Turbo Question!!!!!

Old Nov 26, 2007 | 08:21 PM
  #16  
justjames80's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
From: Louisiana
Back pressure is a pumping loss and therefore is also a parasitic loss. Turbo systems operate most efficiently when the backpressure resulting from the turbo is equal to the pressure of the incoming charge. This comes in well before most turbo kits reach full spool so for the vast majority of operation the engine is pumping against an increasing backpressure. A properly sized turbo will minimize but NOT eliminate this situation. So in anycase a turbocharger will take power to make power for the engine...there is no such thing as free power here.
 
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2007 | 11:00 PM
  #17  
ONELOWF's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,805
Likes: 2
From: NEVADA
I recently read that an engine's power is 1/3 out the exhaust, 1/3 dissipated as heat, and 1/3 does the work. If this is the case, then the 1/3 out of the exhaust, aside from the back pressure or pumping loss, sounds like the way to go. A loss of 10 - 15 hp is a lot better than the 70 - 75 hp loss with a blower.
 
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2007 | 01:20 AM
  #18  
justjames80's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
From: Louisiana
Actually it's a bit less than 1/3 does the work. There is efficiency loss in the very act of combustion that is beyond recovery even in idealized (no friction, perfectly adiabatic, etc.) systems.
 
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2007 | 11:10 PM
  #19  
Moltenice's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 487
Likes: 1
From: WA
I still wont agree that the loss you get in a well matched turbo setup, is anything near "parasitic loss" like you see with a supercharger. There are so many factors that a real set amount is difficult to determine..

I think it's safe to say when debating between the two superchargers, saying the turbo has "almost no" parasitic loss is a fairly safe bet.
 
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2007 | 12:42 AM
  #20  
FlowinExpo08's Avatar
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
how will this turbo system work on a 2000 ford expedition?
 
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2007 | 08:25 AM
  #21  
built54's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,282
Likes: 1
From: Farmington, MO
Originally Posted by FlowinExpo08
how will this turbo system work on a 2000 ford expedition?
just like it will on all the other trucks.
 
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2007 | 01:32 PM
  #22  
justjames80's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
From: Louisiana
Originally Posted by Moltenice
I still wont agree that the loss you get in a well matched turbo setup, is anything near "parasitic loss" like you see with a supercharger.

In case you missed it...

Originally Posted by justjames80
It is significantly less than a supercharger but 10 - 15 hp should be expected.

A loss is a loss is a loss.
 
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2007 | 04:09 PM
  #23  
Neal's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 7,030
Likes: 3
From: WINDSOR, ONTARIO, CANADA
Cool

HI!... I remember reading somewhere that to make 600RWH.P, a ROOTS/SCREW style SC'er needs 125 flywheel H.P just to spin it. A turbo making the same 600RWH.P only steals 15 flywheel H.P. It's still a loss but no where near the loss of a positive displacement SC'er.
 
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2007 | 09:10 PM
  #24  
Moltenice's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 487
Likes: 1
From: WA
Originally Posted by justjames80
In case you missed it...




A loss is a loss is a loss.
well in that case, anything you do to a motor causes a loss..... Eating a cheeseburger causes a loss due to the extra weight

It's fun to live in the "well technically" world huh?
 
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2007 | 09:38 PM
  #25  
built54's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,282
Likes: 1
From: Farmington, MO
i dont care what kind of loss i have, but I Have enough power to make up for that loss. Why go into so much detail here?
 
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2007 | 10:34 PM
  #26  
anaheim_drew's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,082
Likes: 0
From: Anaheim, Ca.
Originally Posted by Moltenice
well in that case, anything you do to a motor causes a loss.....
Eating a cheeseburger causes a loss due to the extra weight It's fun to live in the "well technically" world huh?
What world do you live in that motors eat cheeseburgers
 
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2007 | 11:51 PM
  #27  
ONELOWF's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,805
Likes: 2
From: NEVADA
Originally Posted by built54
Why go into so much detail here?
Because that's what we all do here.
 
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2007 | 12:21 AM
  #28  
justjames80's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
From: Louisiana
Originally Posted by Moltenice
It's fun to live in the "well technically" world huh?

I live in the "sweat the details" world. Little extra knowledge goes a long way huh?
 
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2007 | 01:17 PM
  #29  
GerRod's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Here are the curves on the Eaton M112, (Roush, Powerworks, Trilogy, etc.)

 
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2007 | 03:24 PM
  #30  
Moltenice's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 487
Likes: 1
From: WA
Originally Posted by anaheim_drew
What world do you live in that motors eat cheeseburgers
throw a cheeseburger in and wash it down with some sea foam. All the kids are doing it these days.
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:43 PM.