View Single Post
Old 09-22-2009, 08:02 PM   #7 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ View Post
I guess the most obvious question for me is if this can be cheaply retrofitted to existing cars?
I'm gonna play along for a second and assume it does work.

The "CO and fe gains" come from downsizing the engine i.e. put in a 1.0 where a 1.6 used to be, so no, slapping one on your wheels won't help unless you downsize the engine too.

At this point I fail to see how this offers an advantage over a turbo. Yeah, they had their pretty graph, but properly sized turbos work over different rpm ranges.
__________________


  Reply With Quote