Forced Induction and Fuel Economy

[ellenbetty]

So far I have not heard anyone say that a turbo would increase fuel economy with the 1.5 liter motor. But with Ford talking about it's Ecoboost motor producing more power with improved fuel economy, I wonder if a turbo would pay for itself over it's life span. I found a turbo kit for the 1.5 liter motor Toyota Yaris at http://www.turbo-kits.com/yaris_turbo_kits.html. The fuel management system is not included. I have read nothing about any one making a automatic fuel management system. I am one of those who would not like to have to fiddle with manual fuel management syste. Still I wondered how guys into hp react to the cost of the kit and the claim of a 100%+ hp gain.

[enviri]

woah crap they are in windsor locks, CT

[1NZYaris1]

At that price , one would have thoght the Blitz S/C is a better option.
i only say that as a good a/m management computer is about another 2k on top
of the turbo price .

[ChinoCharles]

Is turbo-kits.com legit?

[ChinoCharles]

a good a/m management computer is about another 2k on top
of the turbo price .

Um, no?

[cali yaris]

The question is about fuel economy?

[eTiMaGo]

Ford's Ecoboost engine has been designed to be turbo'ed from the beginning and its characteristics honed to provide a power increase while maintaining good fuel consumption, and by all accounts they can do a very good job at that.

The problem is that our engines have been designed from the ground up to be extremely efficient without any kind of forced induction. So, it can never have exactly the same characteristics as a turboe'd engine. That being said, by all accounts, adding a small turbo or a supercharger, then proceeding to drive normally, does give you a sensibly more powerful engine without extremely high of a mileage cost.

[eTiMaGo]

Originally Posted by cali yaris

The question is about fuel economy?

and turbos... HELP!

[Morgan]

well the rest of the world gave up on the big displacement v8 a long time ago (luxury car brands excluded) and moved on to smaller forced induction engines to make power and still maintain fuel efficiency and emissions standards... its funny that ford (now doing the same thing) is marketing their 'smaller displacement forced induction' engines as "ECOBOOST" like its some new and amazing concept

yet another reason american auto makers are still behind the curve....

my $.02

[kurokoma-kun]

Who needs FI, when you can get 325 hp and 660 ft-lbs of torque out of a 4-cylinder diesel motor? Well that is if the EcoMotors International open piston, opposed cylinder engine currently in development ever enters production.

For what it's worth, my fuel econ went up a couple mpg with the s/c--until I started running the A/C. With it running my mpg is down about 2-3 mpg compared to last summer.

[Yaris Hilton]

The way you get improved fuel economy with a turbo is by using a smaller turboed engine to replace a bigger naturally aspirated engine with the same power. You're unlikely to see much improvement in fuel economy by adding a turbo to an existing gasoline engine, though you do recover some wasted energy from the exhaust stream to overcome some of the pumping losses at part throttle. Usually you're going to use the turbo to increase the power used, and fuel economy will go down. Wouldn't be much point adding all that power and never using it, would there?

[Cosmonaut]

LOL if some company guaranteed that their turbo would increase FE i would get that in writing and then sue them for false claims.

Yaris Hilton hit the head saying you get improved FE using a smaller boosted engine as opposed to a larger displacement engine. i read some time a go Ford would leave the V8 a lone but offer the ecoboost V6 engine. i say boost the 8 too.

and a good chunk of the world moved to smaller displacement engines not the "rest".