Turbo Vs Non-turbo
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,198
From: I gotta have more cow bell!!!!
Car Info: 05 STi
Originally Posted by case1
^^Uuuhhhhhh, one has a turbo and the other doesn't.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,198
From: I gotta have more cow bell!!!!
Car Info: 05 STi
Originally Posted by case1
^^Have fun in your Firebird, btw, I've got a number for a barber who does great mullets.
Don't forget your giant Bad Boy Club sticker for your rear window either.
Don't forget your giant Bad Boy Club sticker for your rear window either.
OMG!!!! ROFLMAO!!! HAHAHAHAHA
VIP Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 10,133
From: Lastweek Lane - Watertown, NY
Car Info: 02WRXpseudoSTiWannabeWagon
Because I'm procrastinating doing some work....
In my own words, a turbo effectively gets more explosive power out of the mixture. The reason is because a turbo compresses air to where it's volume is much lower.
If you have a 305in^3 v8, for instance, each cylinder holds like 38.125in^3 of fuel and air (oxygen). The mixture is normally something like (man, I don't know what a good N/A AFR is), let's say 12:1 air-to-fuel.
That means that there is 35 cubic inches of air and 3 cubic inches of gasoline in that cylinder. Oxygen is approximately 21% of the air, so there is 7 cubic inches of oxygen in that cylinder.
Well, if you compress the air that you're sucking into that 5 liter engine, and are able to get 45 or 50 cubic inches WORTH of air, but still only displace the 35 cubic inches, you're going to increase the amount of oxygen as well (we're going into some math that's a bit beyond me now.)
Bottom line, a turbo, in a sense, increases displacement without increasing displacement. Following that, it increases compression ratio as well (if BANSUVs sees this, maybe he'll explain dynamic compression ratio to you)
Now, simply throwing a turbo on a stock car is a no-no. If it's a car that has previously been equiped to handle the extra load a turbo will put on the rotating parts, then maybe, but since everything IS now dynamic, you've got to know how to manage the combustion once the forced induction kicks in.
A stock car would more than likely require heads and pistons that would lower it's static compression ratio. You'd need a manifold that would feed the turbo with the high-velocity exhaust gasses in order to spin the compressor wheel. You'd need a higher flowing fuel system and the means to control it. You'd probably need to re-examine your entire exhaust tract in order to be certain that the tubing diameter wasn't robbing you of power.
What am I forgetting?
In my own words, a turbo effectively gets more explosive power out of the mixture. The reason is because a turbo compresses air to where it's volume is much lower.
If you have a 305in^3 v8, for instance, each cylinder holds like 38.125in^3 of fuel and air (oxygen). The mixture is normally something like (man, I don't know what a good N/A AFR is), let's say 12:1 air-to-fuel.
That means that there is 35 cubic inches of air and 3 cubic inches of gasoline in that cylinder. Oxygen is approximately 21% of the air, so there is 7 cubic inches of oxygen in that cylinder.
Well, if you compress the air that you're sucking into that 5 liter engine, and are able to get 45 or 50 cubic inches WORTH of air, but still only displace the 35 cubic inches, you're going to increase the amount of oxygen as well (we're going into some math that's a bit beyond me now.)
Bottom line, a turbo, in a sense, increases displacement without increasing displacement. Following that, it increases compression ratio as well (if BANSUVs sees this, maybe he'll explain dynamic compression ratio to you)
Now, simply throwing a turbo on a stock car is a no-no. If it's a car that has previously been equiped to handle the extra load a turbo will put on the rotating parts, then maybe, but since everything IS now dynamic, you've got to know how to manage the combustion once the forced induction kicks in.
A stock car would more than likely require heads and pistons that would lower it's static compression ratio. You'd need a manifold that would feed the turbo with the high-velocity exhaust gasses in order to spin the compressor wheel. You'd need a higher flowing fuel system and the means to control it. You'd probably need to re-examine your entire exhaust tract in order to be certain that the tubing diameter wasn't robbing you of power.
What am I forgetting?
Originally Posted by gpatmac
Because I'm procrastinating doing some work....
In my own words, a turbo effectively gets more explosive power out of the mixture. The reason is because a turbo compresses air to where it's volume is much lower.
If you have a 305in^3 v8, for instance, each cylinder holds like 38.125in^3 of fuel and air (oxygen). The mixture is normally something like (man, I don't know what a good N/A AFR is), let's say 12:1 air-to-fuel.
That means that there is 35 cubic inches of air and 3 cubic inches of gasoline in that cylinder. Oxygen is approximately 21% of the air, so there is 7 cubic inches of oxygen in that cylinder.
