Originally Posted by Whipple Charged (Post 3622378)

Actually, I don't have my mind made up, I'm actually far more open minded than that and deal with all the US big 3 on projects that are slated for 2015 and above where there is a huge switch in direction.

So what your saying is that Audi is has only went away from turbo's because of cost?

Furthermore, if you are doing "calibration", you must be an engineer, and any even remotely educated engineer in any big 3 would know that 60hp at an idle is truly one of the most uneducated statements possibly ever posted on forced induction. On the same engine, at idle, the 4.0L takes less than 2hp to turn.

240hp for 1000hp? My goodness you clearly have never even looked into screw compressors, nor did you read any of the SC papers your refering too!!!!

On the identical engine, watercooled turbo vs twin screw does not automatically "win" as such a broad statement with zero facts is extremely poor in judgement. You don't even know the compression, camshaft, exhaust system, intercooler size or plumbing.

As for the OEM's, it turns out that many assumptions were made in the decision making to go with turbos on gasoline powered engines. Now that many did make the switch, with the new 2015 emission and mileage regulations, turbo's have only shown a 2% advantage on fuel mileage while costing nearly 3 times that of a positive displacment supercharger system. This is only on the production side, on the warranty side, its over twice as high to warranty the turbo applications, as some have to spin the turbo at 130,000RPM and are so close to there thermal and mechanical failure points that failures are far more common. Going even deeper, what happens to one of these small engines when the cam sensor fails? I know one 4-cylinder vehicle in particular that has a top speed of 5mph if the cam sensor fails and they can't control the cam position to get the turbo to spool soon. While it might be rare, its something that is looked at. If the vehicle is parked on just a few degree incline, it literally cannot go forward. As for torque and HP, on many of the direct injected engines, the HP is actually 1% higher, while torque at low rpm is well over 10% higher. Peak torque is a wash as many of these applications have 30+psi of back pressure.

Many have invested heavily into turbo, small engine applications and those investments were years ago, as they are working on the future packages now and as I said, many are NOT turbo.

Originally Posted by brivander (Post 3622386)

Carry on -- my numbers were a bit ridiculous, exaggerating based on your COMPLETELY uneducated facts. Do you work for whipple, if so please PM me your name if you would, we could have a real chat tomorrow? Or are you a distributor?

I've already said to much in this thread.

Originally Posted by fast fun 2 (Post 3622393)

Just so you know...he IS Whipple. Those arent uneducated facts..your talking with Dustin Whipple

Originally Posted by brivander (Post 3622386)

Carry on -- my numbers were a bit ridiculous, exaggerating based on your COMPLETELY uneducated facts. Do you work for whipple, if so please PM me your name if you would, we could have a real chat tomorrow? Or are you a distributor?

I've already said to much in this thread.

Originally Posted by brivander (Post 3622386)

Carry on -- my numbers were a bit ridiculous, exaggerating based on your COMPLETELY uneducated facts. Do you work for whipple, if so please PM me your name if you would, we could have a real chat tomorrow? Or are you a distributor?

I've already said to much in this thread.

Originally Posted by HabanaJoe (Post 3622301)

I can provide you with a bucket of free power but the bucket to carry it in, well that's going to be pretty pricey!