Meme vs meme

What engine is this?

kek

speedhunters.com/2013/02/the-triflux/

NOS

Supercharger for THAT TORK

Centrifugal supercharger desu. I don't like turbo whine and I don't like what turbos do to exhaust notes, but I also don't like the space demand and boost profile of Roots or screw superchargers.

That ecoboost

Tarbo for the whistle, and the kick.

My car is only a 1.6 but it feels more torquey than most larger engines cars I've driven because of the SC, plus the whine is intoxicating

You preped your self to use the meme you cunt
Kys. Same fag

Wow, that is awesome.

>actually believing this

What 1.6 engine has a supercharger?

AW11

What?

You know that engine isn't supercharged, right?

supercharger if a V8 to preserve the exhaust note otherwise turbo

you could say n/a is the most meme...

Mini r53 works.
I know a turbo might've been more practical, but I love the way it drives

Also why is every diesel nowadays a turbo but supercharged diesels pretty much don't exist?

Centrifugal supercharger is the worst of both worlds. It'll give you the supercharger whine along with the BOV woosh, and instead of generating more or less constant boost pressure like a positive displacement supercharger or a turbo (over the boost threshold, at least), it increases boost pressure linearly with RPM, making your power band much peakier.

Centrifugals give you much more power at high RPM, whereas positive displacement superchargers give you more low end power.

electric turbo.

Beyond the realm of having to choose.

Because Diesel engines have higher temperature exhaust gas compared to gasoline engines, making turbochargers even more efficient.

Wastegates can also whine.

>heat soak
That's detemined by your intercooler, not your compressor (although it helps if you've got an efficient compressor).

Daily reminder that most racing series, including LMP, have a hellish amount of rules that make drawing conclusions from them both an impossibility and a fallacy in and of itself.

You can gear a supercharger to make boost up high too. See: Centrifugal.

Turbo's also add torque you doofus.

Bottles run out.

Wastegate on a centrifugal will also whine, and unmuffled centrifugals simply make your ears bleed - might as well muffle it a bit with a turbine.
Roots/twinscrew blowers are actually really space efficient in V engines. Boost profile exceeds that of centrifugals, offering more of a boost plateau (and thus consistent power) than centrifugals.

V8 + antilag + BOV noise +wastegate whine = GOD

whats the point of turbos on a DD? if im driving to work i want my engine to be more responsive at lower RPMs because of the traffic lights etc.who cares if im losing top end power and i dont want the turbo because im going to have to rev up to 3k+ to use up more gas when im trying to drive as economically as possible

am i retarded or what?

Also, diesels essentially work by knocking. Knock is bad in a gasoline engine - it kills it. Turbo's are more efficient at adding boost and thus knock, and they outflow superchargers while not drawing any power from the crank.

>Centrifugals give you much more power at high RPM
Pound for pound (of boost), they give just as much power. They only have a good peak boost, while positive displacement units actually produce a wide amount of boost.

Because manufacturers nowadays make turbo's that work efficiently in the low RPm powerband - choking it up top, but making the engine responsive at lower RPM.

Also, you can drive a turbo engine more economically by staying out of boost.

this

how is that possible? from my understanding you need to reach a certain amount of exhaust gasses for the turbo to kick in which just arent there at low RPMs?

also whats the point of the turbo then if you drive out of boost to save gas?

Turbos offer vastly superior power and delivery over stupidchargers
They are also cheaper and easier to make power with

A small compressor will spin up quickly because it doesn't require a lot of gas flow to spin up, but at higher RPMs it'll choke the engine.

>but at higher RPMs it'll choke the engine.
what do you mean by this? its small so eventually the exhaust gasses will be too much and it will start pumping air into the engine in amounts the engine cant handle?

Your recommendation of centrifugals is also exactly why I mentioned centrifugals in the first place. Far better profile for street cars. Civilized low down, boost when you actually want it. A blower will either make shit boost the entire time or too much boost far too early because it's meant to only go in a straight line at full throttle.