Well, if you compress the air that you're sucking into that 5 liter engine, and are able to get 45 or 50 cubic inches WORTH of air, but still only displace the 35 cubic inches, you're going to increase the amount of oxygen as well (we're going into some math that's a bit beyond me now.)
Bottom line, a turbo, in a sense, increases displacement without increasing displacement. Following that, it increases compression ratio as well (if BANSUVs sees this, maybe he'll explain dynamic compression ratio to you)
Now, simply throwing a turbo on a stock car is a no-no. If it's a car that has previously been equiped to handle the extra load a turbo will put on the rotating parts, then maybe, but since everything IS now dynamic, you've got to know how to manage the combustion once the forced induction kicks in.
A stock car would more than likely require heads and pistons that would lower it's static compression ratio. You'd need a manifold that would feed the turbo with the high-velocity exhaust gasses in order to spin the compressor wheel. You'd need a higher flowing fuel system and the means to control it. You'd probably need to re-examine your entire exhaust tract in order to be certain that the tubing diameter wasn't robbing you of power.
What am I forgetting?
In my own words, a turbo effectively gets more explosive power out of the mixture. The reason is because a turbo compresses air to where it's volume is much lower.
If you have a 305in^3 v8, for instance, each cylinder holds like 38.125in^3 of fuel and air (oxygen). The mixture is normally something like (man, I don't know what a good N/A AFR is), let's say 12:1 air-to-fuel.
That means that there is 35 cubic inches of air and 3 cubic inches of gasoline in that cylinder. Oxygen is approximately 21% of the air, so there is 7 cubic inches of oxygen in that cylinder.
Well, if you compress the air that you're sucking into that 5 liter engine, and are able to get 45 or 50 cubic inches WORTH of air, but still only displace the 35 cubic inches, you're going to increase the amount of oxygen as well (we're going into some math that's a bit beyond me now.)
Bottom line, a turbo, in a sense, increases displacement without increasing displacement. Following that, it increases compression ratio as well (if BANSUVs sees this, maybe he'll explain dynamic compression ratio to you)
Now, simply throwing a turbo on a stock car is a no-no. If it's a car that has previously been equiped to handle the extra load a turbo will put on the rotating parts, then maybe, but since everything IS now dynamic, you've got to know how to manage the combustion once the forced induction kicks in.
A stock car would more than likely require heads and pistons that would lower it's static compression ratio. You'd need a manifold that would feed the turbo with the high-velocity exhaust gasses in order to spin the compressor wheel. You'd need a higher flowing fuel system and the means to control it. You'd probably need to re-examine your entire exhaust tract in order to be certain that the tubing diameter wasn't robbing you of power.
What am I forgetting?
Answer:.. The "Bashing" like everyone esle has in here.. lol
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 10,029
From: Sacramento CA
Car Info: 02 Impreza WRX sedan
Gale Banks has done twin-turbo setups on V-8s for years but it comes out of experience at Bonneville and two engineering degrees (electrical and mechanical).
http://www.bankspower.com/im_SuperRod_Sept04.cfm
--
0==WW==0
"…axles of evil…" - george w. bush
http://www.bankspower.com/im_SuperRod_Sept04.cfm
--
0==WW==0
"…axles of evil…" - george w. bush
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,198
From: I gotta have more cow bell!!!!
Car Info: 05 STi
Originally Posted by Wingless Wonder
Gale Banks has done twin-turbo setups on V-8s for years but it comes out of experience at Bonneville and two engineering degrees (electrical and mechanical).
http://www.bankspower.com/im_SuperRod_Sept04.cfm
--
0==WW==0
"…axles of evil…" - george w. bush
http://www.bankspower.com/im_SuperRod_Sept04.cfm
--
0==WW==0
"…axles of evil…" - george w. bush
VIP Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 691
From: Bad Cop = No Donut
Car Info: 2005 WRX
Originally Posted by gpatmac
Because I'm procrastinating doing some work....
In my own words, a turbo effectively gets more explosive power out of the mixture. The reason is because a turbo compresses air to where it's volume is much lower.
If you have a 305in^3 v8, for instance, each cylinder holds like 38.125in^3 of fuel and air (oxygen). The mixture is normally something like (man, I don't know what a good N/A AFR is), let's say 12:1 air-to-fuel.
That means that there is 35 cubic inches of air and 3 cubic inches of gasoline in that cylinder. Oxygen is approximately 21% of the air, so there is 7 cubic inches of oxygen in that cylinder.
Well, if you compress the air that you're sucking into that 5 liter engine, and are able to get 45 or 50 cubic inches WORTH of air, but still only displace the 35 cubic inches, you're going to increase the amount of oxygen as well (we're going into some math that's a bit beyond me now.)
