I doubt you've driven an F40 or a turbocharged Honda F1 car, either...
...I've driven quite a few new turbocharged cars over the past several years... the EVO, the Ralliart, the WRX, the STI, the X6 with the 35i package, the X5 with the 3.0D package, the Jaguar with the new V6 twin turbo diesel mill, the S60 T6, 2.0T and T4, the Ford Ranger / Mazda BT50 with the 2.5 / 3.0 Duratorq package, the 2.5 and 3.0 Hilux D4Ds, the new Navara high-output 2.5s, the Mitsubishi Triton/Strada with the old 3.2 4M41, the old 4D56T and the new high-output 2.5 package (178 bhp), the 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 Hyundai/Kia CRDi engines, the Ford/PSA 2.0 TDCi mated to both 6MT and the Powershift transmission... the MINI Cooper S and Countryman S and maybe a few more which aren't really noteworthy.
Your typical medium-output turbodiesel is good (218 hp 3.0 BMW cited is the epitome of linear power) for both power and economy. I personally love the BMW straight six (not V8) diesel.
But in a market obsessed with headline power (like the US), things go astray. The higher horse 270+ 35d variants have noticeable ramp-up, and newer turbodiesels are ekeing even more power out of lower displacements, sacrificing linear powerbands for more top-end boost.
Good examples are the Frontier Navara 2.5, which has absolutely no low end power (sucks for towing) and the new Triton 2.5 DiD, which has even more top-end and, while not sacrificing low-end torque as much, has very unsettling turbo ramp up through the rev range. It suffers from throttle lag, as well, thanks to throttle programming meant to meet emissions regulations in Europe.
One utterly unforgiveable one is the 3.0 CRDi Hyundai uses for the Veracruz. Despite the power being a match for BMW's non 35d diesel variants, the significant lag makes it a horrible car to overtake with, as the power delivery is uneven and unpredictable.
Lately I've been driving a lot of turbos... some are impressive... the 180+ hp Volvo T4, 1.6 liters, is smooth and linear, feeling much like a naturally aspirated 2.5 with more top end. Though ramp-up in power past 4k rpm is large, the car is not unsettled by it and driveability is not affected. Some are not... the new Mini Countryman S 1.6 turbo, with slightly more power with overboost function on... suffers from too much torque-steer and surge (nothing, nothing, nothing... boost) for such a small engine with such a low power output... in this case, a variable valve 2.0 might actually work better and not suffer in comparison in terms of economy.
I've yet to drive the new gasoline 1.4T Cruze (it's not out in our market yet), but I do hear it's good... though reviews on fuel economy for newer downsized US turbos are mixed... particularly with the Explorer 2.0T.
-
It would be nice if manufacturers (and regulatory bodies) tried to educate people on things like useable power and "power under the curve", to cure this fascination with top-end figures and let people know that they can get similar performance with better fuel consumption from something that doesn't have that extra 10-20 hp up where nobody but a few gearheads will ever use it...
-
Still, there are some issues besides driveability. Especially in a hot country like mine, where, after a bout of hard driving and/or heavy traffic, a lot of high-boost turbocharged cars suffer from heat soak due to the tropical climate and go into limp mode. We've even had a spate of 1.5 CRDi failures in commercial fleets. Heavy workloads don't seem to agree with oil-fed variable geometry turbos. Though this is more to do with abuse and poor maintenance procedures than with an actual flaw versus other turbos. Yet all turbos suffer in hot conditions. And don't even ask about direct injection piezo-injector nozzle replacement... it's a killer.
-
I love small turbodiesels, mind you. I think that Hyundai-Kia 1.5 is fantastic, and one of our personal cars is a Focus diesel with a "135 horse" engine that actually makes more like 150 hp during the ten-second overboost period. There's some torque-steer, but the power delivery is more linear than higher powered units, and fuel economy is great. On a good day I can get 4.7 to 5 l / 100 km with a motor good for over 200 km/h mated to a "compact" heavier than a Mazda6... without resorting to P&G or any other fuel saving techniques except sticking to an 80-100 km/h cruise.