Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com

Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com (http://www.camaro5.com/forums/index.php)
-   Forced Induction - V8 (http://www.camaro5.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=74)
-   -   Turbocharge your way to efficiency.....and power! (http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4786)

Mr. Wyndham 06-25-2008 10:05 PM

Turbocharge your way to efficiency.....and power!
 
I was shown this today...and was impressed, so I wanted to share.

I always wished GM had produced a Direct Injected NA version of the 2.0L Ecotec so that we could compare it's numbers to that of the Turbo version....but they don't. This is exactly what I've been looking for, though (minus the engine type, so here you have it (an Australian publication):
http://autospeed.com/cms/A_109931/article.html

Quote:

A turbo engine has the potential to be more economical than a naturally aspirated engine for two reasons.
  • Thermal Efficiency
A turbocharged engine is more thermally efficient than a naturally aspirated engine. This is easy to understand when you remember that the turbo uses energy normally wasted out of the exhaust.

If you stand behind a car on a dyno as it undergoes a full power run, you’ll be amazed at the force of the gas coming out of the tail-pipe – you can feel it from literally metres behind the car. As it exits the engine, the gas is also hot – up to 800 degrees C – and it is hot because it has energy that can do work.

Since a turbo makes use of both the heat and flow, in a turbo car a greater amount of fuel is converted to useful work.

(Another way of looking at this is to consider that there is always a temperature drop across a turbo. That is, the temperature of the exhaust gas measured in front of the turbo is always higher than the temperature of the exhaust gas measured after the turbo. This temp change is indicative of the energy being taken from the exhaust gas. The turbo also takes much of the pulsing out of the exhaust gas – the reason why a turbo car usually needs less muffling of its exhaust. Again, the turbo is drawing energy from the exhaust.)

So a turbocharged engine is more thermally efficient than a naturally aspirated engine.
  • Shape of Power Curve
The other reason that a turbo engine has the ability to more economical relates to the way in which it develops power.

In a given naturally aspirated engine, the power developed at each rpm depends on aspects such as valve timing and intake and exhaust manifold tuning. For example, the engine might be ‘tuned’ to develop a lot of power at low revs. However, even with variable valve timing and variable inlet manifolds, a naturally aspirated engine with good bottom-end power is very unlikely to have good top-end power – the compromise to get the good bottom-end power output is simply too great.

The reason that good bottom-end power will improve fuel economy is that the car will be able to use low engine revs more of the time. That is, the gearbox will not need to change down, so keeping revs lower. This is important for economy as the frictional losses inside the engine increase rapidly with higher revs – the throttled engine becomes less efficient as revs rise. But low engine revs can only be used if the engine has sufficient power to propel the car at those revs!


Of course, fitting a bigger engine will give good power at low revs – but a bigger engine will also have higher internal friction, so there’s no overall gain.

Therefore, to gain the best real world economy, what is needed is a small engine (so having low internal friction) running at low revs (again, small internal frictional losses) that develops lots of power at those low revs.
And the best way to efficiently give a small engine good low-down power is to turbo it.

...............

So let’s take a step back. In the comparison shown above of the two 2-litre engines, the turbo engine has better fuel economy, better CO2 emissions, 50 per cent more bottom-end power and 34 per cent more top-end power.
In short, it’s better in every respect (except, it must be said, cost to build).

Having driven both engines on the road in recent times, the turbo engine is massively better – and in fact in freeway travel, we scored an even greater fuel economy win to the turbo engine than the above official test figures show.
Now all we need is for GM to pop out a Turbo V6....hmmmm.........

CamaroSpike23 06-25-2008 10:32 PM

Quote:

A turbocharged engine is more thermally efficient than a naturally aspirated engine. This is easy to understand when you remember that the turbo uses energy normally wasted out of the exhaust.
a turbo uses energy normally wasted... so by the turbo creating MORE heat underhood, its better?


http://camaro5.com/forums/showpost.p...3&postcount=58




Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragoneye (Post 82796)

Now all we need is for GM to pop out a Turbo V6....hmmmm.........

and you mean for them to pop out ANOTHER turbo v6

http://www.askbill.info/images/grandnational/87GNX.jpg

Mr. Wyndham 06-25-2008 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23 (Post 82824)
a turbo uses energy normally wasted... so by the turbo creating MORE heat underhood, its better?

What Turbo's actually do that today on OEM setups?:rolleyes: Huge pieces that get sat there and ran WOT for a while until you get a pretty light-show for the Camera...................

