| From seeing your posts, you aren't the most technically inclined guy. You're one of those people who will break out the saw and start cutting without thinking twice about it. I'm one of those people who figures everything out and measures it twice before I cut. I'd love to argue with you on a technical level but when only one side has the knowledge to argue, the other side is relegated to making poorly worded, poorly constructed posts which are devoid of any meaning. Basically "your wrong!!1" type replies. I never said a Mustang's naturally aspirated 302 is dominant to the forced induction VG, nor would I ever say that. You're trying to form a strawman argument and I'm not about to fall for your simple tricks. On the other hand, if you want to compare a turbocharged VG to a turbocharged V8, I'd definitely side with the turbocharged V8 engine. Its torque curve and power band would be vastly superior due to its displacement. Time to school your ass- class is in session. The amount of power than an engine can make is directly related to the amount of air that the engine can flow. Read these links then get back to me: [ http://www.ztechz.net/id2.html ]
[ http://www.offroaders.com/info/tech-corner/reading/cfm.htm ]
[ http://www.yawpower.com/martech.html ]
If you don't feel like reading all of that, or don't understand it, at least consider the most basic parts:
Volumetric efficiency = (actual airflow/theoretical airflow) max theoretical airflow at 100% VE is (displacement x RPM)/3456 When you mod both engines the same way- both being NA or both being turbocharged, you're not going to be able to get the volumetric efficiency of the small to be high enough to overcome the lack of displacement, because any big-gain tricks you can do to the small engine you can also do to the larger engine.
 |
14:15:17 01/25/05
