Is it the Turbo age? - Page 2 - Honda-Tech - Honda Forum Discussion

General Discussion and Debate Discuss, Debate, and Converse with other Honda-Tech members in a mature, intelligent manner.

Is it the Turbo age?

Old 04-23-2012, 04:13 PM
  #26  
El Chico
 
Knightsport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: The Deep Web
Posts: 100,679
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

I always though the turbo age was the late 80's or erarly 90's.

Maybe a Turbo Renaissance.
Knightsport is online now  
Old 04-23-2012, 04:26 PM
  #27  
Honda-Tech Member
 
Whats Up DOHC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,501
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by xtrac1 View Post
Bean counters at BMW must be loving it.

Cost to develop a high output NA motor (I-6/V-8/V-10 @ 8K rpm) vs a turbo is a no brainer.
"Mercedes just got another 40HP out of the M156, what's our response?"

"Develop brand new engine, or turn N54 waste gate screw 1/8th turn. Hmmmm"

This is not the turbo era. Its the green era. Turbochargers allow the horsepower of a V12 with the CO2 output of a 3 banger
Whats Up DOHC is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 04:28 PM
  #28  
Cogent Argument Enthusiast
 
Uncle Ben's's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Completing my training with my Supreme Leader
Posts: 8,021
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

And on Sundays I elude the Eyes,
And hop the Turbine Freight
To far outside the Wire,
Where my white-haired uncle waits



Turdblo is the engine of the future.
Uncle Ben's is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 05:27 PM
  #29  
Honda-Tech Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Western NYS
Posts: 1,137
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

From an engineers standpoint (or a manufacturer standpoint), what are the downsides of turbos?

The ones I can come up with:
1) More moving parts / components (you need the turbine, intercooler, all of the piping, likely a stronger fuel pump?)
2) Less resilient than NA engines (oil cooled turbos are highly sensitive to the condition of the oil and can fail if starved for oil pretty quickly).
3) More advanced ECU programming (must make sure the AFR does not lean out.)
4) Turbo lag
5) Can be hard to market to certain groups (the elderly, concerned parents, soccer moms...)
6) Require higher octane gas (albeit if the market switched to e85, this wouldn't be a problem at all...)

Any other ones?
joeshmo is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 05:37 PM
  #30  
Cogent Argument Enthusiast
 
Uncle Ben's's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Completing my training with my Supreme Leader
Posts: 8,021
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by joeshmo View Post
From an engineers standpoint (or a manufacturer standpoint), what are the downsides of turbos?

The ones I can come up with:
1) More moving parts / components (you need the turbine, intercooler, all of the piping, likely a stronger fuel pump?)
2) Less resilient than NA engines (oil cooled turbos are highly sensitive to the condition of the oil and can fail if starved for oil pretty quickly).
3) More advanced ECU programming (must make sure the AFR does not lean out.)
4) Turbo lag
5) Can be hard to market to certain groups (the elderly, concerned parents, soccer moms...)
6) Require higher octane gas (albeit if the market switched to e85, this wouldn't be a problem at all...)

Any other ones?
1. So does VTAK, and other VVT systems
2. Doubtful, if you know how not to make a turbo fail. Oil starvation makes bad things happen to engines, period. The 4g63 was a hell of an engine. Pretty sure Mitsubishi used it for nearly 20 years in various boosted applications.
3. Advanced ECU programming isn't any more expensive than normal ECU programming, AFAIK. Tuning is just as important for NA as it is for boost.
4. Better than waiting until 4500+ for VVT
5. Nobody from these demographics will buy a turbo Sonic/Cruze?
6. Pretty sure almost all high output NA engines require 91-93 octane gas
Uncle Ben's is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 05:39 PM
  #31  
Honda-Tech Member
 
MrDomino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: North of LA
Posts: 952
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by joeshmo View Post
1) More moving parts / components (you need the turbine, intercooler, all of the piping, likely a stronger fuel pump?)
2) Less resilient than NA engines (oil cooled turbos are highly sensitive to the condition of the oil and can fail if starved for oil pretty quickly).
3) More advanced ECU programming (must make sure the AFR does not lean out.)
4) Turbo lag
5) Can be hard to market to certain groups (the elderly, concerned parents, soccer moms...)
6) Require higher octane gas (albeit if the market switched to e85, this wouldn't be a problem at all...)
1) Why would you need a stronger fuel pump? Fuel is directly proportional to power regardless of engine configuration.

