1.8T vs VR6

[20v turbo 0]

There's nothing subtle or particularly clever about the 1.8T

 

In that case, perhaps you can explain how to design a 1.8 turbo charged engine that has a very low boost threshold, low lag and a flat torque curve with 80% of peak delivered by 2000RPM. One that can pass EU4 emissions and is durable enough to pass Audi's sign off criteria, namely 180 hours continuous at WOT, peak power RPM, a minimum of 3 times without failure. Then add a basic head & port design good enough to to be used in a N/A version of the same engine allowing it to flow ~74% of the capacity of the 2.9VR6 from ~62% of the displacement.

 

On the contrary, there's a lot that's clever about the VAG 1.8T engine.[/quote:d4a8e]

:D :D

[dr_mat 0]

There's nothing subtle or particularly clever about the 1.8T

 

In that case, perhaps you can explain how to design a ... On the contrary, there's a lot that's clever about the VAG 1.8T engine.[/quote:44579]

 

No, I can't tell you how to do that. But then, that's why I don't make car engines, isn't it? Can you tell me how it's done?

 

There's art in natural aspiration, making it flow and flow well when you haven't got some great big blower pushing the air in there. The VSR is art - getting +ve pressure to the tune of .5 bar just by manifold design. Sure, there's technology in turbo boosting, but there's not so much art, just numbers. Want more power, crank the knob in the computer. Big deal!

[PhatVR6 0]

did you guys see me recent dyno plot?

 

200lbs/ft at 3500 rpm. happy with that.

 

still not as goot as the REVO'd TDI, but then again, I'd choose a TDI over a 1.8T any day.

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Yeah I was impressed with that. Hoping for the same when I get my 268s put in next month.

[Guest]

No, I can't tell you how to do that. But then, that's why I don't make car engines, isn't it? Can you tell me how it's done?

 

As a matter of fact I can but it'd take me a couple of hours to type in 3 years worth of research & experience, including inside info from someone who worked on the project at Audi so I'll distill it down into 4 words - high flow, low boost. That takes care of everything apart from the flat torque curve which is a function of the EMS modulating the wastegate.

 

The VSR is art - getting +ve pressure to the tune of .5 bar just by manifold design.

 

I sold my VWM VSR to Kieron in 2001, I know exactly how they work.

 

Sure, there's technology in turbo boosting, but there's not so much art, just numbers. Want more power, crank the knob in the computer. Big deal!

 

I take it this is the irony part of your post?

[Guest]

did you guys see me recent dyno plot?

 

200lbs/ft at 3500 rpm. happy with that.

 

I see you're getting stick from the septics over the 1/4 times. I assume you know how to calculate your shift points already but I'll stick it up just in case :

 

Find your peak bhp point on the RR printout.

 

Take the car up to peak bhp RPM in each gear, change up and note the RPM drop at each change.

 

For each gear, half the RPM drop and add it to the peak bhp RPM - this is your shift point.

[dr_mat 0]

As a matter of fact I can ..

 

Good. Glad to hear you know what you're talking about.

 

Sure, there's technology in turbo boosting, but there's not so much art, just numbers. Want more power, crank the knob in the computer. Big deal!

 

I take it this is the irony part of your post?[/quote:586c6]

 

Of course I'm aware there's a lot of work and technology that's gone into making the 1.8T, I'm not completely dense. There's probably less technology in the VR6, in fact. I'm not going to deny the 1.8T is a strong, highly tunable, flexible, powerful, reliable engine. :)

 

But it has no charm, no charisma, no "class". That's where the art comes in.. Making a powerful, flexible engine (the VR6 just about claims the "flexible" title in standard form, but definitely gets that with VSR), that doesn't use any electronic tricks or short cuts..

 

I guess it's just a personal thing at the end of the day. I'm the kind of person who doesn't like tone controls, I prefer a system designed to perform that way without artificial assistance. The VR6 is designed to perform, the 1.8T is designed to perform ok - for a 1.8 - then add the turbo and bingo, power...

 

You see what I'm getting at? It's difficult to describe...

[Jim 1]

I really hope you aren't trying to make the argument that forced induction is 'cheating' dr_mat? :)

[dr_mat 0]

I really hope you aren't trying to make the argument that forced induction is 'cheating' dr_mat? :)

 

'Course it is! ;)

[Jim 1]

I've heard someone argue that on another forum before, but I just don't buy it i'm afraid. I'd say Nitrous is more of a cheating kinda thing.. but IMHO a supercharger or a turbo is no more cheating than having a few extra cylinders on the block. Significant work is required to install or remove one which makes it an integral part of the engine..

 

Turbo's and superchargers have been around for a LONG time - the old 1930's Supercharged Bentleys for example. They are a long established and very non-cheatingy method of improving power on an engine as far as I am concerned.

 

I'm aware you are probably just messing around so.. take my response in the same kind of way please :D :)

[dr_mat 0]

.. probably .. ;)

 

In all seriousness, my personal opinion (for which I make no apologies) is that turbo/supercharging is cheating... Call me a purist if you will (tho I'm sure some people won't stop there)... :)

 

I know a lot of people will disagree, but hey, that's what opinions are *for*, right? ( Nitrous is definitely cheating tho.. :) )

[Jim 1]

I dunno.. if it was a rarely used technology that wasn't embraced by any of the known manufacturers, i'd have to agree but...

 

Seeing as forced induction is good enough for Mercedes Benz, Ferrari, Jaguar, Bugatti, VW, Porsche, Bentley, and just about everyone else then its good enough for me. Still.. I'm glad we've finally established why you have always seemingly been a 'VR6 or bust' Corrado owner - 4 pot N/A is too boring(?) and G60 is a cheats car! I still think my cheating G60 is equally worthy tho :)

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Perhaps you'd care to elaborate on why you think FI is 'cheating' Matt?

