VNT is good when you work with only one turbocharger.Diesel_Benz said:Yes. BMW beat them to 100hp/L last year and the better VNT is being replaced by the inferrior two-turbo sequential-compound setup.
They are cutting production costs to offset some of the emissions add-on costs.
So...adding a bunch of bends, valves and an another turbine is somehow...more efficient? BS. Its only about cost.TDIfreak said:worse turbine efficiency due to the vanes interfering exhaust gas flow.
When does the kerma twin turbo kit come out. That I will buy. lolVailPowder said:The future sure looks interesting!
Talk about fun cars!
I asked a question regarding the efficiency of a VNT vs a 2-stage turbo setup in another thread - http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=197998 . My question, and the reply from a couple of engineers who frequent this board, you can read there.Its really too bad engine makers are devolving from the superior VNT to complicated, bulky, expensive and obsolete sequential-compound turbos.
Rub87 said:201hp, for that I just need a OEM pd150 with a hybrid..
@12MPGHWY do you have personal experience with spooling of 2 gt28r cartidges on a 13B? What A/R and compressor? something real mean would be a 20B with 3 of these babies, lol
Any interest in the honda 4cyl turbo diesel?TDIMeister said:One of the problems of a fairly large displacement (for a passenger car application) 4-cylinder engine is the long stroke at 99mm and the inherent reciprocating mass of a Diesel engine. I'd love to see the size and weight of the balance shafts for this engine.
Statements of weight reduction are nothing but PR-speak. Not a single OEM doesn't invest significant engineering resources to weight optimization, but different companies go about it differently. The claim seems to become diminished when M-B and VW are still using cast iron crankcases whilst BMW is leading the way with using aluminium as the crankcase material for its biturbo Diesel. The BMW also has an appreciably shorter stroke (90mm) than both the VW 2.0 TDI (95.5mm) and M-B 2.14 CDI (99mm).
As an engine engineer, of all the three biturbo inline-4 engines, I'd choose the BMW in a heartbeat, although the BMW biturbo inline-6 would still beat all in my books.
Yeah, well if I show up at your doorstep in a 2008 MB C-300 CDI I want to see you say no when I throw you the keysTDIMeister said:One of the problems of a fairly large displacement (for a passenger car application) 4-cylinder engine is the long stroke at 99mm and the inherent reciprocating mass of a Diesel engine. I'd love to see the size and weight of the balance shafts for this engine.
Statements of weight reduction are nothing but PR-speak. Not a single OEM doesn't invest significant engineering resources to weight optimization, but different companies go about it differently. The claim seems to become diminished when M-B and VW are still using cast iron crankcases whilst BMW is leading the way with using aluminium as the crankcase material for its biturbo Diesel. The BMW also has an appreciably shorter stroke (90mm) than both the VW 2.0 TDI (95.5mm) and M-B 2.14 CDI (99mm).
As an engine engineer, of all the three biturbo inline-4 engines, I'd choose the BMW in a heartbeat, although the BMW biturbo inline-6 would still beat all in my books.
If they do a biturbo version, sure, why not!Passenger Performance said:Any interest in the honda 4cyl turbo diesel?
Meh, wouldn't be the first time I've driven one.Drivbiwire said:Yeah, well if I show up at your doorstep in a 2008 MB C-300 CDI I want to see you say no when I throw you the keys