Are turbos good for making power?
>>17422726
looks really clean
it would be shame if someone shit in it
If your car isn't twincharged and NOS'd don't even talk to me
not if you're concerned with launching :^)
When the engine is designed to accommodate it, the fuel system can pump enough fuel for it, and the ECU/carb(s) has been tuned for it, yes.
Why do you inquire?
>>17422734
Ya turbo lag and turbo whistle so good xddd
Downsized engines with turbos sound great
>>17422767
Well realistically turbos are not very good. A turbo v6 versus v8: weighs about the same, makes just as much power (unless unstable boost), turbo uses less fuel but needs higher octane for higher compression (so cost about equals out). Turbo can be moved around in the engine bay but you also get turbo lag, not really worth it imo.
>Next you will say "doesn't matter cause GT-R lmao"
Yes. Also, water is wet.
>>17422726
Name one 3 second car using turbos.
yes
>>17422876
You should never use anything but 93 (AKI) in a turbo car. Their physical compression ratios are typically low, but the turbo pressuring the intake stream raises the effective compression ratio and will still detonate on too low of octane gas.
>>17423382
is that a poorly photoshopped turbo on some shitbox?
>>17423389
yes
Daily reminder that the shelby gt500 can make 800hp on <10psi of boost.
>>17423383
you have no idea what you're talking about.
>>17423452
>doesn't refute my point
turbo is the only way my single cam can make 200 horse
>>17423455
running 93 octane isn't necessary in all turbo applications. There's a lot more to compression ratios than intake air. anti knock, ignition timing, pistons, etc.
If you want a mean street monster sure, but it isn't a necessity.
>>17423471
This, most ecoboosts use 87 octane but you just loose power.