RE: Let turbos be turbos: Tell Me I'm Wrong

[Teggers]

Agreed. I work in the motor trade and 90% of the modern cars with turbo's I've driven don't really feel or sound it

However, my 1993 Mitsubishi Lancer Evo 2 with a couple of tweaks has that nothing nothing nothing BAM! as the turbo hits. Set to boost controller to "sharp" so I get more of a turbo hit when in "high boost" mode. Although I will admit when the roads a re a bit damp it does tend to spin up all 4 wheels in the lower gears!

[glasgowrob]

Crafty_ said:

that looks great fun!

It actually is especially launching it off roundabouts

Be even. Better once the hybrid goes on and those peaks get even bigger

[danjama]

Excellent article for Sunday reading.

This is exactly why I love my MR2 turbo's. In rev2 form you get the CT26 turbo which has a bit of lag and then the boost hits you from 2500-6000rpm. Hold on to 6500-7000 and shift and you're right in the power again!

Perfect!

They later changed the CT26 to a CT20b which is much more linear and lasts slightly longer in the revs. Doesn't deliver the same punch IMO.

[aeropilot]

estacion said:

aeropilot said:

Oldsmobile J-85 Jetfire was the first ...............just

OK, I was very wrong, I admit it! But the 930 is by far the best!

Oh yeah, I've always had a soft spot for 930 Turbo's (especially flat nose RUF versions )

[IMIA]

I had OEM VTGs on my stock 997.1 turbo for almost 8 years fromm new. I now have GT2 hybrid turbos and without sport mode on my turbo runs 1.1 bar but in 1st, 2nd and 3rd gear its been mapped to hold back torque exactly the same way as the new 488. In 4th, 5th and 6th I get full boost and the car is much more drivable than before. In Sport mode I get 1.3 bar and more torque in all gears and its a roller coaster experience but much more difficult to drive neatly. 9e carried out all the work and its a masterpiece. I'm all for 9e's for modern thinking. I had a 930 and sold it after 4 weeks as I found it very difficult indeed to keep on the boil - I'd have left it for dead in a hot hatch like my old 1.9 Pug GTI on a give and take typical B road in the UK.

9e 28

Edited by IMIA on Sunday 15th March 15:53

[Mr Whippy]

Husaberk said:

Possibly I suppose but the inference that the urgency of acceleration tails off towards the redline is inaccurate.

Given road speed increases with rpm, and the peak power isn't at peak torque, the urgency is technically dropping from peak torque onwards.

But it's no bad thing that it feels otherwise, that shows VW have done a great job in making it technically good for performance but also 'feel' great to use all the rev range!

Dave

[kambites]

So the conclusion we seem to be coming to is that turbos in modern performance road cars are typically the worst of both worlds in that they have neither the throttle response and desire to be thrashed of a naturally aspirated engine nor the character of an old-fashioned turbo.

What they are, is utterly effortless and economical which I suppose sums up the market of most modern performance cars.

Edited by kambites on Sunday 15th March 14:57

[Escy]

I like old school turbo charged power delivery. Nothing, nothing, nothing, BOOM! It's more fun, you can't help but smile as you surge builds, it's like being on the crest of a wave. It's probably only a sensation you get on a modified car that's running lots of boost. I'd love to experience a YB Cosworth on a T4, I bet the power delivery is mental.

I had a supercharged Mini Cooper S Works (early 200bhp version). It was nice and peppy but the power delivery didn't do it for me. Found it boring.

[pppppppppppppppp]

You can get old-school turbo lag with a simple remap. In fact, that's what most remaps do.

I don't know why the manufacturers don't offer interfaces which allow owners to change the map of their car. It can be made user-friendly; removing jargon like boost pressure (or leaving it in for those who want it) and talking about power, torque and efficiency. They could also define maximums to keep the car within warranty and allow the tuners to keep their place by breaching those maximums with after-market parts.

[Crafty_]

Mr Whippy said:

Given road speed increases with rpm, and the peak power isn't at peak torque, the urgency is technically dropping from peak torque onwards.

But it's no bad thing that it feels otherwise, that shows VW have done a great job in making it technically good for performance but also 'feel' great to use all the rev range!

Dave

That was my problem with it actually, I didn't feel it was great through the revs, it revs well but the only sensation was seeing the speedo needle wing around (very quickly). Reminded me of an N/A car to be honest, which is not why I like turbos !

[otolith]

They're a necessary evil, and the sooner the tech filters down to hide their existence, the better.

[Toltec]

pppppppppppppppp said:

You can get old-school turbo lag with a simple remap. In fact, that's what most remaps do.

