Saturn Sky Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Neat concept but it has added complexity, cost and possibly reduced reliability. Is it worth it just to eliminate a little turbo lag?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,738 Posts
Neat concept but it has added complexity, cost and possibly reduced reliability. Is it worth it just to eliminate a little turbo lag?
Sticking an electric motor into the turbocharger doesn't seem all that complex, and this forum is full of people who have probably spent more for less, with a greater impact on reliability.
It is also doing more than eliminating turbo lag. the whitepaper i read on it described higher torque at lower engine speeds in addition to significantly improved throttle response.

Done right (and it is AMG/Mercedes) I can see this acting like a supercharger at low speed and a turbo at high, and I can tell you that a supercharged 2.4 in a Sky has significantly more bottom end that the 2.0 turbo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Lower torque and slower throttle response at lower engine speeds is just a different way of saying lag.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,738 Posts
Just my opinion, but a variable geometry turbo, with its moving vanes and actuator, would seem to be a more complex solution than a coaxial electric motor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,364 Posts
Lower torque and slower throttle response at lower engine speeds is just a different way of saying lag.
Not so.

Slower throttle response may be lag. Bottom end torque is not.
Quite so. the LNF tuning intentionally avoids having full torque applied to the driveline at low rpm. They allow the torque to peak at around 2500 rpm (and then the artificially limit it to that maximum figure).

The LNF has one of the least laggy turbo set ups I have driven.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top