Centrifugal superchargers will make a little bit more peak power than a positive displacement supercharger due to reduced parasitic loss and increased compressor efficiency, and a little bit more peak power than a turbo because of reduced reduced backpressure. The amount of extra power they make over either is negligible, and the area under the curve they give up is unacceptable.

In broad strokes, you're right.

However, they do not offer a superior powerband over positive displacement superchargers. They offer more power, and less heat with it.
Also, some positive displacement superchargers are cheaper for certain V engines, and may be easier to build if you don't want EFI because of nostalgia.

No, the turbine wheel will impede exhaust flow, which hurts power. The engine would be exhaling through a straw.

It's so small that eventually it'll restrict the engine from breathing freely, like a too small set of headers would. It won't completely stop the engine obviously, but it will reduce top end power output.

why not strap a refrigerator compressor to the intake?

Air in amount the engine can't handle (causing a lean condition) are to be fixed with wastegates and BOV's.

Or you select the right size blower, and it augments your entire powerband, while still having decent cruising behaviour.

>it's meant to only go in a straight line at full throttle.
An engine isn't meant to go straight our around corners - that's the chassis' job, and the supercharger engine will simply provide a good throttle response so you can get around that corner predictably.

They do offer a superior powerband

>a little bit more peak power than a turbo because of reduced reduced backpressure
Wrong. Whether you take the energy directly from the crank, or take it from the exhaust gasses, it takes a fixed amount of energy to spin an identical compressor to an identical RPM for an identical airflow. Theoretically, that makes peak power exactly equal.

However, this is not the case. Exhaust energy is spare energy, and if your turbo does not choke the fuck out of your engine, a turbo will make more peak power, with a better torque curve, than a centrifugal.

This desu. Consistent torque and power, no lag, it's a nice upgrade.

If you don't like power down low - you've got a throttle for that.You shouldn't see the deficiency of a centrifugal (lack of boost down low) as an advantage, because there's other systems that can fix that.

How fucking long does it take your engine to get to 2krpm?

By that point, you're making power with a turbo.

twincharged nigger. read a book.

supercharger.
install can be done in a day or two
no taking forever to get the set up just right
no big boost spikes
no kits from china

Twinturbo, not twincharged. You're confusing the Triflux with other Lancia engines that were, in fact, twincharged.

>no kits from china
Really?

Turbocharger
install can be done in a day or two
no taking forever to get the set up just right
no big boost spikes
Everything comes from china

That's wrong, though. Putting a restriction right in the way of the exhaust increases backpressure and costs power. Do you think your turbo manifold really flows as well as a tri-Y? Do you think the exhaust turning 90 degrees at the turbine housing has no impact on the engine performance. The "strap a turbo to your engine and magically gain power with no increase in fuel usage" bullshit has long been disproven.

Having a centrifugal supercharger with a well-designed header will net you slightly more peak power than a comparable turbo system, on the order of maybe 5 HP. However, instead of reaching peak boost at ~3000 RPM and holding it out to redline, you have a compressor that's only making maybe 30-40% of peak boost at 3000 RPM and doesn't reach 100% until after your shift point unless you enjoy living life on the edge.

As the other guy mentioned, turbos absolutely do absolutely provide a broader, thus better powerband. Not being of fixed ratio to the crankshaft gives a turbocharger the capacity to provide superior boost levels at individual RPMs.
As previously noted however, you still have to "fill" the exhaust turbine at low RPM or coming back onto throttle from a closes position.
Interesting to note Vortec is working in a CVT driven centrifugal blower.
>If you don't like power at an arbitrary rpm
That could be a problem if you either have a torque converter with a stall speed of 1000rpm, or don't know how to operate a manual gearbox. If your idea of motoring nirvana is mashing on the throttle from idle and up shifting at 1500, then perhaps you should be driving a semi truck... Which is turbo anyway :P
A turbocharger provides boost a you demand it (ie, throttle position), not just as RPM allows (provided you "fill" the exhaust turbine of course).

