The 13B NA Power Thread.

NoDOHC · 03-17-2009, 10:59 PM

Bear in mind that turbo fuel requirements / per horsepower are considerably higher than NA requirements.

Unless designed very carefully, a turbocharged engine is less efficient than a naturally aspirated engine.

300 whp looks like about 25% efficient with 4X550s (this is a little high for a stock turbo configuration) I would be worried with 4x550s at 300whp on boost.

Roen · 03-18-2009, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoDOHC

Bear in mind that turbo fuel requirements / per horsepower are considerably higher than NA requirements.

Unless designed very carefully, a turbocharged engine is less efficient than a naturally aspirated engine.

300 whp looks like about 25% efficient with 4X550s (this is a little high for a stock turbo configuration) I would be worried with 4x550s at 300whp on boost.

Still, we're talking similar efficiency numbers, or at least it sounds similar to my ear.

The person I know had to shut the car off on the dyno since the NA injectors' duty cycles were getting to high at 197 whp.

03-17-2009, 10:59 PM	#1
NoDOHC The quest for more torque Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Sheboygan, Wisconsin Posts: 855 Rep Power: 17	Bear in mind that turbo fuel requirements / per horsepower are considerably higher than NA requirements. Unless designed very carefully, a turbocharged engine is less efficient than a naturally aspirated engine. 300 whp looks like about 25% efficient with 4X550s (this is a little high for a stock turbo configuration) I would be worried with 4x550s at 300whp on boost. __________________ 1986 GXL ('87 4-port NA - Haltech E8, LS2 Coils. Defined Autoworks Headers, Dual 2.5" Exhaust (Dual Superflow, dBX mufflers) 1991 Coupe (KYB AGX Shocks, Eibach lowering springs, RB exhaust, Stock and Automatic)