> Well, Moss seems to have done a respectable job with the TR6 supercharger;>
and a turbocharger is just a particular type of supercharger. In theory a>
turbo is more efficient, because it gets at least some of it's energy by>
recovering waste heat; and uses a more efficient (but high speed) turbine as>
a compressor. But translating that into improved performance still looks>
tricky to me.
Randall is correct as usual. Turbocharger is a contraction of
turbosupercharger, the official name. Turbo is the combination form of
turbine, a device that is spun by fluid, exhaust gasses in this case. The
gasses enter the turbine hot and under pressure. They expand in the turbine
and leave the turbine cooler and under less pressure. The pressure and heat
energy become mechanical energy when the turbine spins. The turbine spins the
compressor, unlike a mechanical supercharger, in which a gear train or belt
turns the compressor.
Another difference between turbochargers and superchargers is that
superchargers compress the intake air after it is mixed with the fuel, and
turbochargers compress the air before it is mixed with fuel. On airplanes
anyway. I have never read or heard why this is done or if the opposite could
be done. Seems to me that superchargers on fuel-injected car engines would
compress the air before it is mixed with fuel, but what do I know?
Does anyone know?
Curious,
John H.
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
This list supported in part by the Vintage Triumph Register
http://www.vtr.org
Triumphs@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/triumphs
http://www.team.net/archive
|