- Thread starter
- #101
I case you don't find my comment between the 2399 comments
, I reproduce it here, in essence I had critiqued the 'not much difference' subjective assessment, and also a quite fundamental misunderstand of flow vs boost that - granted - is very widespread (but can lead to wrong conclusions):"Respectfully disagree. 0,067s might not sound much, but that is at full boost/flow. Transient from an unpressurised pipe, it can easily be double that as the turbo needs to get power also from the boost it creates - boost builds more boost. So we're talking 0,15s ish of added lag (on top of whatever lag 0,1s+ already there due to IC and other piping volume). Might not sound much, but in a driving situation with limited grip and vision, such a delay in every corner can make a very big difference to driveability and also times. Hence anti-lag in competition even on much less laggy applications (as well as helping boost treshold of course). Also disagree on turbo size. Boost pressure matters because the volume is locked by the piston engine that has a fixed volume per rotation. So you can't just increase the volume flow through a turbo. The gain with a bigger turbo comes from the fact that it has much less flow losses, meaning a lot less of that boost is needed to overcome pressure losses in the turbo itself (both compressor and turbine) and associated smaller piping. This is especially at high rpm where flow is higher and where we know big turbos have their biggest gains. But this only works up to a point. So not flow, but flow losses and therefore pressure losses are the biggest difference. I really appreciate your vids and honestly, this is the first time I need to "disagree"
"