My friend and I where discussing the low end power aspects of turbo cars. He says that the turbo hurts low end power because it is such a restriction in the exhaust track. I think that it doesnt hurt low end power that much because the turbo is still spinning just not making boost so it offers less resistence to the incoming air. Also i think the notion of turbo cars being slow on the low end are because of thier low compression ratio's and different timing that a N/A motor. So if you have a turbo buick and you take of the turbos and install regular headers exhaust etc. Will your dyno sheet have more low end power to a certain point? With the exact same engine mind you, same compression ratio etc?
Low-end power question
- Thread starter mhaskell
- Start date
Welcome!
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
blackbuick87
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 3,205
Yeah it will have more power from 0-1000rpms, and then it would suck
Your buddy is talking out of his a$$. Ask him to run a GN and we will show him all about low end torque
Your buddy is talking out of his a$$. Ask him to run a GN and we will show him all about low end torque
blackbuick87
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 3,205
In a serious answer, turbo lag is the time it takes for the turbo to spool up and begin building boost. Before the turbo kicks in the engine is making the same amount of power as a N/A motor. I imagine the turbo may be a restriction at 5000rpms compared to a V8 with open duals, but the advantages of a turbo FAR outweigh any minor restriction
Mr URL
Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 674
This is the factory Turbo Buick hp/tq #'s so you tell me. These are low rpm range and MASSIVE torque motors. Shifts are in the 5,000 range. Slightly modified and well tuned it's common to have 500+ ft-lbs of torque rear wheel.
245 HP @ 4400 RPM
355 ft-lbs of torque at 2000 RPM
We power brake and build boost at the line to get a good healthy launch cause the boost is what makes this little motor have the power of a big block.
245 HP @ 4400 RPM
355 ft-lbs of torque at 2000 RPM
We power brake and build boost at the line to get a good healthy launch cause the boost is what makes this little motor have the power of a big block.
neither of us doubt the advantages of a turbo. I had a 1987 t-type before i had to sell it for college 
My question is though if you took a turbo motor and made a dyno run with the turbo on and without the turbo would the NA motor make more power off idle until a certain point? Or even at idle would it still make more power. Not counting powerbraking etc. just on the dyno. Is the restriction of the turbo at idle an effect?
My question is though if you took a turbo motor and made a dyno run with the turbo on and without the turbo would the NA motor make more power off idle until a certain point? Or even at idle would it still make more power. Not counting powerbraking etc. just on the dyno. Is the restriction of the turbo at idle an effect?
Mr URL
Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 674
I doubt anybody has done dyno testing with and without the turbo on. Everybody is interested in what the turbo can do.
Yes, the turbo has some restriction to it. You'll have more exhaust back pressure than boost pressure produced. But the turbo and intercooler will about double the hp/tq of a stock motor. Turbos have some lag before boost comes up. Sure it will feel like a dog (laggy) at first since a N/A 3.8 V6 is a dog but when the boost comes up hang on cause your little motor is now flowing the air of a big block!
Basically what I'm saying is a turbo will greatly increase the power of an engine and that little exhaust restriction doesn't mean squat in overall power because the turbo adds so much more power.
Yes, the turbo has some restriction to it. You'll have more exhaust back pressure than boost pressure produced. But the turbo and intercooler will about double the hp/tq of a stock motor. Turbos have some lag before boost comes up. Sure it will feel like a dog (laggy) at first since a N/A 3.8 V6 is a dog but when the boost comes up hang on cause your little motor is now flowing the air of a big block!
Basically what I'm saying is a turbo will greatly increase the power of an engine and that little exhaust restriction doesn't mean squat in overall power because the turbo adds so much more power.
Here's my take on it: The exhaust is still spinning the turbo although there is no boost even at 1500rpm. Since the turbine is still spinning it is still sucking in air and forcing it into the motor just a little easier than if the turbo wasn't there. I had to drive my car in and out of the driveway in both of these configurations a few times and the turbo helped moved air into the engine better than w/o the turbo. There was a noticable difference.
ks
ks
salvageV6
Daily Driver
- Joined
- May 25, 2001
- Messages
- 20,968
I would say that comparing the two types of cars that the N/A version would make slightly more power to about 2.2K rpms.
Yeah that's barely off idle.
Not worth worrying about really.
The turbo kicks in low with a stocker and a real chip.
Nobody worries about low end power at those rev.s. Once you go above 2.5K the difference is obvious and still very much within what I would call the low end power band.
There is little lag with the stocker.
Just my .02. Not worth dynoing where you don't run often in the power band.
Yeah that's barely off idle.
Not worth worrying about really.
The turbo kicks in low with a stocker and a real chip.
Nobody worries about low end power at those rev.s. Once you go above 2.5K the difference is obvious and still very much within what I would call the low end power band.
There is little lag with the stocker.
Just my .02. Not worth dynoing where you don't run often in the power band.
R
Russ Merritt
Guest
How did this debate start, couple o big ol bong hits? and what did I hear, you sold the car to go to college, what are you f$#@%^
and what did I hear, you sold the car to go to college, what are you f$#@%^The argument started because this guy doubted the GN's ability. He was grasping at straws to knock it down. Dude i KNOW i should never have sold the car,i think about it everyday. In about two months i plan to take 6K and go looking for another one. I figure once i get my mechanical engineering degree in 3 years i can build a sick GN. Anybody in the mass/ri area know of a 3.8 turbo, gn or t-type thats cheap? Help a poor college kid who made a mistake out.
Anybody in the mass/ri area know of a 3.8 turbo, gn or t-type thats cheap? Help a poor college kid who made a mistake out.Intercooler
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 3,534
Another somewhat bad decision. (No Pun) The market is flooded with ME's.Originally posted by mhaskell
The argument started because this guy doubted the GN's ability. He was grasping at straws to knock it down. Dude i KNOW i should never have sold the car,i think about it everyday. In about two months i plan to take 6K and go looking for another one. I figure once i get my mechanical engineering degree in 3 years i can build a sick GN.
Intercooler
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 3,534
That's great with no experience. I wish you the best of luck. Must be the region. Around here a bunch of cuts have flooded the market with degreed and experienced ME's. The degree is one thing, experience is another.
I drove my car with no wastegate for 6 months when I was really hurting for money and didn't want to pay for good gas or break it. Even taking off easy with the rpms ~2,000 it didn't feel nearly as fast as with the turbo. Just because it isn't making boost, it's still helping. If you watch one of the vacuum/boost guages, your vacuum drops much quicker (of course it does but I'm talking at very low throttle) with the turbo hooked up. I think the only way a higher compression V6 would be faster is for the half second it takes to start making boost. Some people can get nearly full boost with the car stopped on the stock convertor.
Similar threads
