0-60

The car we're building at work is 0-60 in just under 2.4. 1.1G of acceleration
 
SoonerAviator said:
They still do better than an NA-counterpart at altitude. Boost is boost. You may not be getting 15psi boost pressure, but you'll still be getting something decent out of it. The NA will just be sucking wind.
Click to expand...

Or not sucking enough wind, as the case may be. :)
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Absolutely, the turbo cars will do significantly better at altitude than their N/A counterparts. However they won't do better at altitude than they will at sea level.
Click to expand...

I feel and hear my turbo here in New Mexico at 6500 feet. I do not feel or hear my turbo at sea level, but seat of the pants acceleration feels about the same at both altitudes. I do not have an after market programmer on the diesel.
 
Zeldman said:
I feel and hear my turbo here in New Mexico at 6500 feet. I do not feel or hear my turbo at sea level, but seat of the pants acceleration feels about the same at both altitudes. I do not have an after market programmer on the diesel.
Click to expand...

Your Duramax is new enough that I would figure it to be based off of absolute pressure and increase the boost to maintain a particular absolute pressure. My '04 Ram was similar, and also VGT/computerized. Driving that on I-80 through Utah, you could hear and feel the turbo howling a lot more than you did at sea level.

If you look at older turbo systems with normal wastegates though (pre-VGT days), I don't think those would. Superchargers, of course, should give you a fixed pressure ratio and thus give lower absolute manifold pressure at altitude. Old wastegates basically used springs that would take the manifold pressure and open the wastegate at a particular delta-P.
 
Sure, I can do 60mph in 16 seconds. Twice! :)

In 16 seconds, I sure am slowed down back to 60mph from trapping at 120+ at 1/4sm. :)
Though I can hit 60mph on my speedometer pretty instantly (<1/2sec) if I put it in 2nd gear, hit the throttle and pop the clutch.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Your Duramax is new enough that I would figure it to be based off of absolute pressure and increase the boost to maintain a particular absolute pressure. My '04 Ram was similar, and also VGT/computerized. Driving that on I-80 through Utah, you could hear and feel the turbo howling a lot more than you did at sea level.

If you look at older turbo systems with normal wastegates though (pre-VGT days), I don't think those would. Superchargers, of course, should give you a fixed pressure ratio and thus give lower absolute manifold pressure at altitude. Old wastegates basically used springs that would take the manifold pressure and open the wastegate at a particular delta-P.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, my Gen 2 (latest) 3.5 Ecoboost does not have VGT(s). However it does have electronically actuated wastegates (I don't think that's very common).

Based on my observations of the boost in Forscan throughout various driving conditions there definitely appears to be a lot of computer logic around its boost decisions. I'd be surprised if it didn't properly account for altitude.

Hard to say what all Ford is doing since they're electronic. For example, at low-load, the computer will fully open the wastegate to reduce backpressure and pumping losses.
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
Interestingly, my Gen 2 (latest) 3.5 Ecoboost does not have VGT(s). However it does have electronically actuated wastegates (I don't think that's very common).

Based on my observations of the boost in Forscan throughout various driving conditions there definitely appears to be a lot of computer logic around its boost decisions. I'd be surprised if it didn't properly account for altitude.
Click to expand...

An electronically controlled wastegate will provide the same benefit. I'm sure your F-150 accounts for altitude.

I guess I'm just old. I still think of turbo systems from cars from the 90s and earlier. But that's been a long time now and nobody has those anymore. Get off my lawn. Now I want something with Webers.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
An electronically controlled wastegate will provide the same benefit. I'm sure your F-150 accounts for altitude.
Click to expand...
Glad I bought a '17. A '16 would be non-VGT with old-school wastegates. I knew it was a redesign however it was so new that basically nobody knew what was actually redesigned. Still learning about it.
 
