Why is that? Is exhaust scavenging a more efficient way of providing boost vs. a belt/pulley system drive off the crankshaft?turbodan wrote:
No matter which kind of supercharger you use and no matter how you do it, you can be sure that the same system with a turbocharger will be more efficient and make more power.
M535i Kompressor Project
-
Nebraska_e28
- Beamter
- Posts: 9062
- Joined: Apr 13, 2006 11:18 PM
- Location: Council Bluffs, IA
- Contact:
A turbosupercharger extracts waste energy from the exhaust to drive the compressor. A mechanical supercharger is 100% parasitic. It could be argued that the turbo is partially parasitic, but even then, it's still taking a good bit of waste energy and putting it back to use.Nebraska_e28 wrote:Why is that? Is exhaust scavenging a more efficient way of providing boost vs. a belt/pulley system drive off the crankshaft?turbodan wrote:No matter which kind of supercharger you use and no matter how you do it, you can be sure that the same system with a turbocharger will be more efficient and make more power.
Turbos utilize some of the heat energy that is wasted out the exhaust on NA and supercharged engines. That is the fundamental difference that gives the advantage. A well designed turbo system will have more intake manifold pressure than exhaust backpressure, so scavenging isn't a problem. You can also alter the pressure ratio between the intake and exhaust to suit your needs. Different pressure ratios can be used to fine tune cylinder filling.
The proof is on the dyno. I've seen a few engines running a supercharger and a turbocharger on the same engine at the same boost pressure. The turbo system always comes out ahead.
The proof is on the dyno. I've seen a few engines running a supercharger and a turbocharger on the same engine at the same boost pressure. The turbo system always comes out ahead.