I know why track junkies like NA car. It's the responsiveness coming out of the corner. You don't have a turbo which needs to spool up. But what about a centrifugal supercharger? It's spun by a belt, so it should always be ready to go. Is that the case, or is an N/A car still more responsive?

 

Blowers add complications NA engines don't have. Turbo lag isn't a big deal since on the track it is always spooled. The simplicity and reliability of NA goes a long way. The biggest problem with turbos is heat management. They generate a lot of heat and need constant maintenance and repairs. They are finicky and add a lot of parts, all of which can put you out of the game if any break. When turbos do fail they fail in a giant cloud of expensive white smoke and those failures are usually catastrophic. On track turbos are famous predictors of a flatbed in the very near future.

Super chargers are more reliable but are parasitic and only deliver power as a function of RPM. They don't offer that massive boost low down in the power band that turbos offer but rather peak at redline just like NA. They tend to multiply the powerband of the engine rather than change the powerband of the engine as a whole.

On a purely performance basis Turbo > SC but again the drawback is in the volatile nature of making them work reliably, even in the dead of summer.