Bottom line, a turbo, in a sense, increases displacement without increasing displacement. Following that, it increases compression ratio as well (if BANSUVs sees this, maybe he'll explain dynamic compression ratio to you)
Now, simply throwing a turbo on a stock car is a no-no. If it's a car that has previously been equiped to handle the extra load a turbo will put on the rotating parts, then maybe, but since everything IS now dynamic, you've got to know how to manage the combustion once the forced induction kicks in.
A stock car would more than likely require heads and pistons that would lower it's static compression ratio. You'd need a manifold that would feed the turbo with the high-velocity exhaust gasses in order to spin the compressor wheel. You'd need a higher flowing fuel system and the means to control it. You'd probably need to re-examine your entire exhaust tract in order to be certain that the tubing diameter wasn't robbing you of power.
What am I forgetting?
In my own words, a turbo effectively gets more explosive power out of the mixture. The reason is because a turbo compresses air to where it's volume is much lower.
If you have a 305in^3 v8, for instance, each cylinder holds like 38.125in^3 of fuel and air (oxygen). The mixture is normally something like (man, I don't know what a good N/A AFR is), let's say 12:1 air-to-fuel.
That means that there is 35 cubic inches of air and 3 cubic inches of gasoline in that cylinder. Oxygen is approximately 21% of the air, so there is 7 cubic inches of oxygen in that cylinder.
Well, if you compress the air that you're sucking into that 5 liter engine, and are able to get 45 or 50 cubic inches WORTH of air, but still only displace the 35 cubic inches, you're going to increase the amount of oxygen as well (we're going into some math that's a bit beyond me now.)
Bottom line, a turbo, in a sense, increases displacement without increasing displacement. Following that, it increases compression ratio as well (if BANSUVs sees this, maybe he'll explain dynamic compression ratio to you)
Now, simply throwing a turbo on a stock car is a no-no. If it's a car that has previously been equiped to handle the extra load a turbo will put on the rotating parts, then maybe, but since everything IS now dynamic, you've got to know how to manage the combustion once the forced induction kicks in.
A stock car would more than likely require heads and pistons that would lower it's static compression ratio. You'd need a manifold that would feed the turbo with the high-velocity exhaust gasses in order to spin the compressor wheel. You'd need a higher flowing fuel system and the means to control it. You'd probably need to re-examine your entire exhaust tract in order to be certain that the tubing diameter wasn't robbing you of power.
What am I forgetting?
Easy way to look at it, N/A engines are limited to an amount of hp they can make because they can only suck in a certain amount of air (whatever the #'s are), add a turbo or supercharger in the mix and you can cram alot more air into the system.....more air = more power as long as you can give it more fuel too.
VIP Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,023
From: Phoenix, AZ
Car Info: Subaru Impreza WRX 2002
Originally Posted by case1
Uuuhhhhh, I agree with what he said, I think.....
Easy way to look at it, N/A engines are limited to an amount of hp they can make because they can only suck in a certain amount of air (whatever the #'s are), add a turbo or supercharger in the mix and you can cram alot more air into the system.....more air = more power as long as you can give it more fuel too.
Easy way to look at it, N/A engines are limited to an amount of hp they can make because they can only suck in a certain amount of air (whatever the #'s are), add a turbo or supercharger in the mix and you can cram alot more air into the system.....more air = more power as long as you can give it more fuel too.
Fuel + air + spark = boom = power. Normally aspirated, turbo and supercharged engines all fit this same principle. In order to get more power, a turbo or supercharged engine attempts to compress and pressurize the intake air so that the air that flows into the chamber before the intake stroke is already pressurized, increasing the amount of available oxygen and the combustion temperature. However, in turbo and "blown" engines, that compression amount is dynamic -- the harder the turbo/blower works, the more compressed air reaches the combustion chamber; thus a turbo engine generally has a lower compression ratio in order to accommodate the really really high pressure of full-on boost. Generally turbo and supercharged engines are small-displacement, medium-RPM engines with two or more valves per cylinder and fuel injection. A turbo or supercharger is a way of virtually increasing the displacement of the engine (as noted in another post) like dynamically adding cylinders to the engine as the boost comes on.
In a N/A engine, the way to make more power (beyond adding more displacement) is to raise the RPM and dump in fuel like crazy; that's why N/A race car engines run upwards of 11,000 RPM (and do so safely for hours). However, no matter how high you run the RPM, the amount of compression per stroke remains the same; you are just running the cycle MUCH FASTER -- thus the term "static compression." N/A engines are typically larger displacement, med-to-high RPM engines with sometimes up to four valves per cylinder and often using a carburetor rather than injection to supply fuel.
Neither method is a perfect solution; there are many examples of crazy-high HP from both the blown and N/A camp. I think (not certain about this!) that the best engine out there for power-to-displacement ratio is a Cosworth turbo diesel.