OEMs wouldn't put anything under the hood and warantee itfor 100,000 miles if they didn't work well. Fwiw, I'm a big fan of those remote-mounted guys, though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23 (Post 82824)
and you mean for them to pop out ANOTHER turbo v6

yes I do. Touche.:D


but besides all that...I like the Eaton blowers, too. ;) Is that what you wanted to hear?:bellyroll:

CamaroSpike23 06-25-2008 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragoneye (Post 82833)
What Turbo's actually do that today on OEM setups?:rolleyes: Huge pieces that get sat there and ran WOT for a while until you get a pretty light-show for the Camera...................

OEMs wouldn't put anything under the hood and warantee itfor 100,000 miles if they didn't work well. Fwiw, I'm a big fan of those remote-mounted guys, though.

go take a heat gun to a stock turbo'd car, compare it to the manifolds themselves, the turbos, and the exhaust leaving the turbo, then find the same motor N/A'd and check the heat on the manifolds and the exhaust farther down

and thats another thing with OEM turbos. they are small. :mad0259:

which allows them to be used for that amount of miles and not run into problems. just like motorcycle motors compared to a v-8. ever wonder why they can spin up to 14,000 rpms? cus they are smaller and have a lot less rotating mass. same applies to turbos, but i am aware that you know that. just puttin it out there :thumbsup:



Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragoneye (Post 82833)
but besides all that...I like the Eaton blowers, too. ;) Is that what you wanted to hear?:bellyroll:

yes, yes it is. :bow:

btw... have i told you about the new power setup for Project Darkseid?

Mindz 06-26-2008 12:18 AM


CamaroSpike23 06-26-2008 05:46 AM

looks like a pair of demented psycho rapist eyes looking at you when its backing into the dyno.

fredl11 06-26-2008 09:40 AM

I was interested
 
but after reading this important information from a Cobalt Forum I am not to sure about the use of turbos or Superchargers!

Just when you thought you had seen / heard it all. This has got to be a joke, he cannot be serious!
http://cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=118899

"So we all know that the supercharged engines need the intake bypass valve so they work in reverse. Otherwise the supercharger would just suck all the air out of the cylinder. So knowing that, how does the turbocharged version work in reverse? The engine is trying to suck air backwards, yet the turbo wants to spin forward so I don't see how it works. Is there some sort of exhausting intake bypass valve on the turbo version? Also, if it does have the valve, does that also mean that it can make boost in reverse? Like how much boost? Like 5 psi or does it go over 20?

Can anyone help me sort this out?"



BUT! Just ito be sure I'm going outside and have wife watch my engine as I back out of the driveway and see just exactly what the engine does with turbos when going in reverse! I'll post if anything monumental happens.

No really, he might be on to something, we've never seen what happens with the engine with a closed hood, maybe its like what goes on behind closed doors.


:iono: :mad0259: :iono:
.

CamaroSpike23 06-26-2008 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredl11 (Post 82948)
but after reading this important information from a Cobalt Forum I am not to sure about the use of turbos or Superchargers!

Just when you thought you had seen / heard it all. This has got to be a joke, he cannot be serious!
http://cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=118899

"So we all know that the supercharged engines need the intake bypass valve so they work in reverse. Otherwise the supercharger would just suck all the air out of the cylinder. So knowing that, how does the turbocharged version work in reverse? The engine is trying to suck air backwards, yet the turbo wants to spin forward so I don't see how it works. Is there some sort of exhausting intake bypass valve on the turbo version? Also, if it does have the valve, does that also mean that it can make boost in reverse? Like how much boost? Like 5 psi or does it go over 20?

Can anyone help me sort this out?"



BUT! Just ito be sure I'm going outside and have wife watch my engine as I back out of the driveway and see just exactly what the engine does with turbos when going in reverse! I'll post if anything monumental happens.

No really, he might be on to something, we've never seen what happens with the engine with a closed hood, maybe its like what goes on behind closed doors.


:iono: :mad0259: :iono:
.

oh, jeez. please tell me you and he are joking.

Xanthos 06-26-2008 10:18 AM

I'm still a fan of NA tuning.
- Xanthos

DGthe3 06-26-2008 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredl11 (Post 82948)
but after reading this important information from a Cobalt Forum I am not to sure about the use of turbos or Superchargers!

Just when you thought you had seen / heard it all. This has got to be a joke, he cannot be serious!
http://cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=118899

"So we all know that the supercharged engines need the intake bypass valve so they work in reverse. Otherwise the supercharger would just suck all the air out of the cylinder. So knowing that, how does the turbocharged version work in reverse? The engine is trying to suck air backwards, yet the turbo wants to spin forward so I don't see how it works. Is there some sort of exhausting intake bypass valve on the turbo version? Also, if it does have the valve, does that also mean that it can make boost in reverse? Like how much boost? Like 5 psi or does it go over 20?

Can anyone help me sort this out?"



BUT! Just ito be sure I'm going outside and have wife watch my engine as I back out of the driveway and see just exactly what the engine does with turbos when going in reverse! I'll post if anything monumental happens.

