Quiz time: Name engines that were nat-asp AND Turbo'd...
Turbo Mini Forums

figure i have for the LET
201/5800 (bhp) 206/2400 (lbft)
cant find the boost as migweb's down again.

Here for the craic..

Supercharged Arden powered

Pug Mi16 1998ccm 150/155 bhp and T16 1998ccm and 200 bhp (220 with 45 sec overboost) :)

www.shag.no

Most of those are modern!
One of the all time greats, the lotus esprit and esprit turbo.
www.lotusespritworld.com/EModels/S4.html.

Found it!

Rover 2.0 T series Nat asp is 140hp

Fiat Uno 1.3 Turbo N/A 70hp, Turbo form 122hp. dunno about Torque figure and boost level

ok, having done some occasional research into this, I'm a little confused about 'claimed' power outputs now...
Not taking anythign away from the great work done by anyone, but a recent "244bhp/178lb ft torque, at 16psi boost" statement is another that just made me sit and think about this; that along with the 'bananas' we laugh about on this site seem to make little sense in reality.



So, let's look at the data I could find and verify from the engines above...

In general, this is what i'm finding (perhaps not surprising) and it is based on OEM information right from older-generation 1980's motors, right up to the latest JDM / US spec STi imprezza...



Basically, you can see it is a pretty linear line between boost (y-axis, bar) increase and power (x-axis, %). Wow! Big surprise I hear you say...

Basically, it seems to me you can take the boost, and up it to the point that for every 1-bar, you'll get 175% more power than the non-turbo engine. in short, 200% more power will need around 1.3bar of boost (depending on how you look at the trendline)...


Best thing about using OEM data of course, is that we know they match the compressor to be at / around / near max efficiency at the boost / aiflowflow needed to achieve the power - hence we do get a pretty linear-ish curve from this data, and of course it's pretty accurate data.

What I'm getting at though - and I'm not neccesarilly doubting any claims of anyone (myself included) - is how do you get these HUGE hp claims in our little engines without the aid of BIG, efficient boost?

Be honest now, what power would your engine make if you raised the CR to (say) 10:1, and bolted an LCB up to it and a K&N to the carb intake? No cam swap or anything?
I reckon mine would struggle to make 85bananas, but we'll say 85bananas to be optimistic.

So, adding my magic 175% power figure in there, I'll have 148bananas on 14.6psi of boost.

The magical 200 bananas is 235% more power than my theoretical starting point of 80 bananas.

So that means - I need as near-as-dammit - 1.9 bar of boost (28psi) to get there...

Of course, I KNOW that bangs / minute make power, but going from a 7000rpm red-line to a 8000rpm red-line STILL won't account for that surely?






Or am i missing something obvious?

Edited by turbodave16v on 6th Dec, 2006.

The swift was never turbocharged, and the GTti engine was only turbocharged, the non turbo engine was only 6 valve not 12 valve.

Not exactly constructive!

I see what you mean about the sens of bananas,
I think that the dyno is reading very high. Another mini was dynoed with 107 hp at wheels(very good) but, if this dyno were right , this mean it does lost 70 bhp in his gearbox that's 42% (I read that's 20% was more correct) and 107*120/100 never made 175 bhp but 128 (a more commun figure for 12 psi)
then the 244 bhp are still giving a powerfull 178 bhp with 16 psi's of boost, but more commun (it would be know for long if a cam on it's own could give more than 60 bhp












Names edited Fab. PM sent :)

Edited by turbodave16v on 18th Nov, 2006.

the BMW 2002 and the 2002 TI,turbo,

Fab , just to show some etiquete at this point con you remove the name form your last post,

WWW.FORCE-RACING.CO.UK PLEASE CLICK HERE

Toyota supra (load of models and different engines so ill only do 1)

Supra mk4 3litre engine
NA - 220hp / 210lbft
Turbd - 280hp / 260lbft

What about more japs like mr2 and skylines they both come NA and turbd.

I have to agree with Dave about these horsepower claims being made.

The recent 244hp seemed a bit optomistic, so I ran my spreadsheet that I have used to calculate the maximum power and air flow for my 998, with data for a 1275 on 16 psi.

My spreadsheet gives near identical results to the Ray Hall turbocharger site calculator, so I assume it is accurate.

The science does not add up based on air flow, intercooler efficiency, compressor efficiency, engine volumetric efficiency the maximum power from a 1275 is around 180 hp at 6500rpm. If it is a 1380 then possibly 195 hp.

I dont like to criticise other peoples efforts but they should check their own figures against the science before making outlandish claims.

This also seesm to fit in with dave's curve above.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."