2) Why are they less resilient than NA engines? Turbos fail if starved for oil, so what? So does your engine.

3) The programming is a little more difficult but for the benefits it's worth it. Moreover, who cares? Most of these engines are high volume so it's not like a little bit of additional development is going to severely impact the final price.

4) Turbo lag isn't an issue if you size things right. Turbo lag is virtually nonexistent in my GTI.

5) Most of these people have no idea what type of engine is in their vehicle. If you don't want it to be a turnoff then don't mention it.

6) That's not true. Knock sensors + modern engine control systems = do whatever
MrDomino is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 06:17 PM
  #32  
rookn00b
iTrader: (2)
 
xtrac1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,639
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by Knightsport View Post
If you consider the LS3 a truck engine then pretty much anything remotely based on a SB350 design is a truck motor.

Does not correlate.
It's a multi-role player. Similar to the F-16, it's still got some omph

Originally Posted by Whats Up DOHC View Post
"Mercedes just got another 40HP out of the M156, what's our response?"

"Develop brand new engine, or turn N54 waste gate screw 1/8th turn. Hmmmm"

This is not the turbo era. Its the green era. Turbochargers allow the horsepower of a V12 with the CO2 output of a 3 banger
Advances in turbos are welcome, but it's still up to the owner to care for it.

That's scary.
xtrac1 is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 06:37 PM
  #33  
Honda-Tech Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Western NYS
Posts: 1,137
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by MrDomino View Post
1) Why would you need a stronger fuel pump? Fuel is directly proportional to power regardless of engine configuration.

2) Why are they less resilient than NA engines? Turbos fail if starved for oil, so what? So does your engine.

3) The programming is a little more difficult but for the benefits it's worth it. Moreover, who cares? Most of these engines are high volume so it's not like a little bit of additional development is going to severely impact the final price.

4) Turbo lag isn't an issue if you size things right. Turbo lag is virtually nonexistent in my GTI.

5) Most of these people have no idea what type of engine is in their vehicle. If you don't want it to be a turnoff then don't mention it.

6) That's not true. Knock sensors + modern engine control systems = do whatever
Anytime I've ever seen a turbo setup (aftermarket, that is) with any significant amount of boost, the fuel pump (and the injectors) get an upgrade. I had always assumed it was so they could keep up with the higher fuel consumption under heavy boost so the engine won't lean out.

I still feel that turbo engines are less resilient than NA engines. The turbine is turning so much faster than the other parts, is directly in the exhaust stream, ect, generating so much heat. I feel as if oil change intervals should be lower on turbo engines (albeit I'm stuck in the turbo dodge world, perhaps things are much better now.)

I guess you are right about the marketing scheme (just don't say it has a turbo engine), but I'd say most people would be able to tell. The power curve of a turbo engine is quite different from most NA's, all the turbos I drove (albeit, mostly turbo dodges once again) had a noticeable point where they hit boost. Even a car with a smaller turbo (prelude and a turbo volvo) had noticeable boost. I don't know though, I'm definitely no expert and I haven't really driven a more modern turbo for any length of time.

