06-11-2015, 06:19 PM
|
#17 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,335
Thanks: 24,453
Thanked 7,394 Times in 4,789 Posts
|
turbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by bondvagabond
Thank you aero head for all the great input. My e-350 is actually a 1993, I think the one in your link is a 2012. Ford did a body change in 92 or 93 and redesigned for less drag. Supposedly my factory c of d is 0.37 not great but better than some of the stuff coming out today.
My van is also the factory long version, 20" longer behind rear wheels. I know from my time as a boat builder that the same design stretched was always more efficient for displacement hulls anyway, that do not plane.
I've been agonizing over doing a turbo or a tuned exhaust designed to be most efficient at intended rpm zone of 1400-1600rpms.
The only data I could find on that was for the 1.6 vw diesel. Both the na and turbo use the same compression ratio 23:1 and using the EPA specs the na diesel is 9% greater efficiency. All the other diesels I have found the factory drops the compression ratio for the turbo motors. This comparison is more like what I was contemplating of adding a turbo to the already higher 21.5:1 compression ratio of my na motor.
Both my 7.3 and the vw 1.6's are all mechanical idi's so without being an engineer I think This data dictates that I stay na and build a custom tuned set of headers and exhaust
|
Has Gale Banks offered a turbo package for your powerplant? They include tuned exhaust with their kits.It's all dyno-tested.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
|
|
|