FORCED INDUCTION Turbos | Superchargers | Intercoolers | H2O/Meth Injection
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Turbo theory

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 6, 2012 | 07:06 PM
  #71  
robbyredneck's Avatar
TECH Regular
15 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 406
Likes: 1
From: canandaigua,n.y.
Default

i have this book and it may be 15 years old but corkys point of reference is from decades ago. i agree with smokeshow that new turbo tech will reduce your losses and if your running huge injectors at 80% dc,, your using some fuel. the best mileage conserver is still your right foot
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2012 | 03:17 PM
  #72  
Banned
iTrader: (27)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by CC05
I'll jump in here. As someone who has never had a turbo vehicle, would that fact still remain true, with the technology in tuning available nowadays, along with extremely efficient turbos? That quote is from '97, so just how accurate is that? I haven't been around long enough to get in this thread when it was first started, but that quote seems to negate real-world results--seems like the standard theory is that if you stay in boost, you'll gain mileage.? Please fill me in on this. I'm always up for learning, and turbos are probably my weak point.
Most people posting online have no idea or real world knowledge, turbos increase ve, there is more volume in a given cylinder,
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2012 | 04:57 PM
  #73  
nonnieselman's Avatar
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,068
Likes: 2
From: Crystal Springs, MS
Default

I know its not apples to apples.. but i went to the South east truck meet at silvermodo's place.. averaged 24mpg round trip with the STS 60MM turbo.. 1050? miles

I just got back from a training seminar in dallas, tx. averaged 24mpg 975? miles. only difference was no turbo, and added a isky 215 cam.

Its all on how you drive.. i dont think theres much of a argument to go over.
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2012 | 10:33 PM
  #74  
Banned
iTrader: (27)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by nonnieselman
I know its not apples to apples.. but i went to the South east truck meet at silvermodo's place.. averaged 24mpg round trip with the STS 60MM turbo.. 1050? miles

I just got back from a training seminar in dallas, tx. averaged 24mpg 975? miles. only difference was no turbo, and added a isky 215 cam.

Its all on how you drive.. i dont think theres much of a argument to go over.
well put
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2012 | 11:01 PM
  #75  
smokeshow's Avatar
Thread Starter
Mod with training wheels
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,741
Likes: 207
From: Detroit
Default

That's some good real world data. The difference is not even noticeable, all things considered. Also...cylinder volume is constant unless you bore or stroke it
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
kha4079
GM Parts Classifieds
4
Oct 29, 2018 04:38 PM
lxcoupe
FORCED INDUCTION
7
Sep 6, 2017 08:24 AM
jtphelps289
GM Drivetrain & Suspension
8
Sep 11, 2015 06:37 PM
slowswb
GM Parts Classifieds
1
Sep 5, 2015 02:27 PM
06murder
Tuning, Diagnostics, Electronics, and Wiring
2
Sep 4, 2015 03:54 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:55 PM.