jesse said:
Glad I bought a '17. A '16 would be non-VGT with old-school wastegates. I knew it was a redesign however it was so new that basically nobody knew what was actually redesigned. Still learning about it.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the old school wastegates on the 1st gen EcoBoost were truly old school or if they had an electronic controller in between, like what I had on the VR4 (although for me it was aftermarket). Basically with a solenoid valve in between the manifold pressure line and the physical wastegate you can regulate what boost pressure goes to the wastegate and vastly improve turbo response time, customize boost levels for different conditions, etc. An electronically controlled wastegate would give you much more control than the solenoid since you'd theoretically have a stepper motor and thus not have to deal with differential equations and the laws of physics quite as much.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I wonder if the old school wastegates on the 1st gen EcoBoost were truly old school or if they had an electronic controller in between, like what I had on the VR4 (although for me it was aftermarket). Basically with a solenoid valve in between the manifold pressure line and the physical wastegate you can regulate what boost pressure goes to the wastegate and vastly improve turbo response time, customize boost levels for different conditions, etc. An electronically controlled wastegate would give you much more control than the solenoid since you'd theoretically have a stepper motor and thus not have to deal with differential equations and the laws of physics quite as much.
Click to expand...

Except for maybe some really, really, REALLY old turbo engines and diesel applications I have not seen a turbo setup that does not have ECU control of manifold pressure, either via wastegate solenoid or VGT. The OEMs would be stupid not to have control of it since it is an easy way to derate power and keep the engine safe if there is a dangerous condition such as knock.

I can’t imagine any of the ecoboost engines being an exception to this, although I personally haven’t done much work on them or investigation into them.
 
mondtster said:
Except for maybe some really, really, REALLY old turbo engines and diesel applications I have not seen a turbo setup that does not have ECU control of manifold pressure, either via wastegate solenoid or VGT. The OEMs would be stupid not to have control of it since it is an easy way to derate power and keep the engine safe if there is a dangerous condition such as knock.

I can’t imagine any of the ecoboost engines being an exception to this, although I personally haven’t done much work on them or investigation into them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm old now. I'm thinking of those old turbo engines because that's what I played with mostly.

Get off my lawn.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Yeah, I'm old now. I'm thinking of those old turbo engines because that's what I played with mostly.

Get off my lawn.
Click to expand...

What cars have you played with? I cut my teeth on the ‘80s turbo mopars and fords, even those wastegates were electronically controlled. Some of the European stuff from that era might not have had ECU control of manifold pressure but I don’t recall since I didn’t spend much time around them.

I “graduated” to the ‘90s and newer Asian stuff after that. There has been a lot of progress in engine controls over the years. The best part is that there are all sorts of programs that a person can use to edit the calibrations in stock ECUs these days, which is a good thing for me since two of my turbo cars have engines that were never available for the US market.
 
mondtster said:
What cars have you played with? I cut my teeth on the ‘80s turbo mopars and fords, even those wastegates were electronically controlled. Some of the European stuff from that era might not have had ECU control of manifold pressure but I don’t recall since I didn’t spend much time around them.

I “graduated” to the ‘90s and newer Asian stuff after that. There has been a lot of progress in engine controls over the years. The best part is that there are all sorts of programs that a person can use to edit the calibrations in stock ECUs these days, which is a good thing for me since two of my turbo cars have engines that were never available for the US market.
Click to expand...

A lot of the earlier turbo cars I dealt with were turbo Audis that belonged to one of my best friends who was into them. Those to my knowledge had no electronic anything. My 3000GT VR-4 technically had a solenoid from the factory for some factory control, although the things never worked by the time they showed up in the hands of people like me and they were removed in favor of either a direct hook-up to the manifold or some aftermarket control. I started with the former and switched to the latter. So I guess that had computer control even though I didn't think about it.

Some of the older fully mechanical turbo diesels, too. I believe the first year 6.5TD was all mechanical and had a fully mechanical wastegate. One friend had one of those. Mine was a '97, which did have a solenoid to control the boost flow to the wastegate. The setup didn't work great and switching it over to conventional upgraded/adjustable wastegate was generally considered a better option, and what I did on it.

