Why superchargers aren’t common anymore

They haven’t disappeared, but mechanical superchargers are far less common in new production cars because modern turbocharging and hybrid systems deliver similar or better performance with higher efficiency, lower emissions, and better packaging and cost. Today, superchargers are mostly confined to niche high-performance models and the aftermarket, while many automakers pivot to turbos, mild-hybrid “e-boosters,” and full electrification.

What superchargers are—and how they differ from turbos

A supercharger is an air compressor driven mechanically by the engine’s crankshaft, forcing more air into the cylinders for more power. Unlike a turbocharger, which is spun by exhaust gas energy that would otherwise be wasted, a supercharger draws power directly from the engine, delivering instant boost but also imposing a parasitic load.

The main types of mechanical superchargers differ in how they move air and in their efficiency, sound, cost, and packaging. Below is a quick overview of the common designs and where they’ve been used.

• Roots: Displacement blower that moves large volumes of air at low pressure. Classic “blower” sound and immediate boost; used in many muscle-car applications.
• Twin-screw (Lysholm/TVS): Compresses air internally; more efficient than Roots at many operating points; common in modern high-output V8s.
• Centrifugal: Compressor behaves more like a turbo’s compressor but driven by a belt; efficient at high rpm, more compact, often seen in aftermarket kits.

All three can deliver strong performance, but their reliance on crankshaft power means efficiency and emissions are harder to optimize than with exhaust-driven turbos, especially under today’s regulatory tests.

Why automakers moved away from belt-driven superchargers

Since the late 2000s, a combination of regulation, technology, and cost has steadily favored turbochargers and hybrids over mechanical superchargers. The core reasons below reflect the priorities of modern powertrain programs.

• Fuel economy and CO2 rules: Superchargers consume engine power to make power, hurting cycle-test efficiency. Turbos harvest otherwise-wasted exhaust energy, making it easier to meet WLTP, EPA, and RDE targets.
• Emissions compliance: Lower pumping losses and better thermal management with turbos simplify NOx and particulate control in real driving, a growing regulatory focus.
• Turbo tech caught up: Twin-scroll and variable-geometry hardware, low-inertia wheels, electric-assist spooling, and advanced boost control narrowed or erased the old “lag” advantage of superchargers for everyday drivability.
• Packaging and cooling: Supercharged setups often need larger intercoolers and robust belts or gears, adding heat load and complexity in crowded engine bays designed around modular turbo systems.
• Cost and scalability: A single turbo architecture can be scaled across engine families and markets; that modularity is attractive when product cycles are shorter and volumes shift toward hybrids and EVs.
• NVH and durability: Continuous mechanical load and belt dynamics add noise and potential wear points; modern turbos are quieter and more durable than earlier generations.
• Electrification synergy: Mild-hybrid and full-hybrid systems pair naturally with turbos (torque fill masks lag, regenerative braking recovers energy), reducing the need for a crank-driven blower.

Taken together, these factors make turbos and hybrids the default choice for mainstream performance and efficiency targets, leaving superchargers as a niche solution rather than a volume technology.

What changed in the 2010s and 2020s

The industry’s shift shows up in model lineups. Several brands that once relied on mechanical superchargers have moved on as turbocharging and electrification matured.

• Mercedes-Benz retired its “Kompressor” supercharged gasoline engines in favor of turbocharged units more than a decade ago; AMG performance moved to twin-turbo V8s and high-output turbo fours.
• Volkswagen dropped its “twincharged” 1.4 TSI (both supercharger and turbo) by the mid-2010s, replacing it with refined small turbos that hit efficiency targets with fewer parts.
• Jaguar Land Rover’s 3.0L and 5.0L supercharged petrol engines have been phased out in most products; newer sixes use a turbo with a 48V electric supercharger in some variants, and V8s have shifted to turbo sources.
• Stellantis’ supercharged Hellcat V8 era (Charger/Challenger, TRX) concluded as the company pivots to twin-turbo sixes and EVs; the new Charger adopts a twin-turbo inline-six and electric models.
• General Motors remains an exception with supercharged LT4 V8s in niche models like the Cadillac CT5-V Blackwing and Escalade-V, but these are low-volume halo vehicles.

The pattern is consistent: mass-market portfolios prioritize turbo-hybrids and EVs, while superchargers persist mainly where character, instant response, and brand identity justify the trade-offs.

Where superchargers are still used

Despite the mainstream retreat, superchargers retain a loyal following and targeted OEM use-cases. Here is where you’ll still encounter them—and their newer cousins.

• Niche performance cars and SUVs: Examples include Cadillac’s CT5-V Blackwing and Escalade-V with supercharged V8s, emphasizing response and soundtrack as much as outright speed.
• Aftermarket performance: Roots and centrifugal kits remain popular for V8 muscle cars and trucks, offering bolt-on gains and immediate throttle response.
• Motorsport and drag racing: Predictable, instantaneous boost delivery can be advantageous in certain classes, especially where displacement and response outweigh cycle efficiency.
• Electric superchargers (e-boosters): Not crank-driven, but worth noting—48V electric compressors from brands like Mercedes-AMG, Audi, and JLR provide near-instant low-rpm boost to support a turbo, blending response with efficiency.

In these arenas, the benefits—instant torque, distinctive character, and tuning simplicity—can outweigh the efficiency penalties that disqualify superchargers from volume production programs.

Do EV “Superchargers” factor into this?

If you’re thinking of Tesla’s Supercharger fast-charging network, it is still widely used. Corporate shifts in 2024 led to staffing changes and a rethink of expansion pace, but the network remains active and continues to open to more non-Tesla EVs via the NACS standard. That’s a different use of the word “supercharger” and unrelated to engine superchargers.

What the future looks like

With stricter global fleet emissions targets and accelerating EV adoption, belt-driven superchargers are unlikely to return to the mainstream. Expect:

• More turbo-hybrid pairings that deliver instant torque without parasitic loss.
• Targeted use of 48V electric compressors to eliminate lag on smaller turbo engines.
• Occasional supercharged halo models where brand heritage and character matter.
• Continued strength in the aftermarket for enthusiasts who value response and sound.

In other words, the technology will survive, but as a specialist tool rather than a standard feature of new combustion cars.

Summary

Superchargers aren’t “gone,” but they’ve been sidelined by more efficient, regulation-friendly turbo and hybrid solutions. Modern turbos deliver the response drivers expect without the parasitic losses that hurt fuel economy and emissions tests, while electrification fills any remaining response gaps. The result: superchargers remain in a few halo vehicles and the aftermarket, while the mainstream moves on to turbos, hybrids, and ultimately EVs.

Why aren’t superchargers used in racing?

Although superchargers offer a significant jolt of power, their fuel efficiency in racing isn’t quite as unbeatable. That’s because superchargers’ power is derived directly from the engine, which also means superchargers can negatively impact your engine’s power in the long run.

Are superchargers obsolete?

Increasingly compact and efficient turbochargers, as well as other methods of boosting power output like hybrid systems, have made supercharging all but obsolete, its disadvantages overtaking its advantages in the eyes of consumers.

What is the biggest downside to a supercharger?

Disadvantages of Superchargers
The kinetic energy of exhaust gases isn’t utilized in superchargers. Since the engine has to power the vehicle as well as the supercharger, they need to be built for greater force exertion. Superchargers are 20-25% less fuel-efficient than turbochargers.

Why don’t cars have superchargers anymore?

And the extra work being used is Horsepower. And nowadays, the tree huggers demand more fuel efficient cars and the petrol head tree huggers want that, but with more power. That’s why most of your car companies ditched the Supercharger and use a Turbocharger because it’s more fuel efficient.