I guess you are right also about the knock sensors being able to adjust timing to run on lower octane fuel, but that kindof defeats the purpose of any performance oriented turbo (which, I suppose, isn't really the point of the thread anyway.)
joeshmo is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 06:47 PM
  #34  
Cogent Argument Enthusiast
 
Uncle Ben's's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Completing my training with my Supreme Leader
Posts: 8,021
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Yes, but you don't add injectors and a fuel pump to a car, you use a large volume unit/set from the factory, instead. Also, we're talking about manufacturing, not getting raped by aftermarket companies. Hell, even a good Walbro pump should still cost maybe $100. You can buy complete sets of large factory injectors such as 2jz injectors for way under $100. I would think sourcing larger injectors from a parts supplier would be an immaterial increase in production costs.
Uncle Ben's is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 06:53 PM
  #35  
Honda-Tech Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Western NYS
Posts: 1,137
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by Uncle Ben's View Post
Yes, but you don't add injectors and a fuel pump to a car, you use a large volume unit/set from the factory, instead. Also, we're talking about manufacturing, not getting raped by aftermarket companies. Hell, even a good Walbro pump should still cost maybe $100. You can buy complete sets of large factory injectors such as 2jz injectors for way under $100. I would think sourcing larger injectors from a parts supplier would be an immaterial increase in production costs.
Very true. Honestly, I'm all for turbo engines. I was just trying to think of negatives to them. I'm just guessing they have higher production costs, and these factors can be significant even if they only add a small amount of cash (say, 1k) to the selling price of the car, especially on lower end models/econoboxes. I dunno, I was just throwing some ideas out there. As for pluses for turbo'd engines:
1) Fuel economy (depending on size of engine/turbo/ the tune/ the driver).
2) Power (see above as well).
3) Efficiency (related to the above two).
4) Lower price vs similarly rated NA engines in terms of power(typically, anyway.)

Any other ones?
joeshmo is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 06:57 PM
  #36  
Paragraph Alert
 
ActiveAero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Oil rig, middle of the ocean
Posts: 5,069
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by Knightsport View Post
I always though the turbo age was the late 80's or erarly 90's.

Maybe a Turbo Renaissance.
This. We are talking about an era when all of the below had turbo variants:

Mustang
TransAm
Ford Probe
Ford Thunderbird
Ford Cougar
Supra
300ZX
RX-7
Celica
MR2
DSM
3000GT
Pontaic Grand Prix
Pontaic Sunbird
Mazda 323 and 626
Izuzu Impulse
Starion/Conquest
Buicks
Chrysler K-cars and vans.
Plymouth Acclaim Turbo
Chrysler LeBaron sedan
Dodge Lancer
Dodge Omni GLH
Dodge Charger Shelby
Dodge Shadow ES Turbo
Mazda
Toyota Pickups

And a ton more I don't feel like copy and pasting.
ActiveAero is online now  
Old 04-23-2012, 07:16 PM
  #37  
Honda-Tech Member
 
MrDomino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: North of LA
Posts: 952
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by joeshmo View Post
Anytime I've ever seen a turbo setup (aftermarket, that is) with any significant amount of boost, the fuel pump (and the injectors) get an upgrade. I had always assumed it was so they could keep up with the higher fuel consumption under heavy boost so the engine won't lean out.

I still feel that turbo engines are less resilient than NA engines. The turbine is turning so much faster than the other parts, is directly in the exhaust stream, ect, generating so much heat. I feel as if oil change intervals should be lower on turbo engines (albeit I'm stuck in the turbo dodge world, perhaps things are much better now.)

I guess you are right about the marketing scheme (just don't say it has a turbo engine), but I'd say most people would be able to tell. The power curve of a turbo engine is quite different from most NA's, all the turbos I drove (albeit, mostly turbo dodges once again) had a noticeable point where they hit boost. Even a car with a smaller turbo (prelude and a turbo volvo) had noticeable boost. I don't know though, I'm definitely no expert and I haven't really driven a more modern turbo for any length of time.