You can spool your turbo whenever you want with a little bit of nitrous. A 25 shot blended from 0% at half throttle to 100% at WOT will spool the fuck out of any turbo. Post-turbo water injection works wonders, too.

i make peak torque in my cars twin scroll tarbo at 1.8rpm. pretty neat.

Only if you're fitting a kit. If you're starting from scratch I'd prefer to weld up (or more likely have someone else weld up) a turbo exhaust manifold than a supercharger intake manifold.

its acutally the 4AGZE but thats none of my business

One of the reasons I'm going a water/meth injection route on my TD 4x4. Other benefit of course is cooler EGTs with a little more boost and a cleaner intake tract.

Turbo

The problem with water/meth injection is that it only benefits you if you tune your car to run with it, and then it's incapable of running without it. With a small nitrous shot at high load, low RPM, you're only using your auxiliary injection a tiny fraction of the time. With WMI, you're using more WM50 the harder you push your car, which means you'll run out more quickly and you're more likely to explode your engine when you do.

If you have a nitrous wet shot and something goes wrong, you add no additional nitrous or fuel and nothing bad happens. If you have a nitrous dry shot and something goes wrong, you run a bit rich. You'll use more fuel and get less power, but it won't break anything. If you have WMI and something goes wrong, your EGTs spike through the roof and you melt your exhaust valves and detonation bends your rods into bananas and your piston rings turn into boa constrictors and snap your pistons in half.

But what about that PSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

How about building a better powerful engine than being a lazy yuropoor and slapping on a meme device.

Also sexy. Honestly they're both sweet in their own ways.

I still don't understand why turbos have "lag". Why would putting a turbo on your car suddenly make the throttle unresponsive in low RPMs? It only has an affect on your car above a certain RPM so why isn't the level before that RPM just like normal.

Cause it's pulling in less air than without a turbo at low rpms.

I dont like the way the turbo mini's drive desu
the R53 is bae because no turbo

If you wanna run big boost you gotta reduce the compression.
There's also a bigass turbine blocking the path of the exhaust gases.

But why? Isn't the exhaust turbine only connected to the exhaust, with the other end of the turbo simply feeding into the intake?

So big turbo = lag because low compression is necessary otherwise the engine will kaboom under boost. Right?

Wastegate whine..... Cool story bro.

so at which point does the wastegate whine, its it when you only have a low or high % of duty cycle???????

>I still don't understand why turbos have "lag"
A turbo is a turbine and doesn't do anything for you if its not spinning or "spooled up"

It's only a thing when you have a huge intercooler with a lot of piping to fill up. You get poor transient response when you're feathering the throttle and the BOV vents all of your boost and your compressor has to build up pressure again.

But mostly, when people talk about turbo lag, they're talking about the spool threshold. The turbine requires a certain amount of exhaust gas to spin up, and boost pressure will go very quickly from 0 to 100% once it hits a certain RPM. This can feel like lag if you're hitting the throttle at low RPM.

That, and a big turbine = more energy needed to get it up to speed, so it needs enough exhaust flow to spin up.

>The problem with water/meth injection is that it only benefits you if you tune your car to run with it, and then it's incapable of running without it.
While that might be true for a performance application, for my turbo diesel 4x4 with nothing more than a slight decrease in waste gate operation and slight increase in fueling, there's the obvious benefits of maintaining EGTs in long drawn out load situations (ie; towing uphill which I often do), where as if I was to find myself with an empty water reserviour, I'd simply monitor EGTs and adjust driving style to suit.
For my application, nitrous isn't really an option.

Why not both?

Turbo v8, easy 600hp and still enough power/tq in the low end

twinturbo inline 16 is better

Twincharged V24 is faster.