Honestly, for the most part I'm not a huge fan of turbos except on diesels. I bought the VR4 to have time to play with turbos, and that was fun, but I've never been a fan of turbo lag. The ultimate problem with the VR4 that annoyed me with it was that the gas pedal always felt disconnected from the horsepower production. You could tell there was that lag in there from the turbos, and then the transversely mounted engine with all wheel drive (and a lot of play that had developed over the years)... it just never fully felt connected. Plus I'm a low RPM/torque kind of person, and I spent a lot of time trying to improve that. Even went so far as to have an intake modified off of a Diamante and put on adjustable cam gears to mess with the timing. It all helped, but in the end it never did what I wanted.

So I sold it and bought the E55, which my wife has now commandeered as her commuter and loves it. But now I'm without a "fun" vehicle (although I do have the new Ram and am enjoying it) and am going around in circles with what to buy.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
A lot of the earlier turbo cars I dealt with were turbo Audis that belonged to one of my best friends who was into them. Those to my knowledge had no electronic anything. My 3000GT VR-4 technically had a solenoid from the factory for some factory control, although the things never worked by the time they showed up in the hands of people like me and they were removed in favor of either a direct hook-up to the manifold or some aftermarket control. I started with the former and switched to the latter. So I guess that had computer control even though I didn't think about it.

Some of the older fully mechanical turbo diesels, too. I believe the first year 6.5TD was all mechanical and had a fully mechanical wastegate. One friend had one of those. Mine was a '97, which did have a solenoid to control the boost flow to the wastegate. The setup didn't work great and switching it over to conventional upgraded/adjustable wastegate was generally considered a better option, and what I did on it.

Honestly, for the most part I'm not a huge fan of turbos except on diesels. I bought the VR4 to have time to play with turbos, and that was fun, but I've never been a fan of turbo lag. The ultimate problem with the VR4 that annoyed me with it was that the gas pedal always felt disconnected from the horsepower production. You could tell there was that lag in there from the turbos, and then the transversely mounted engine with all wheel drive (and a lot of play that had developed over the years)... it just never fully felt connected. Plus I'm a low RPM/torque kind of person, and I spent a lot of time trying to improve that. Even went so far as to have an intake modified off of a Diamante and put on adjustable cam gears to mess with the timing. It all helped, but in the end it never did what I wanted.

So I sold it and bought the E55, which my wife has now commandeered as her commuter and loves it. But now I'm without a "fun" vehicle (although I do have the new Ram and am enjoying it) and am going around in circles with what to buy.
Click to expand...

I never really did anything with the Audis. I only messed with a Porsche 944 turbo a little, and messed with Saabs a little. The majority of my early turbo experience was with the Chryslers and some Fords. Then I was on to the DSMs after a while. I was never a big 3000gt guy but knew a few people who had them.

The older diesels generally didn't have any electronic boost control as you noted. Some didn't even have wastegates at all, just an exhaust housing and turbine wheel selection that should keep boost under control. As diesel emissions requirements tightened and people's performance expectations have increased, the need for manifold pressure control became a necessity, as well as exhaust manifold pressure control to insure proper EGR flow.

The newer gas powered turbo engines that are coming with newer turbo designs and variable cam timing seem to be light years ahead of the older stuff like your old VR4. My current daily driver is a Subaru Legacy with a JDM 2.0L turbo engine that has variable intake and exhaust cam timing, relatively high compression ratio pistons (for a turbo engine), and a smallish twin scroll turbo. It is obvious that Subaru didn't intend this to be an engine that would make the most power ever but it is pretty responsive and makes a good street car. The engine runs smooth and almost has a power band like a healthy N/A car would.

Your talk of the E55 has made me curious again about some of the European cars. Next time I need a car I may have to look into them.
 
mondtster said:
Your talk of the E55 has made me curious again about some of the European cars. Next time I need a car I may have to look into them.
Click to expand...

The E55 was my first owned Mercedes and bought as a semi-disposable car with 190k on the clock. Over 2 years later (and pushing 220k) it’s not going anywhere and my wife will pick it up tomorrow or Friday from getting long tube headers put on it as well as new motor and tranny mounts. We liked it enough that when she needed a new Mom mobile we bought another Mercedes (a GL550) and I’m browsing to see if a 3rd Mercedes might fit the budget for my desired next fun car, although the ones I’d really want are likely out of reach.