No really, he might be on something, we've never seen what happens with the engine with a closed hood, maybe its like what goes on behind closed doors.


:iono: :mad0259: :iono:
.

fixed

Shadowsong 06-26-2008 04:50 PM

I <3 Turbos :wub:

I'm going to look into dropping one (maybe two... >.>) into the v6 camaro when I get my hands on one... I'll have to do something about that high comp. ratio though :iono:

Kyle2k 06-26-2008 07:07 PM

No you won't, its a direct injection engine...look at the 335i engine specs...you'll be suprised how high it can be with direct injection ;)

Nickdago 06-26-2008 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragoneye (Post 82796)
I was shown this today...and was impressed, so I wanted to share.

I always wished GM had produced a Direct Injected NA version of the 2.0L Ecotec so that we could compare it's numbers to that of the Turbo version....but they don't. This is exactly what I've been looking for, though (minus the engine type, so here you have it (an Australian publication):
http://autospeed.com/cms/A_109931/article.html

Now all we need is for GM to pop out a Turbo V6....hmmmm.........

Sounds like we might expect a Camaro with a smaller turbo charged engine to help in MPG's

Grape Ape 06-27-2008 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23 (Post 82840)
go take a heat gun to a stock turbo'd car, compare it to the manifolds themselves, the turbos, and the exhaust leaving the turbo, then find the same motor N/A'd and check the heat on the manifolds and the exhaust farther down

and thats another thing with OEM turbos. they are small. :mad0259:

which allows them to be used for that amount of miles and not run into problems. just like motorcycle motors compared to a v-8. ever wonder why they can spin up to 14,000 rpms? cus they are smaller and have a lot less rotating mass. same applies to turbos, but i am aware that you know that. just puttin it out there :thumbsup:

Here is another article from the same awesome Aussie website (I showed the first one to Dragoneye) about the different ways automakers use turbos. http://autospeed.com/cms/A_2786/article.html

After reading it I think that a small turbo is kind of like a low stall torque converter, it makes a lot of sense for a daily driver which is after all what they are building. Sure they will choke before they hit the readline, but there is very little lag and peak torque is avaible from 2k to 5k (or so) and I'll make that trade for my daily driver.
:blackvertshift:

ZeeTwentyFour 06-27-2008 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowsong (Post 83089)
I <3 Turbos :wub:

I'm going to look into dropping one (maybe two... >.>) into the v6 camaro when I get my hands on one... I'll have to do something about that high comp. ratio though :iono:

yea a V6 turbo would make me :happyanim: but too high a compression is less :cool: maybe if they give us a small little turbo OEM or over the counter with some boost? say 5-8 pounds? nice economy and more then 300 horses:chevy:

Shadowsong 06-28-2008 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyle2k (Post 83130)
No you won't, its a direct injection engine...look at the 335i engine specs...you'll be suprised how high it can be with direct injection ;)

Please do go on.....

CamaroSpike23 06-29-2008 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nickdago (Post 83132)
Sounds like we might expect a Camaro with a smaller turbo charged engine to help in MPG's

yeah, we've discussed that option numerous times.

greenrail 06-30-2008 03:04 PM

My sources are telling me that the Turbo Four Cylinder is pretty much a done deal for the Camaro.

May be an interesting alternative in light of the new CAFE regs and the need to lighten the car up somewhat.

Grape Ape 07-01-2008 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenrail (Post 84107)
My sources are telling me that the Turbo Four Cylinder is pretty much a done deal for the Camaro.

May be an interesting alternative in light of the new CAFE regs and the need to lighten the car up somewhat.

Are you talking about a small 4 (the new 1.6?) plus a V6 or the LNF instead of a V6? It can't see GM offering the LNF & LTT in the same car since the performance would be so similar.

DGthe3 07-01-2008 07:15 PM

We have no reason to believe that a V6 won't be offered, so if there is a turbo4, it would most likely slot under the V6.

Mr. Wyndham 07-06-2008 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grape Ape (Post 84499)
Are you talking about a small 4 (the new 1.6?) plus a V6 or the LNF instead of a V6? It can't see GM offering the LNF & LTT in the same car since the performance would be so similar.

derrr...I can't believe I had to look up those engine codes, I'm usually on the ball with those. ;)


Anyways, here's a brain teaser for you. There's no doubt that the Camaro will get a V6 -- and many reliable people are telling us, whether directly or not, that it will be 300hp. But if they put the Turbo 4 in the car, who's to say that it doesn't drop in power to maybe 220hp or something like that? They could do that and then by utilizing the turbo/direct injection combo, the powertrain guys could probably whip out a 30mpg Camaro. Besides, there's no real reason to have 260hp in the bottom-line car, not - like you said - when the V6 is so close to it in power.:iono:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.