Originally Posted by
Zate
i dunno i think the problem is that fuel only has so much energy per unit in it. X amount of fuel when burnt perfectly produces Y amount of HP. Doesnt matter if you have a 6.0L V8 or a turbo 2.5L, 500 HP requires a crapload of fuel.
Same on the smaller scale... doesnt matter if its a 900cc single cylinder with a Turbo, or a 1.8L, 110 HP requires about the same amount of fuel, its the efficiencies in how its burnt, and how the energy produced is transmitted to the ground that is important.
With more efficient burning process and a more efficient method of getting the energy from the combustion to the wheels you could use less fuel to produce the same effect.
You're looking at it the other way.
I'm saying OK. We need to get a car that makes 170HP because that's the acceptable norm right now and we feel this is enough zip to get us by (assuming the car's weight is kept rather low.)
We can take a 1.8l engine and slap a turbo on it and by golly, we have ourselves the 170HP. the 1.8 by itself would just make an "ok" 135 HP. Both engines are exactly the same, except one has a smart ECU that activates the boost when throttle and rpms get high enough by closing up the wastegate. Instant 35HP increase in power, whereas to get the same effect we would need to get ourselves something like a... 2.5l engine.
The 1.8l normal would get around 35mpg.
1.8l T would get around 34mpg, as long as it doesn't get into boost which shouldn't even be that hard anyways.
2.5l wouldn't even be able to get anything over 30, no matter if it's in the same exact car under the same exact driving conditions and same driver.
And yeah, on the other things i didn't argue against, I can see your point but I think due to these inefficiencies and capabilities of engines, the turbos "unlock" this extra power by benefiting from the waste gasses. Exhaust is just waste turned into energy. Kinda better than nothing.