By comparison she liked her BMW 740iL although she loves the Mercedes. And the BMW was much less reliable. My Z4 did a lot better and I’ve considered another Z4, but unlike Mercedes where AMGs are just as reliable, BMW Ms seem to fall apart.

But I want a manual transmission, and Mercedes has been out of that business for some time.
 
sferguson524 said:
www.ff.com An EV :)
Click to expand...

Only 2.39 seconds with 1050 horses? Explain... ?

Tesla does 2.2 seconds with 605 horses - hence curious why FF doesn't get at least the same.

Or is FF's 1050 HP like Tesla's theoretical 762's HP at the motor, which you can't actually achieve since you can't draw more than 605 HP out of the battery without melting it?
 
deonb said:
Only 2.39 seconds with 1050 horses? Explain... ?

Tesla does 2.2 seconds with 605 horses - hence curious why FF doesn't get at least the same.

Or is FF's 1050 HP like Tesla's theoretical 762's HP at the motor, which you can't actually achieve since you can't draw more than 605 HP out of the battery without melting it?
Click to expand...
<shrug> I am a VMware architect for them. I have seen the cars in R&D, thats about it :)
 
Anyone else? I just started the thread because it seemed like a fun question for all you automotive heads.
 
denverpilot said:
Anyone else? I just started the thread because it seemed like a fun question for all you automotive heads.
Click to expand...

Well, I can tell you the 0-60 on the E55 just got better. Laurie picked it up and said that it's noticeably faster and sounds better with the long tube headers. Plus now the engine and transmission actually stay where they're supposed to with the new mounts. Old ones were really bad. Looking forward to driving it when she gets home.
 
denverpilot said:
Anyone else? I just started the thread because it seemed like a fun question for all you automotive heads.
Click to expand...
I was surprised at how many people have put their vehicles to this test. I can't say that I ever have. Or maybe they got the numbers from some website.
 
Everskyward said:
I was surprised at how many people have put their vehicles to this test. I can't say that I ever have. Or maybe they got the numbers from some website.
Click to expand...

Until very recently I've also top speed tested every vehicle I've owned. *shrug*
 
Bill Jennings said:
Until very recently I've also top speed tested every vehicle I've owned. *shrug*
Click to expand...

I gave up on that a long time ago. 160+ on the road is pretty fast.
 
Everskyward said:
I was surprised at how many people have put their vehicles to this test. I can't say that I ever have. Or maybe they got the numbers from some website.
Click to expand...

I got my numbers from websites. Like I said, I don't really care about 0-60 as a number - what I care about is my enjoyment of the car. While 0-60 is a useful number to have to some extent with that, it's more useful in thinking about which car I want to buy rather than something I care to try for myself.
 
Everskyward said:
I have top-speed tested some vehicles going west from Denver on I-70. :crazy:
Click to expand...

I rented an Altima last weekend and drove up 70 to Dillon from Denver, then on up 9 and 40 over Rabbit Ears Pass to Steamboat. Yes, it was at full military at times Lol.
 
Bill Jennings said:
I rented an Altima last weekend and drove up 70 to Dillon from Denver, then on up 9 and 40 over Rabbit Ears Pass to Steamboat. Yes, it was at full military at times Lol.
Click to expand...

Full military up there for me was pulling the 12,500 lb trailer behind the Dodge.

Hitting the two minute EGT limit on the Cummins and backing my foot out of it while PASSING stuff like rental Altimas is kinda fun. In a different sort of way other than going fast.

Poor truck is so bored now. Ha.
 
denverpilot said:
Full military up there for me was pulling the 12,500 lb trailer behind the Dodge.

Hitting the two minute EGT limit on the Cummins and backing my foot out of it while PASSING stuff like rental Altimas is kinda fun. In a different sort of way other than going fast.

Poor truck is so bored now. Ha.
Click to expand...

I always found it a lot of fun to accelerate (on the highway, up a hill, whatever) full power in the Cummins and run max power for an extended period of time. Kinda like my old days running engines on the dyno or flight stands.

Ahh, memories. And many thousands of gallons of fuel burned. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top