Why have you already come to the conclusion that a S/C is inferior to a T/C at high altitude? Because of the parasitic nature of the S/C, therefore you're losing HP because of altitude and you're losing HP because of the S/C?
It seems as if a S/C would be better at high altitude due to the fact that boost would hit much sooner in the power band than a T/C. Per your quote,
Quote:
|
turbos need to spool more at high altitude to compensate for the thinner air, thus increasing their heat and reducing their performance.
|
S/C run 'relatively' cooler than a T/C, and when you bring up your quote, the T/C will be working 'X' times as hard, it seems like a T/C would be counter-intuitive to what you want to achieve. Then again, I am sure there is something I haven't yet considered. I am spoiled I live 62 ft above sea level >_<
Lastly, if close to sea level cars are dynoing around 160 whp, that means your getting roughly 124 whp - so you want to gain an extra 126 whp with a T/C - hmmm