mileage daily driving supercharger

[Jackson1320]

Here's a pretty good read for you.

http://www.speedhunters.com/2015/04...percharger will do,produce good low-RPM power.

Both options will decrease your mileage. If you want the most efficient forced induction, run turbos.

What are people getting with turbo?
I reset my fuel and drove 100 miles without checking but driving mindful of the fuel consumption and got 25mpg. My lifetime mileage is 21mpg that is street, track, everything

Sponsored

 

[SheepDog]

What are people getting with turbo?
I reset my fuel and drove 100 miles without checking but driving mindful of the fuel consumption and got 25mpg. My lifetime mileage is 21mpg that is street, track, everything

I don't really think that the dash calculation is very accurate. I run e70 all the time and never get more than about 13 miles per gallon when I do the calculation at the pump. Turbos are just inherently more efficient because the engine doesn't have to use energy to spin them.

Gearing, tires, driving style certainly play a larger roll in fuel economy than the type of FI being used.

 

[Jackson1320]

I don't really think that the dash calculation is very accurate. I run e70 all the time and never get more than about 13 miles per gallon when I do the calculation at the pump. Turbos are just inherently more efficient because the engine doesn't have to use energy to spin them.

Gearing, tires, driving style certainly play a larger roll in fuel economy than the type of FI being used.

I don’t know how accurate the dash is but that’s what it says. so maybe that information helps them out maybe not.

Turbos are not free power, they do take power to make power. just less than a supercharger

 

[SheepDog]

I don’t know how accurate the dash is but that’s what it says. so maybe that information helps them out maybe not.

Turbos are not free power, they do take power to make power. just less than a supercharger

Sure, because it causes backpressure and forces the engine to "push harder" to expel the exhaust, and it generates a lot more heat, but still nothing close to as much power suck as a belt driven device. It takes 100 hp to make your Procharger give you 750

 

[engineermike]

If you measure turbo exhaust pressure you'd see that at cruise and light load it doesn't move the needle off of 0. I would say at part throttle it's basically nothing. Under boost, I've measure up to 50 psi and heard of much higher. Unlike boost, it linearly rises with rpm. I saw a test one time where a 1000 hp engine was using 200 hp to spin a supercharger but a turbo only robbed about 50. Heat is what drives the turbo, so you can achieve lower exhaust pressure than boost and if you do, its almost free.

 

[Jackson1320]

If you measure turbo exhaust pressure you'd see that at cruise and light load it doesn't move the needle off of 0. I would say at part throttle it's basically nothing. Under boost, I've measure up to 50 psi and heard of much higher. Unlike boost, it linearly rises with rpm. I saw a test one time where a 1000 hp engine was using 200 hp to spin a supercharger but a turbo only robbed about 50. Heat is what drives the turbo, so you can achieve lower exhaust pressure than boost and if you do, its almost free.

Heat is not what drives a turbo. I guarantee you I could stick a turbo in the oven all day long it won’t do anything. Expanding exhaust gases drive the turbo.
back pressure is going to change from setup to setup so one kit can cost 50hp where another will cost 200hp. A supercharger will cost 15-20% on modern kit. A turbo kit about half that. I still Would like to see what that translates to In feel economy

 

[engineermike]

Heat is not what drives a turbo. I guarantee you I could stick a turbo in the oven all day long it won’t do anything. Expanding exhaust gases drive the turbo.

The power produced by the hot side is a function of mass flow and change in enthalpy. Enthalpy is almost completely a function of temperature, not pressure. You could produce enough shaft power to make boost with next to zero pressure upstream of the turbine if it’s sized to do it, and the gas is sufficiently hot with enough mass flow. Some T6 frame turbo race cars will generate only half the boost worth of drive pressure. This wouldn’t be possible if pressure is what’s doing the work.

. I still Would like to see what that translates to In feel economy

As I explained earlier, a PD blower at light load and low rpm robs you of almost no power, just as a turbo adds almost no back pressure. In both cases the engine calibration will be much more influential than the type of FI.

