re: 4-cylinder turbos, you got one?

quote:

---

4-cylinder turbos, you got one?

---

Yep.

Alfa Romeo 2.0l in-line 4 w/ 280 hp and 306 lb-ft tq. Car weights about 3500, so not a rocket ship but moves pretty good. Throttle response is my only complaint, but that can be fixed easy.

Their CEO has often talked about how their size is always overcome by their willingness to try new technology, try and separate themselves from what the other asian manufacturers have.

Out of that comes the original rx7 and miata.

Imagine a mx5 with a I6 wedged in it. The I6 is supposed to use the same skyactive technology.

i dont understand why they dont just put superchargers

quote:

---

i dont understand why they dont just put superchargers

---

fightin tigers hit the nail on the head.

Keep in mind the whole impetus to move more cars to forced induction if to help meet the every tightening governmental controls on fuel mileage and emissions. A supercharger causes parasitic loses due to being driven by engine power vs the turbo that uses the exhaust gases whose energy would otherwise be wasted. The negative for turbos is you, in general, have to decide whether you want low-end torque or high-end horsepower, as well as they, have turbo lag because they take time to build boost where the supercharger is almost instantaneous. You can avoid the majority of these issues by using multiple smaller turbos (quicker spool up but still having the higher boost capacity) or by using something like the variable turbine geometry turbos that Porsche uses (which acts as a variable sized turbo), both add complexity and cost.

The turbo is the more effective route to the current goal.

As an aside for high-performance cars where efficiency is not a big issue you will see the type of performance dictate the FI option. Cars designed for fast accelerating short races (1/8-1/4m) often have superchargers though some do have duel or large single turbos. Think Hellcat for example. Cars designed with more of a road track in mind will almost always have turbos.


One thing to add is Mercedes has played with electric superchargers for years, which are on demand vs always on for belt or gear driven superchargers. They now have a 3l I6 with a small electric supercharger that runs until the turbo spools up cutting out the lag.

I will say turbos are MUCH better than they were 25 years ago. Back then in cars like a 911 Turbo you had to roll onto the throttle significantly before you needed the power. I remember when I was tracking my dad's 911 I would be on the gas right after I was finishing braking into a corner (overlapped if I was trail braking). This led to many a pants-shitting moment in an arse-engined car that was prone to snap oversteer when ham-fisted. It did lead me to becoming smooth, slow is smooth and smooth is fast as they say.

I have a 13 year old turbo diesel... Turbo just shite out about a month ago and was a little over 800 to replace. I live in Germany and they are popular here. I get about 550 miles per tank which is 13.5 gallons. I get around 40 mpg which is pretty good. The gas mileage you get along with the power and size of the vehicle is pretty impressive.

The majority of cars on the road today should have turbochargers.

They really should mostly be diesel, but we Americans hate diesel cars because we are dumb

quote:

---

Buy Volvos, they’re boxy but good.

---

Yep.

quote:

---

Should have got the 6 speed, it turns a ho-hum commuter into an almost-sports sedan.

---

Yea I heard that the 6spd was the tits but I traded in a 6spd and needed something quick and they had a 2.0 sport auto on the lot with everything I wanted. What I really didn't want was a CVT trans, which most of them have. The auto is nice, have been in a stick acura daily for 2.5 years. I don't miss it. Yet.

If buying a car for 10+ years of ownership I wouldn't go turbo. They are very well designed but will fail at somepoint. Might be 100k might be 200k but have a life span. But damn, they are fun for the occasional driving car.