Quote:
Originally Posted by Driftster
Quote:
That is doing the exact opposite you want of this car. Making this car able to be turbo'd easily would require lowering the compression ratio
doing this would then mean the people that want to keep the car NA are shafted.
If you then still wanted a decent power level (200hp NA) at that lower compression, Toyota/Subaru would have had to put a lot more time/money into developing a high-power low-compression NA engine, raising the cost of the car itself which then takes away the market of the car.
|
I'm sorry but you couldn't be more incorrect with this statement..
To make the car more capable/able to be turbo'd without more work than it's worse would require some modification to the current engine yes but read this thoroughly before you comment..
-Yes it would require a drop in compression ratio, would this affect the power produced by the engine? No not at all.
A Compression of 12.5:1 is no where near "necessary" to produce 197HP out of a 2.0L |
Correct. BUT a high compression ratio IS required to produce a 200hp 2.0L engine AT A LOW COST.
Quote:
|
- The drastically sky high compression atio of this car serves ONE purpose above all else in this application and it is not the production of power, it is the fuel economy.
|
Fair enough I say. As others have said, so much more emphasis is being put on fuel economy these days. It's the automotive industry advancing technology - something I would NEVER try to delay.
Quote:
|
LOWERING the compression yet maintaining the 197 power level is not rocket science either, as there are a dozen if not more cars on the market right now producing these same figures.
|
See below.
Quote:
|
Whether the power be produced through cam timing valve timing
|
Cost
Already using Toyota "G" head which stands for a "performance" valve angle.
Cost.
Quote:
|
ONTOP of that, lowering the compression ratio on this engine BEFORE giving it to the N/A tuners NOW gives the N/A tuner even MORE opportunity to produce power...
|
How so? Given the same engine w/ different CR, each with a suitable tune, the higher compression engine will make more torque (+ power), as long as it's not detonating/pre-igniting.
Quote:
On to your second point..
1.. The IS-F has a compression ratio of 11.8:1, I don't know where you got 13.5:1, but that is incorrect.
|
My mistake. I know there was a Toyota engine using 13.5:1... But searching on google only brings up the Prius
, I'm sure it was more performance-oriented than that!
Quote:
|
2.. I have no idea where you're getting your "limit" etc as if there is some cap on compression ratio's in which they become ineffective.
|
There is no hard "limit" as per say, but there are areas where a certain setup of engine (eg port injected engine) where the compression ratio tends to start causing problems with detonation, when using pump fuel.
Quote:
|
The compression ratio isn't the ONLY deciding factor in boost naturally, but you're also treating the atomization the in cylinder injector brings on as a cure all for detonation, when in fact it's more of a band aid....It's more of a "persistent methanol" injection
|
I know this. Give me a bit more credit, eh?
Quote:
Have a look around the industry buddy, and look at all the new cars which are being force fed like crazy in the aftermarket..you'll see they all share a
common bond..
They don't use direct injection..
|
Mazda 3 MPS uses both a turbo, direct injection, and is being modded?
Quote:
Except if you understood how imperative the dish on that piston was to the effectiveness of the direct injection you'd understand how your attempt at "making my point about the shape of the piston next to moot" ......was moot...
The combination of the in cylinder atomization with the dish shape is what gives proper cylinder cooling and proper /more efficient burn..
without that Dish shape...all you're doing is spraying fuel onto a side of a cylinder bore..
|
Change the piston to one which causes the same dish when the injector fires. ie. match it up to the change in stroke you have made, so that the injector fires into the same place even though you've changed the stroke.
Quote:
Just like that huh?
Lol so just spend 10-20,000 on a 20,000 dollar car..
genius move there..
|
As I said, if you don't like it, get a different car? Many people have spent far more than what the car they're modding is worth by doing mods that don't give them too much gain.
Quote:
|
Except when modding becomes a difficult task/chore and more of a hassle producing minimal gains for maximum work.....the modding/tuning of the car hits a crest/comes to a head...and from there very little development takes place, and the car spends the rest of it's years in niche groups and club meetings filed with people who love blowing their money on unsuccessful products
|
The introduction of fuel injection over a carburetor would have been given the same treatment when it was introduced, and now look where it is - used in every production car, and the tuners now have no problem tuning it to be efficient and powerful. Hell, I learnt how the "more advanced" fuel injection works before I learnt how a carb worked... and guess which one seems easier and more simple to me?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fa5tco
By the way. A turbo wrap blanket will keep the heat down. You can touch one of those blankets with your bare hands after someones been running the car. No worries about "melting a serpentine belt" or whatever hyper paranoia people were blathering about a few pages ago. Calm down.
|
Tried saying this a couple of pages ago. Though I also said it's likely Toyota/Subaru would come up with something more elaborate if they were to do it. Can't really see them just putting a turbo blanket over the turbo, if they decide to turbo it stock. XD