>not gas turbines

CRANK
WHIP

it's because no matter what power your engine is making, the turbo adds more or you wouldn't have it there. the lag just refers to car not making all the power it can with an the help of the turbo.
>Why would putting a turbo on your car suddenly make the throttle unresponsive in low RPMs?
it woudln't. it just makes it less responsive relative to the car's full potential. if you put a turbo on your car then flooring it at certain rpms will be at least as responsive as when it was NA, but you'll get a kick once the the turbo spools so it'll feel like there's a delay.

Turbo

>blah blah blah back pressure
What is wastegate?

>fuel efficiency meme
Yes, a turbo costs more fuel than na, but not as much as sc

>lag
Negligible on any street-able turbo. If you have a massive turbo, then yeah there's lag as your exhaust tries to spin it

>power loss
A turbo costs power by adding back pressure. This isn't a terrible loss (muh 0.1 mpg loss), a sc costs power by literally draining it straight from the engine (muh 5 mpg loss)

After all that, I will say, for an engine without efi, or an exceptionally weak one (less than 100 horses), I would go sc.

Supercharger. Because retard brute strength and that exhaust sound

And yet the most powerful vehicle on earth run superchargers. Get a new argument

Only because by rules they cannot run turbochargers

>Still not as powerful as 2 stoke turbo diesel ship engines
Superchargers btfo!!!

Get a more relevant argument

Yeah, it's great. It feels torquey, linear, still revs pretty high and makes that delicious whine and has the exhaust crackle and pop

Diesels actually have lower exhaust temps compared to gasoline engines, due to the longer expansion stroke - more of the heat of combustion is turned into mechanical energy, thus less is lost out the tailpipe; it's the primary reason behind their efficiency.

why do people make these posts where they feel they need to respond to everyone

>Centrifugals give you much more power at high RPM
But typically still less than a turbo

>Wastegate on a centrifugal will also whine

Take another look at what you've written here.

A wastegate.

A device that bypasses exhaust drive gas away from the turbine, to reduce enthalpy acting on the turbine.

On the turbine.

For a PTO driven supercharger.

Which has no turbine.

Fucking really?

And no, you will not get a poppet wastegate of any dimension to sound remotely like a gilmer drive and interference rotors interfering with the housing.

Did all of this come from Forza?

Load of shit. Water and alcohol will reduce charge air temperature and clean the intake tract regardless of any adjustment to the fuel delivery. Alcohol flash evaporates due to the low boiling point of alcohol and the rapid decompression of the alcohol after the nozzle. Same thing happening in the TX valve of the refrigeration system.

If you are using a water injection system to add additional octane and rely on this additional octane to prevent piston in the exhaust pipe then sure, that's the outcome when you run dry.

But water and alcohol injection will deliver benefits out of the box.

And I don't think you've ever used Nitrous before. Last time my wet fogger went wrong, nitrous was delivered and fuel was not. Care to guess how that ended for me?

You cannot assume a Nitrous system will always fail safe, as it won't. How can you assume if the fuel deliver solenoid's wiring failed, that the Nitrous delivery solenoid senses this and does not open? I'll tell you right now, short of a Fueltech that's not happening.

Even the best wastegate will have EMP/IMP 1:1 at peak power. Forty in the inlet manifold, forty in the exhaust. Best case scenario, 1.5:1 more common. Should never exceed 3:1. Yep, you'll be better than 1:1 building power but sure as shit not at peak.

So you'd rather they samefag for eight posts? Fuck up.

>Vortec is working in a CVT driven centrifugal blower

I'm surprised that this hasn't already been made by someone - it seems obvious to me. It fixes the issue of low boost at low RPM, while retaining the superior efficiency. I'm assuming it's a matter of building in a way that it will fit properly in the engine bay.

Thousand liter engine is more powerful than a 8 liter

No shit dumbass. Go be assmad somewhere else

Turbo every time.

8 liter engine designed to run for four seconds before welding itself shut is more powerful than 2l engine designed to run at full throttle for 24 hours

Go he ass mad somewhere else