Unpopular opinion time: Having finally ridden my '21 850 factory turbo, it seems that aftermarket turbo mfgs/shops have no clue what they're doing
- Thread starter routter
- Start date
it's like the guy in the vid says. technically heat is the source thru the combustion of fuel that ultimately causes the turbo to spin but you can also say that heat also powers the radio, ac, and every other device in a car for example since the engine turns the alternator that generates electricity that powers those devices but it's more accurate to say that those things are electrically powered. same with the turbo, it's the exhaust gas flow that spins the turbine. if the exhaust gas temp was somehow cold it would still turn the turbo as long as it had velocity right?
Last edited:
it's not like those companies have the means of BRP either.
Thats what I meant by competing with BRP but yes. I feel like a lot more could have done with the actual chargers.
No one asked my opinion but everyone is going to get it anyways!! Heat is a byproduct from the combustion of the motor. Yes, heat is what causes the gases to expand inside the cylinder to push the piston down, which in turn, causes the crank to turn and so forth. If there were a way to make the gas expand without any heat, the piston would still move down and turn the crank. Heat imo is not a necessary part of combustion or for a turbo to work (turbo is the exact same thing, something has to turn the blades i.e. airflow), it is lost energy in the conversion process of potential chemical energy being converted to mechanical energy. If you hooked an intake up to an air compressor without any fuel, the air pressure would push the pistons and turn the crank without the heat byproduct and turn a turbo.
Hotter air flows better, so there is some advantage to heat, but on the other hand, colder air is denser, meaning more o2 content, which means you can burn more fuel for more power. So my opinion is that heat is definitely not necessary, but MIGHT be an advantage, but also MAY be a disadvantage. Someone far smarter than me would have to way the pros and cons scientifically to decide which ultimately is better.
Hotter air flows better, so there is some advantage to heat, but on the other hand, colder air is denser, meaning more o2 content, which means you can burn more fuel for more power. So my opinion is that heat is definitely not necessary, but MIGHT be an advantage, but also MAY be a disadvantage. Someone far smarter than me would have to way the pros and cons scientifically to decide which ultimately is better.
Junkie, heat is a necessary part of it. Even if you had a cold tank of air to "fuel" the motor and turn the turbo, you would still get heat.
Anytime you compress gas, it builds heat. You would be heating the air up in the motor then heating it up again to build boost. They don't call the intake side of the turbo the angry charge because it's cool.
Sent from my BV9800Pro using Tapatalk
Anytime you compress gas, it builds heat. You would be heating the air up in the motor then heating it up again to build boost. They don't call the intake side of the turbo the angry charge because it's cool.
Sent from my BV9800Pro using Tapatalk
Last edited:
And were does the airflow / energy comes from in your "lab" example ?
The air compressor was feed electricity and then generated airflow. This is why your exemple doesn't work. You isolating a part of the system and not taking everything into account.
Start with the basic of physics:
Nothing is created
Nothing is wasted
Everything is transformed
My example does work. Yes, I know heat is required to operate the system but that’s not what’s in question and that’s already been discussed when I mentioned that heat is foundationally necessary to operate all devices on a car for example The question is, is heat specifically needed to turn the turbo? If somehow for the sake of argument exhaust gasses reached the turbo cooled to ambient temp, the turbo is still going to spin. The blades don’t need hot gas hitting them , the exhaust just has to have velocity.
for an ICE, exhaust gases are completely wasted energy, unless you have a turbo recovering some of that energy. no on is denying base physics.
your turbo act as recovery system making your engine more efficient.
you could go deeper, if your electricity is generated by a water turbine will you say your compressor runs on water?
I never said you wouldn’t get heat, I’m saying it isn’t NECESSARY to make the motor turn.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That is debatable IMO. On a 4-stroke motor, a turbo robs power from the motor (initially) because it is resistance in the exhaust that the movement of the piston has to push. In other words it adds a load to the motor that it has to move. Then of course the benefit outweighs the cost once the turbo spools up. On a 2-stroke it is a debate because backpressure is needed in the exhaust to not loose the next fuel/air charge for combustion, but resistance or backpressure DOES put a load on the piston moving up and down. So COMPLETELY wasted energy is not really a completely true statement. Bottom line is that an ICE is all about moving air, the more you can put in the more you can get out (power), and any resistance to airflow IS a loss of power, even if the resistance of a turbo is obviously an exchange for a small initial resistance of airflow to an eventual greater amount. That's why there is lag in a turbo. You loose some power initially in exchange for greater power once spooled up.
Not debatable at all. It's physics !
And to reply to MKULTRA, the compressor runs on ENERGY that was converted (electricity) from potential energy (height of water). Again...all conversion, again, with what we call "losses" along the way heating the air (power line, compressor frictions etc) that is just, again, energy converted into HEAT.
The turbocharger increase energy conversion efficiency thus you have more HP output from your engine.
with no heat; a engine, compressor or pump will not turn. Since friction IS heat.
I do get what you want to say. It's tough because if we could actually do what you want to in your example, we could have perpetual motion motors.
Sent from my BV9800Pro using Tapatalk
If heat plays no part in spooling a turbo then why can't you spool it just by revving the motor in neutral? A motor needs load to spool which is proof that airflow alone won't cut it.
You can spool up a turbo in neutral. Whether it is in gear or not has absolutely nothing to do with a turbo spooling up.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
so from your statement is it correct to say that an engine under 100% load but having the exhaust gasses go thru an intercooler to cool them to room temp and then into the turbo won't spin the turbo? if it still spins then that's proof that heat is not required to spin the turbo and i don't see how that's different than placing a pinwheel in front of a fan because the pinwheel will definitely spin.
using your statement i can also say that under increased load the engine is working harder thus burning more fuel and creating more exhaust flow in volume and velocity which will spin the turbo and that is the significance of having load on an engine.
what specifically is it that hot gas does to turbo blades in terms of the force applied that cool exhaust doesn't?
what if you took a blow torch to the turbo and heated it up to operating temp which would be exhaust gas temp but with the engine off, will the turbo start to spin?
Last edited:
that's what i was thinking but couldn't articulate it.