I guess you are right also about the knock sensors being able to adjust timing to run on lower octane fuel, but that kindof defeats the purpose of any performance oriented turbo (which, I suppose, isn't really the point of the thread anyway.)
The oil change interval on my GTI is 10,000 miles. Go drive a new GTI or something. The turbo doesn't really lag and is very unobtrusive. I guarantee that you could stick the 2.0 TSI motor into the new Civic Si and most people wouldn't know that it was turbocharged.
MrDomino is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 07:17 PM
  #38  
Honda-Tech Member
 
MrDomino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: North of LA
Posts: 952
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by Uncle Ben's View Post
Yes, but you don't add injectors and a fuel pump to a car, you use a large volume unit/set from the factory, instead. Also, we're talking about manufacturing, not getting raped by aftermarket companies. Hell, even a good Walbro pump should still cost maybe $100. You can buy complete sets of large factory injectors such as 2jz injectors for way under $100. I would think sourcing larger injectors from a parts supplier would be an immaterial increase in production costs.
I honestly can't see it being any larger. Make the injector holes bigger. That's all you really have to do. The bigger fuel pump would probably be a few cents.
MrDomino is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 07:19 PM
  #39  
Cogent Argument Enthusiast
 
Uncle Ben's's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Completing my training with my Supreme Leader
Posts: 8,021
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by MrDomino View Post
The oil change interval on my GTI is 10,000 miles. Go drive a new GTI or something. The turbo doesn't really lag and is very unobtrusive. I guarantee that you could stick the 2.0 TSI motor into the new Civic Si and most people wouldn't know that it was turbocharged.
They'd know something was wrong, making worthwhile torque below 5000
Uncle Ben's is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 08:49 PM
  #40  
FAILWGN
 
Micha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Who knows these days?
Posts: 9,294
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

WTF is torque?

I have super sweet turdblow lag all the time.
Micha is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 09:21 PM
  #41  
Honda-Tech Member
 
AGENT 99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Classified
Posts: 27,136
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

No, its A turbo age. Yes, there was the 80's and now they're back and I'm thrilled.

I love how tons of cars now are turbocharged. F150, Cruze, Optima, Explorer, and hell even a Sonic are turbos. Crank the boost and poof easy horsepower. Whats not to love?
AGENT 99 is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 09:26 PM
  #42  
FAILWGN
 
Micha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Who knows these days?
Posts: 9,294
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

I really want a mazdaspeed2.
Micha is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 09:53 PM
  #43  
Honda-Tech Member
 
AGENT 99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Classified
Posts: 27,136
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by Micha View Post
I really want a mazdaspeed2.

Not sure if serious.

Are they going to make it?
AGENT 99 is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 09:58 PM
  #44  
FAILWGN
 
Micha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Who knows these days?
Posts: 9,294
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Serious.

Some dealer in the mid west made one.

I already have a Mazdaspeed3 right now.
Micha is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 10:13 PM
  #45  
Honda-Tech Member
 
HondaKyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago land
Posts: 6,577
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Turbo lag is just a head start for the lower all motor car.
HondaKyle is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 10:26 PM
  #46  
Honda-Tech Member
 
White98LS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seattle, WA / Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 1,457
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Turbos are the way of the future. Hell, you can't even buy any BMW in the states anymore without a turbo! Besides the M3, and that's going turbo very soon. Who can blame them when the performance and EPA fuel economy (not necessarily real world fuel economy) goes way up?

I think high-performance engines below the exotic stratosphere (performance cars up to a quarter-million, at which case gas mileage doesn't really matter) are even more likely to go turbo because high performance, high-revving engines and fuel economy generally don't mix. Just look at the S2000, current V8 M3, and V10 M5. The M5 real-world gets 10-11mpg combined, even with a 7-speed gearbox. The new TT V8 has more power and WAY more torque while getting 30% better fuel economy. That kind of stuff is hard to turn down when faced with upcoming CAFE regulations.
White98LS is offline  
Old 04-23-2012, 10:32 PM
  #47  
0x5359-0055
 