[dr_mat 0]

I refer to the answer I gave earlier, milud. ;)

[Kevin Bacon 5]

No electronics, no tricks, no charm, no character....... well the VR is ladened with electronics last time I looked, sequential injection, etc etc..... If you were *really* from the school of "all motor", you'd be pulling all that off and running carbs and a dizzy.

 

Turbo engines have no more electronics or tricks than is necessary to run the engine, so that argument doesn't wash with me. Turning the wick up on the boost, why is that cheating? What's the difference between that and fitting a Schrick to the VR6 and boring it out? Both are manipulating the air flow, yes?

 

Air in - Exhaust out. That is what all reciprocating engines try to achieve and NA and turbos are two ways of doing that same job. Step up the boost to get more volume or enlarge the the VR6? You pays your money and take your choice.

 

Neither is 'cheating', it's a 'choice'.

 

K

[dr_mat 0]

I know a lot of people will disagree, but hey, that's what opinions are *for*, right?

 

This isn't an argument, it's a statement of opinion. I maintain that it's much easier to get power from an engine by bolting a turbo on than by doing it all N/A. That's where I stand. You know how stubborn we both are, neither of us will change our opinions so how about we save the rest of the forum from reading the next 20 "yes it is no it isn't" emails? ;)

[dazzyvr6 0]

i can see where drmat is coming from,take the turbo/supercharger off and what have you got,ann engine pushing out 130 bhp perhaps....but id love to bolt a turbo or supercharger on my vr6 :evil:

[Jim 1]

Yeah - but thats the same as saying 'disconnect this sensor' or disconnect this or that from any other engine and it suddenly becomes a lesser engine or doesn't work properly - from the factory, a super or turbo charger is designed to be part of the engine. The fact that it is a removable part has nothing to do with it. Could you not argue that the Schrick is cheating? It might not be forced induction but it does modify the engine to increase power and is a bolt on mod that can be installed and removed in a few hours?

 

I'm not saying it IS cheating - its just a device to increase power in the engine. But if a charger is cheating, there aint no way the Schrick could be percieved as anything else using the same logic.

 

I'm not trying to start an argument or anything - as you say dr_mat everyone is entitled to an opinion and i'm not going to dispute that. But I guess I just feel very differently about it! But there aint nothing like a bit of healthy debate!! :D

[Kevin Bacon 5]

LOL, arguing and 'stating one's opinion' are one and the same thing on most forums :lol:

 

Agreed Jim, you can't simply unbolt the turbo. It's not a fair comparison as it's CR (compression ratio) is radically lower than a NA engine's.

 

There is no such thing as 'cheating' where engines are concerned. It clearly shows a strong bias towards one particular camp when they claim a different kind of technology is 'cheating'.

 

And why is it 'easier' to get power from a forced induction engine? You're fully aware of all the pitfalls and design criteria then?

 

Why can't we just celebrate the progress of engine technology instead? When it comes to NA and diesel, who is going to take the NA over a Turbo diesel? No one..... and that is progress with Turbocharging.

 

I love NA and I love forced induction in equal measure......both are very rewarding to drive but ultimately forced induction gives me a bigger grin, which is what being a car enthusiast is all about?

[CoxyLaad 0]

so why you driving a vr then :-)

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Because I had a 16V Turbo previously and fancied a VR6, hence me saying I like both in equal measure.....

[dr_mat 0]

LOL, arguing and 'stating one's opinion' are one and the same thing on most forums :lol:

[..]

And why is it 'easier' to get power from a forced induction engine? You're fully aware of all the pitfalls and design criteria then?

[..]

Why can't we just celebrate the progress of engine technology instead? When it comes to NA and diesel, who is going to take the NA over a Turbo diesel? No one..... and that is progress with Turbocharging.

 

Being skint is what being an enthusiast is all about... :)

 

Agreed about the diesels, they would not be anything like as popular (and I'd never consider one) without a turbo. But it *is* cheating... ;)

 

And another point - why does everyone seem to think that you have to know HOW to make a turbo work in order to have an opinion on it? My statement is based on the fact that simply by modifying a few constants in the ECU you can increase the power of any 1.8T from it's factory output to silly numbers. Of course, reliability goes down the pan, but that's the trade off that VAG made when they shipped it in the first place. You can't do that in a N/A engine... :-P

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Yeah agree with that, definitely bankrupts you thinking of your car as anything but transport :wink:

 

Diesels aren't so tricky to get right as petrol turbos. All you need in a diesel is as much air as possible and extremely high fuel pressure, metered as finely as possible. You'd never get a NA diesel to give us much torque as a TDi without going silly with the cubic capacity and compression ratio.

 

When VW introduced it's Pump Deuse compression system, that's when diesel engines took a qauntum leap forward and won many fans. Now they're so good, petrol is now in the balance of being a viable fuel or not.

 

I'm still not convinced cheating is the right word to use anyway as it implies dishonesty. 'Cheating' is when you disobey guidelines laid down for engine specifications in Rallying and BTCC. You can't really call company X a cheat for using a turbo instead of "all motor". BMW and Honda gets lots *power* from their high revving NA engines but they need 11:1 or higher CRs and very aggressive cam profiles to achieve that, but look at their torque outputs. Using a turbo is a way of giving you torque not possible in NA, so it's a technical solution, not a cheat.

 

Anyway, we'll have to agree to disagree - as usual :wink:

[CoxyLaad 0]

Yeah cheating possibly isnt the right word. I think its gaining power through auxilliary means (add ons to a NA engine)

 

or am I talking bollocks :roll:

[CoxyLaad 0]

again...