Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | AF 350Z | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
| Latest | 0 Rplys |
|
Engineering/Technical Ask technical questions about cars. Do you know how a car engine works? |
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread |
|
Thread Tools |
11-17-2007, 03:22 PM | #1 | |
AF Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: mayfield, Ohio
Posts: 95
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
turbo or no
i know there is a section for forced induction topics but the question i have isn't directally about forced infuction in itself. ok so i was wondering is it better to have a car with a turbo making like 200hp (such as the saab 9-5 with the v6 rated for 200hp @ 5600rpm) or a nat aspitated car with 200( like the 99' maxima rated with i think 200 @ like 5500rpm). so really my question is if i dropped the engine from the STI in one car and the the engine from a 350z into the exact same car, assuming that they both get 300 hp at like 4500 rpm(not a true just assuming). which would be faster, or would the difference be nominal.
|
|
11-17-2007, 03:34 PM | #2 | |
AF -Advisor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Posts: 1,482
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: turbo or no
as a general rule, the turbo engine will have a higher peak torque, but have a less linear powerband. Its really a question of what kind of 'test' you're doing (there are many ways to define "fast")
Seat of the pants, the turbo engine will likely FEEL faster because of the earlier, and higher peaking torque. But that doesn't mean it'll be faster through the entire RPM range....actually, I'd say its unlikely Future modification options is another issue, unless you know for a fact you'll never be interested in going any further. The turbo engine could probably be improved apon with little expense/difficulty compared to the NA engine just some general thoughts
__________________
life begins at 10psi of boost Three turbo'd motorcycles and counting. |
|
11-17-2007, 03:36 PM | #3 | |
Professional Ninja Killer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Penn Hills, Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,561
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
Re: turbo or no
hp is hp. Its hard to tell which would be faster since I don't have dyno charts in front of me, but if they both put out the exact same outputs (tq and hp) they would be identical. A turbo engine is a naturally aspirated engine 80% of the time. During street driving with part throttle, its not forced induction. That would probably give it an MPG advantage, maybe a weight advantage... at the expense of a little more maintenance and probability for mechanical failure.
But as far as quarter mile times are concerned, HP is the biggest factor. One car with two different 300-hp engines should be able to make the quarter mile in the same time with obvious things like engine weight and traction to consider. Torque is also a factor in more extreme examples. Comparing a 350z engine to a 2.5L suby isn't going to be much different, but in extreme cases it will. For instance, if you put that 300-hp subaru turbo in a heavy car, then swap it out for a 300 hp LS1, the LS1 will probably beat it due to its distinct torque advantage. Torque is what overcomes inertia from a dead stop and the LS1 would get you off the line quicker. Once you're moving, though, its HP that is doing the work.
__________________
Dragging people kicking and screaming into the enlightenment. |
|
11-17-2007, 10:48 PM | #4 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,191
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: turbo or no
a bit off topic but somewhat relevant:
with a 300hp turbo car, it will most likely be a smaller engine. but i'm not so sure you'd get better fuel economy (i haven't seen any real world comparisons though). the turbo vehicle, while smaller in displacement, is still outputing the same power, which means for every unit of time it's using the same ammount of energy. it's also got a restriction in the exhaust causing it to be less efficient. what would give it superior fuel economy? could it be that because it's a smaller engine you can run a greater load (more throttle) and thus reduce the restriction caused by the throttle body?
__________________
Mr. T doesn't pity anyone who likes the Black Eyed Peas. He just kills them. Mr. T speaks only when necessary. His main form of communication is folding his arms and slowly shaking his head. And regardless of the situation, he is always understood. On the A-team, Face , Haniabal, and Murdoch were all masters of disguise. Mr T didn't have to wear a disguise. The bad guys didn't recognize him out of fear. |
|
11-18-2007, 03:05 AM | #5 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Otago
Posts: 849
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: turbo or no
See if you can get the power curve for each engine.
In general the one with a larger area underneath the curve will be fastest. Because on average it can produce more power than the other, even if the peak might be lower. |
|
11-18-2007, 08:40 AM | #6 | |
AF Regular
|
Re: turbo or no
I'm just throwing this out there...
The biggest appeal of a turbocharged engine is that you can make the power of a bigger 6 or 8 cylinder engine without all the weight. That being said, the STI motor is horizontally opposed and therefore not as light as an I or V engine. Although, being an STI owner, the 2.5T must be the better of the two engines.
__________________
Cars are like music. If it ain't fast it ain't shit. |
|
11-18-2007, 10:52 AM | #7 | |
AF Newbie
Thread starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: mayfield, Ohio
Posts: 95
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: turbo or no
going back to what beef burito said abouth the MPG im not really sure but wouldn't it only produce 300hp at full boost? therefore in street driving you wouldn't have the tubo kicking in most of the time, so you would be using less than 300hp worth of gas, so better fuel ecomony. i think...
|
|
11-18-2007, 01:49 PM | #8 | ||
AF -Advisor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Posts: 1,482
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: turbo or no
Quote:
I lost about 5mpg overall when I turbo a bike. Percentage-wise, thats not a huge amount.
__________________
life begins at 10psi of boost Three turbo'd motorcycles and counting. |
||
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
|
|