Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingtal0n
four cylinder turbo is amazing.
everything I've seen with v8's still has me constantly saying, "well, the 4-cylinder might not XXX but it sure can YYY" and giving my old SR credit. The thing that killed it for me was the clutch, constant traffic here took the fun out of it. And 4-cylinder auto just doesn't seem right.
Oh, the thread title. Right. So you guys realize that you are basically comparing 77% efficient compressors with "~76%" efficient compressors, right? Like, one turbo isn't "better" because it's compressor map is bigger, that just means the compressor is bigger. You are getting a very similar compressor discharge temperature across the board.
The performance aspect you are looking to compare isn't in the compressor map at all; that aspect is supported by how the dynamics of the exhaust plays out, not only the turbine wheel but what comes before/after that wheel. In other words, when comparing two similar sized compressors at say, 20psi, both discharge very similar temperatures of air if they are in similar regions of the compressor map (both maps look the same right). So any significant difference in power isn't going to be due to the compressor, comparing mass flow rate and looking at the map isn't going to reveal these discreet behaviors.
|
Except when one compressor is significantly smaller, meaning less mass and intertia... and when the compressor is more efficient, the turbine has to do less work, and when the turbine is more efficient, you get less emap...