 

[Bmaughan]

I get about 7mpg on e85 with a procharger haha

 

[mikengail]

Before was 20/27. After is 19/24...

 

[Jordan @ Lethal]

Ultimately, If you decide to boost your car you are going to lose some mpg but it's largely up to you and your tune as to how much you lose. E85 and boost are going to be on the thirsty side always. Don't sweat it though as the smiles per increases exponentially

 

[17Magnetic5.0]

With a supercharger it would be impossible to determine your mileage drop as everything is subjective to what other mods you have. Say you have 4.10 gears and are cruising at 70 then the supercharger would be spinning faster and require more fuel. While a 3.15 will consume less fuel obviously. Really if you’re concerned about fuel mileage a supercharger might not be for you.

I noticed you’ve asked a lot of questions about supercharging the car and are unsure. Why not start out with smaller mods if you don’t have them yet such as headers intakes tune suspension wheels and tires first and see if that’s enough power for you then if it’s not enough consider boost.

 

[Fissy]

Stock I was at around 19mpg then added a roush 2300 and went to 16mpg on 93 and then after going E85 I went to 10mpg. I have about a 20 mile drive to work. Smiles per gallon are more important imo

 

[Jackson1320]

The power produced by the hot side is a function of mass flow and change in enthalpy. Enthalpy is almost completely a function of temperature, not pressure. You could produce enough shaft power to make boost with next to zero pressure upstream of the turbine if it’s sized to do it, and the gas is sufficiently hot with enough mass flow. Some T6 frame turbo race cars will generate only half the boost worth of drive pressure. This wouldn’t be possible if pressure is what’s doing the work.



As I explained earlier, a PD blower at light load and low rpm robs you of almost no power, just as a turbo adds almost no back pressure. In both cases the engine calibration will be much more influential than the type of FI.

The force from expanding exhaust pushes the turbine of a turbo not heat.
So your theory is the exhaust valve opens and hot air exits the cylinder strictly because of heat? the heat then turns the turbine? so it has nothing to do with this huge explosion that you just contained and all the gases expanding with nowhere to go except into the exhaust and through the turbine?
The turbo is powered by the exact same force that is powering the piston.expanding combustion gases push the piston, when the exhaust valve opens these gases are nowhere near done expanding so they continue to expand in the exhaust system. with nowhere to go they force their way through the turbine of the turbo charger.
On Name brand turbo kits I’ve seen back pressure of up to double the boost pressure. on a race car with a $50,000 turbo systemMaybe you can get closer to what you’re talking about. but on your average namebrand turbo system you are going to have A significant amount of back pressure
more power means more energy output per second, and the law of conservation of energy means you have to put more energy in as well, so you must burn correspondingly more fuel. In theory, that means an engine with a turbocharger is no more fuel efficient than one without. But it doesn’t always work out that way. 2013 study, by Consumer Reports, found small turbocharged engines giving significantly worse fuel economy than naturally aspirated Engines.
Being that I cannot agree with you on how a turbo works I’m sorry but IM not sure I agree with your theory on the fuel consumption. So like I said I would be interested to see just how much fuel consumption difference there are between supercharged and turbocharged

 

[Nate_V8]

Man you sound like how I was back in the day, wanted power but mpg too. To be honest after 10 mustangs, if you are worried about mpg going to work everyday then you either can't really afford to do it in the first place or bolt-ons is what you want. Any gas you may think you save going with X system will be lost as you give some boost here and there because it's fun as heck. Again being in Canada, I mentioned this in one of your other threads, going with a new current gen SC will cost you 14-17000 by the time you are done.

 

[TonyHawk]

Hey guys , so because my car is my daily driver, I'm just wondering what the drop is in mileage when you install a supercharger? Also I've heard that is centrifugal superchargers give you nearly the same mileage? Is this true? Are there differences in mileage with different types of superchargers?

2019 GT Premium PP1 with Roush stage 2. Average 25-26 mpg on the HW

Sponsored