MUH Naturally Aspirated engine

>MUH Naturally Aspirated engine
>Loses ~30% of its performance at 1 mile above sea level

>Glorious Turbocharged engine
>Loses very negligible performance with altitude

Tell me Veeky Forums, why are NA engines not a thing of the past by now?

Sage

...

tirbo engine loses 100 percent perfprmance under whater glorious diesel does not?

put enough water where the air is supposed to be and I guarantee the toughest diesel in the world will blow the fuck up.

>Turbod engines lose less power at altitude

Did I hit where it hurts? How do you feel about your 0-60 increasing by 3 seconds when going to the ski slopes?

Not everyone is doing uphill races.

You are the retard here. Ask any 12 year old and he'll tell you Turbo engines lose less power at altitude than NA. It's simple physics.

Yes but is it relevant ? Not everyone lives in the mountains.

They should. Hillclimbs are the most fun racing there is.

I spend 99.9% of my time at sea level or close to it. I don't know why I'd live anywhere with thin air. It's cold up there.

Having commuted on i70 across the divide somewhat frquently, I would never buy an NA car again if I moved back to Colorado.

Well, I live in Denver, so do many other people, and they don't really know that advertised hp is going to vary greatly for them if the engine is NA. Also, as a car enthusiast, mountain driving is best driving.

Not true all the time.

OT, consumer ignorance and the fact that most people do indeed live down low where it doesn't matter.

What's the point of saging just to say sage sperglord?

You fucks are so ignorant. Where's the oxygen coming from at altitude?

they're generally cheaper and slightly more reliable. also they have nice sound and a purer engine feel

Are you telling me the Viper lost 30% of its power whilst going up pikes peak and it STILL got a 10:00:39 mechanically stock on its factory tires? what a fucking god machine. can only dream of how fast it could go up pikes peak with a set of twin turbos and some slicks.

And are also less fun because of the more linear power delivery. Nothing like waiting for the power to kick in on a stage 2 GTI

Fuck that, give me a super anyway.

Well, this settles it, I'm buying a Navigator.

Glad I convinced you brother, May the Forced induction be with you

My RB20DET with a large turbo was great. Nothing happened below 4000 rpm, but it was the most fun thing ever.

The fastest Pike's Peak cars and bikes are now battery EVs.

Fuck off back to /g/ or whatever you fags hangout

...

>Turbo charged
>Glorious
>Not supercharged master race
>Not cramming in air at every waking moment.

>A FUCKING IPAD

It's indeed VERY IMPORTANT
Thx

>not having both

>mountain driving is best driving.
poor amerifat with no history

...

Yes dual charged engines are a thing. Volvo put them in some of their vehicles in recent years, some random Chink companies are doing it with tiny blocks that go into mainland cars.

But it sounds so silly.

Mountain driving = best driving

They're complex but made decent power for their displacement while still having respectable fuel efficiency. Emissions is the reason why they're doing it in China.

No less silly than a dual-stage turbo, for instance.

There are different ways to go, but one way would be to put the supercharger on a clutch so it could provide at boost at any RPM and then let the turbo take over for better efficiency when it spools up.

I mean, in aviation this is true

You don't go bombing down I-70, do you?

No, never. What kind of irresponsible citizen do you think I am?

I didn't know if you meant pic related when you said "mountain driving = best driving".

I was being facetious with my response user. Going over Monarch is great fun, as is Glenwood canyon at night. Have yet to touge up the Grand Mesa but its only a matter of time

>he doesn't have nitrous to keep his performance to 40k feet
LMAO