View Single Post
      10-06-2016, 10:59 PM   #221
adc
Major General
United_States
2725
Rep
6,750
Posts

Drives: 2018 F80 M3 ED
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: MD/DC

iTrader: (12)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viffermike View Post
Neither was turbocharging in the 1980s. What that era needed was computerized management, the computing power for which simply wasn't available. Turbos were pretty much on or off propositions, as your response partially describes in terms of the power gains it supplied to engines already limited in size. Thanks to engine management software now, it's viable again -- and battery/regen technology will progress in a somewhat similar way.



"Nothing else" is absolutely false. It was also a solution for engine fuel efficiency as related to power, both on race circuits (less pit stops = better chance to win) and in the commercial world. In that regard, turbos were also a social response: to make smaller, fuel-efficient cars that dominated the mass market (and some exotic markets: Think Lotus Espirit and Renault Alpine) faster. Isn't that what hybridization also doing now for some (and, by all accounts, more to come -- including Bugatti, which is why I mentioned it )?

(Don't forget that forced induction existed in most formula racing, including Formula 1, from its inception. For the first couple of decades there were two engine 'formulas' allowed: one NA, the other supercharged. Forced induction was nothing new to formula racing in the 1980s)
In the 80's, many countries had high taxes for engines beyond a certain capacity. So the only things available for companies to increase power output were revs, and turbos. By far, turbos offered much more bang for the buck, even taking huge lag into consideration. Turbos were added to engine for performance, like in Audi Quattros, Porsche 911 and 959, Ferrari F40 etc. The entire Group B rally cars, 500-600 BHP from 1.6-2.5L engines. Fuel consumption was far worse for these cars, as it was for turbocharged F1 cars. They didn't have turbo 4 cyl engines outputting 1200-1500 BHP for fuel efficiency for crying out loud, you got it all wrong.

In the 20's and 30's, as well as the initial turbo days of the early 80's, they had an equivalency formula: lower capacity allowed for FI cars, and higher capacity allowed for NA cars. That's simply because FI cars made lots more power, not because they were sipping less fuel. If you tell this to an automotive engineer of the times they'll die of laughter.

Anyway I don't want to spend more time arguing with you about these topics. Anybody with a modicum of interest can read about it and make their own opinion. Happy motoring.
__________________

2018 F80 Santorini
2019 Z4 3.0i
2022 X2 M35i
Appreciate 1
Viffermike1753.00