213374U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas doe, they do everything big. u mad?
Posts: 5,744
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by __oversea View Post
Tundra > F150
213374U is offline  
Old 04-24-2012, 04:26 AM
  #48  
Honda-Tech Member
 
Lsos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 1,756
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by joeshmo View Post
Anytime I've ever seen a turbo setup (aftermarket, that is) with any significant amount of boost, the fuel pump (and the injectors) get an upgrade. I had always assumed it was so they could keep up with the higher fuel consumption under heavy boost so the engine won't lean out.
Of course, but that's because more power = more fuel. How you achieve more power is beside the point...whether NA, turbo, super, nitrous, whatever.

I still feel that turbo engines are less resilient than NA engines. The turbine is turning so much faster than the other parts, is directly in the exhaust stream, ect, generating so much heat. I feel as if oil change intervals should be lower on turbo engines (albeit I'm stuck in the turbo dodge world, perhaps things are much better now.)
It could be more prone to failure simply due to more parts, but I doubt turbos themselves are unreliable. At the very least, they don't have to be. The speed at which they turn can be engineered for, as can the fact that they're in the exhaust stream. Yes, designing for this might require advanced materials, but we do have the technology. Jet engines, which experience some of the most extreme conditions (temperature and stress-wise) are actually some of the most reliable engines out there. Not just because of the fact that they fly, but just due to the simplicity of their design and operation. They are more reliable than aircraft piston engines, for example.

I thought that the issue of oil was long solved with water cooling, but I don't know. I also remember reading in "Maximum Boost" that the pressure curve of a turbocharged combustion process is much more gentle on the engine, as it is more spread out. NA engines tend to have a higher pressure spike than turbocharged ones.
Lsos is offline  
Old 04-24-2012, 05:03 AM
  #49  
Honda-Tech Member
 
Whats Up DOHC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,501
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by White98LS View Post
Turbos are the way of the future. Hell, you can't even buy any BMW in the states anymore without a turbo! Besides the M3, and that's going turbo very soon. Who can blame them when the performance and EPA fuel economy (not necessarily real world fuel economy) goes way up?

I think high-performance engines below the exotic stratosphere (performance cars up to a quarter-million, at which case gas mileage doesn't really matter) are even more likely to go turbo because high performance, high-revving engines and fuel economy generally don't mix. Just look at the S2000, current V8 M3, and V10 M5. The M5 real-world gets 10-11mpg combined, even with a 7-speed gearbox. The new TT V8 has more power and WAY more torque while getting 30% better fuel economy. That kind of stuff is hard to turn down when faced with upcoming CAFE regulations.
You dont think we are losing anything with this all turbo revolution?

No turbo cars will ever sound like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-UVV9aiUKU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkAFTYoyK2U#t=93
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzW8ECb5xWk#t=13
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYv1_orFB-U

For me that is kind of important, especially in a performance car. For a DD, who cares. But in a sports car/sedan that is supposed to thrill the senses, you shouldn't need an engine note generator. At least with EPS, some manufacturers have got it right. I haven't heard any modern turbocharged engines that sound good. Even the MP4-12C sounds impotent in person.
Whats Up DOHC is offline  
Old 04-24-2012, 05:51 AM
  #50  
Honda-Tech Member
 
MrDomino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: North of LA
Posts: 952
Default Re: Is it the Turbo age?

Originally Posted by Whats Up DOHC View Post
For me that is kind of important, especially in a performance car. For a DD, who cares. But in a sports car/sedan that is supposed to thrill the senses, you shouldn't need an engine note generator. At least with EPS, some manufacturers have got it right. I haven't heard any modern turbocharged engines that sound good. Even the MP4-12C sounds impotent in person.
I highly doubt any automaker cares about your minority opinion especially consider that there's an extremely low chance that you're ever going to buy one of their high performance cars.
MrDomino is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Is it the Turbo age?


Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.