I don't know why the manufacturers don't offer interfaces which allow owners to change the map of their car. It can be made user-friendly; removing jargon like boost pressure (or leaving it in for those who want it) and talking about power, torque and efficiency. They could also define maximums to keep the car within warranty and allow the tuners to keep their place by breaching those maximums with after-market parts.

Do you mean lag or boost threshold? Afaik a re-map changes the fuelling and sometimes the maximum boost level.

There do appear to be plenty of cars with eco, comfort, sport, sport+ etc. settings so some are doing what you are asking for.

[Crafty_]

otolith said:

They're a necessary evil, and the sooner the tech filters down to hide their existence, the better.

I'll take a turbo over N/A any day of the week.

[kambites]

So does anyone actually like the current trend for turbocharging everything then trying (and failing) to make it feel naturally aspirated?

[iloveboost]

kambites said:

So the conclusion we seem to be coming to is that turbos in modern performance road cars are typically the worst of both worlds in that they have neither the throttle response and desire to be thrashed of a naturally aspirated engine nor the character of an old-fashioned turbo.

What they are, is utterly effortless and economical which I suppose sums up the market of most modern performance cars.

Edited by kambites on Sunday 15th March 14:57

That's a bit unfair. What did a lot of people moan about with old school low compression turbo engines? Poor lag, throttle response and fuel efficiency, Manufacturers have worked to get rid of all these problems and to lower emissions. Now everybody is moaning that they don't feel as good as old school turbo engines?! Eh?!

If you want the 'rush' of turbo torque as it comes on boost and no boost drop off to redline, then you need a bigger turbo or a smaller capacity engine. If you want better throttle response, low end torque and less lag you need a smaller turbo.

Some people want the best of both, with a better engine noise. This the type of person that will marry a model and complain that he doesn't like being photographed.
Ok so what we need is a 1.5T, 300hp, three cylinder, sequential turbo Golf R, that costs the same as the current model. Easy!

[ZX10R NIN]

I used to love my Cosworth with it's Garrett T4 Hybrid & the way you used to have to build the boost so you'd actually be on the throttle a little bit earlier than needed it was great big top end rush as it hit boost.

I agree with the article we should be celebrating the fact we have turbos stop trying to make them like N/A lumps

[otolith]

Crafty_ said:

otolith said:

They're a necessary evil, and the sooner the tech filters down to hide their existence, the better.

I'll take a turbo over N/A any day of the week.

I won't, not in anything bought for the pleasure of driving, they're horrible. The one in our Saab is tolerable in a barge and gives good fuel economy for the performance. Otherwise it's like using the remote to go through the menus when our Sky box is on the blink - irritating.

[kambites]

iloveboost said:

That's a bit unfair. What did a lot of people moan about with old school low compression turbo engines? Poor lag, throttle response and fuel efficiency, Manufacturers have worked to get rid of all these problems and to lower emissions. Now everybody is moaning that they don't feel as good as old school turbo engines?! Eh?!

That's my whole point - it's not the same people. Some people like old fashioned turbocharged engines which make a feature out of their high boost threshold and lag; others like naturally aspirated engines for their throttle response and linearity. Modern turbocharged engines offer neither of those things so does anyone actually like them?

Mainstream turbos seem to be trying to be superchargers without the fuel economy cost; and failing. I'd actually rather have either of the extremes than what we have at the moment.

Edited by kambites on Sunday 15th March 16:20

[aeropilot]

kambites said:

iloveboost said:

That's a bit unfair. What did a lot of people moan about with old school low compression turbo engines? Poor lag, throttle response and fuel efficiency, Manufacturers have worked to get rid of all these problems and to lower emissions. Now everybody is moaning that they don't feel as good as old school turbo engines?! Eh?!

That's my whole point - it's not the same people. Some people like old fashioned turbocharged engines which make a feature out of their high boost threshold and lag; others like naturally aspirated engines for their throttle response and linearity. Modern turbocharged engines offer neither of those things so does anyone actually like them?

Mainstream turbos seem to be trying to be superchargers without the fuel economy cost; and failing. I'd actually rather have either of the extremes than what we have at the moment.

Given that turbo's (for petrol engines as we're not seriously discussing diesels here) are here to stay, there's no real reason why we can't have both, which is close to what Saab did some years back when they actually had an all-turbo engine lineup.

No reason why we can't have the torquey flexible engine route for 'normal' everyday engines which would leave the manufacturers to build oa bit of old style turbo nutterness into the performance cars in their range, rather than what we have now.
For whatever reason, they are choosing to pursue the path they are currently taking.

[macdeb]

Turbo's are the future.
I love 'em. I can drive mine without positive boost dependant on throttle opening and it's still a responsive pussycat, then if I want to make it more exciting, I can with just a tad more throttle, or even more if I want.