View Single Post
Old 08-28-2012, 01:21 AM   #27 (permalink)
thomason2wheels
wrx4me...
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: goode, va
Posts: 143

no worries - '91 Subaru legacy L
90 day: 31.45 mpg (US)

weevee - '08 suzuki vstrom dl650
90 day: 61.22 mpg (US)

wrx - '09 Subaru wrx sedan
90 day: 29.8 mpg (US)

Big Bright Green Pleasure Machine - '09 kawasaki ninja 250 se

Connie - '09 kawasaki concours
Thanks: 42
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by meanjoe75fan View Post
For a turbo that does better, fe-wise, than the N/A version: the '88 Saab 9000 turbo matches it's N/A version EPA combined, and betters it by 2MPG on the highway. Same car, same engine....one had a turbo bolted; one didn't.

It was also extremely laggy, which shows the path to success: a really big, heavy turbine wheel.

Diesel dave: you mentioned compressor/turbine combos at 50% efficiency...better tgan piston power. Then wny not delete the piston portion and go with a pure turbine engine? I was told in my flying days that a piston would handily beat a turbine in "power-specific fuel consumption": is that no longer true?
The wrx is pretty 'laggy' too. Turbo starts working around 2k, cruising rpm at 55 is about 2200, so its in boost range at normal highway speeds. Next set of tires will be taller to force slightly lower rpms in top gear. I think getting it down to 2k if possible would give me 10% improvement at eco speeds but when needed i would stillhave boost available above 55.
  Reply With Quote