[DeTomaso] New Ford GT Twin Turbo V6

[cengles at cox.net]

Dear Forum,

                In a coincidence, there is an interesting article in the 
new Road and Track about turbocharging modern engines in modern sports 
cars.   FWIW.


                Full disclosure:  complete article is Rare Forced Air on 
page 27-28 in the Feb 2015 Road&Track by Jason Cammisa.

               These are my selected highlights from that article. 
Complete disclosure: I am not a fan of turbos.  I prefer normally 
aspirated engines for a number of reasons and this article supports my 
opinion.  While the new Ford GT has a twin turbo Ecotec V-6, I would 
prefer it to have a normally aspirated Coyote or the new flat crank V8.

 From Jason Cammisa:

“We don’t like the turbo,” said the  man with an Italian accent, “but it 
is the right way to reduce emissions without sacrificing performance.”
A rare moment of honesty, then a graceful slingshot into the same turbo 
spin we’ve heard from all corners of the globe.
The fact is, every car company is being forced into forced induction, 
for the exact reasons our Italian friend gave.  Since neither he nor the 
company he works for, Ferrari, can come out and say it, I will: Turbos 
aren’t the best solution, especially for high-performance cars, and they 
don’t always provide the benefits that carmakers claim they do.

Turbos, which are powered by exhaust energy that is otherwise wasted, 
increase engine output by forcing extra air into the cylinders, 
prompting the fuel injectors to provide more fuel for combustion.  More 
combustion, alas, means more heat.  To keep the engine from overheating, 
turbo engines inject excess gas under boost.  It seems counter 
intuitive, but this “rich mixture” cools down combustion and reduces 
exhaust temperatures.  It is also a double whammy fuel economy killer, 
because burning that extra fuel doesn’t help the engine make more power, 
it actually reduces output.

….out in the real world, riding that big, effortless wave of boosted 
midrange torque means burning extra fuel—and creating even more CO2.  So 
much for reducing emissions.

Performance, in this sense, refers solely to acceleration.  The Ferrari 
California T’s turbo 3.9 liter 553 hp V8 easily outmuscles the old 
California’s naturally aspirated 4.3 liter 483 hp v8.  Mission 
accomplished.  Except there’s more to an engine’s behavior than going 
fast in a straight line.  The way the engine generates power –its 
personality, if you will---is just as important as the numbers.    For 
the entire history of the marque, Ferrari’s engines have delivered 
urgency and drama in lockstep with revs, creating a festival of sound 
and fury as they raced toward a redline.  Ferrari engines love to rev, 
which is one of the main reasons we love Ferraris.

Once there’s a turbo impeller muffling the screaming glory of that 
prancing horse, you’re talking about an entirely different animal. 
Engines with turbos big enough to provide boost throughout the operating 
range produce peak torque at low revs and then gradually run out of 
steam, like turbodiesels do.  To combat that, gas-powertrain engineers 
artificially create broad torque plateaus by limiting boost at lower 
engine speeds.  That electronic trickery helps the engine more closely 
emulate a naturally aspirated one, but even that isn’t enough for 
Ferrari.  The California T’s computer also looks at gear position and 
limits max boost in lower gears to encourage its driver to revel in the 
gears.

Turbo lag.  Ferrari claims the California’s new turbo engine has “zero 
turbo lag” and “instantaneous response,” then defines response time as, 
“less than one second.” Really?  In a car that can hit 60 mph in three 
seconds, one second, is anything but instantaneous.

Immediate, predictable response is a requirement in any driver’s car. 
Naturally aspirated engines react without delay to throttle inputs, but 
a turbo engine is vastly more complicated.  It has two torque curves—one 
when it is off boost and one when it is at full puff.

A naturally aspirated engine’s output is determined by the position of 
the pedal and the engine speed, period.  Turbos change that into a 
complicated matrix with far too many variables for a driver to keep 
track of.

Modern Ferraris do what you ask, when you ask, how you ask.  They are 
pretty much perfect.  Although their forth coming turbocharged 
replacements will almost certainly be faster, I fear they will be 
undriveable without assistance from an onboard supercomputer.

It ‘s sad that the marquee feels compelled by government policy to bolt 
turbos on to their lovely engines, when it won’t make a whit of 
difference to air quality.   And it is doubly sad that we all know it 
will change the way Ferraris drive.”


                         Warmest regards,  Chuck Engles
-------------- next part --------------
   Dear Forum,

                  In a coincidence, there is an interesting article in the
   new Road and Track about turbocharging modern engines in modern sports
   cars.   FWIW.

                  Full disclosure:  complete article is Rare Forced Air on
   page 27-28 in the Feb 2015 Road&Track by Jason Cammisa.

                 These are my selected highlights from that article.
   Complete disclosure: I am not a fan of turbos.  I prefer normally
   aspirated engines for a number of reasons and this article supports my
   opinion.  While the new Ford GT has a twin turbo Ecotec V-6, I would
   prefer it to have a normally aspirated Coyote or the new flat crank V8.

   From Jason Cammisa:

   aWe donat like the turbo,a said the  man with an Italian accent, abut
   it is the right way to reduce emissions without sacrificing
   performance.a

   A rare moment of honesty, then a graceful slingshot into the same turbo
   spin weave heard from all corners of the globe.

   The fact is, every car company is being forced into forced induction,
   for the exact reasons our Italian friend gave.  Since neither he nor
   the company he works for, Ferrari, can come out and say it, I will:
   Turbos arenat the best solution, especially for high-performance cars,
   and they donat always provide the benefits that carmakers claim they
   do.

   Turbos, which are powered by exhaust energy that is otherwise wasted,
   increase engine output by forcing extra air into the cylinders,
   prompting the fuel injectors to provide more fuel for combustion.  More
   combustion, alas, means more heat.  To keep the engine from
   overheating, turbo engines inject excess gas under boost.  It seems
   counter intuitive, but this arich mixturea cools down combustion and
   reduces exhaust temperatures.  It is also a double whammy fuel economy
   killer, because burning that extra fuel doesnat help the engine make
   more power, it actually reduces output.

   a|.out in the real world, riding that big, effortless wave of boosted
   midrange torque means burning extra fuelaand creating even more CO2.
   So much for reducing emissions.

   Performance, in this sense, refers solely to acceleration.  The Ferrari
   California Tas turbo 3.9 liter 553 hp V8 easily outmuscles the old
   Californiaas naturally aspirated 4.3 liter 483 hp v8.  Mission
   accomplished.  Except thereas more to an engineas behavior than going
   fast in a straight line.  The way the engine generates power aits
   personality, if you will---is just as important as the numbers.    For
   the entire history of the marque, Ferrarias engines have delivered
   urgency and drama in lockstep with revs, creating a festival of sound
   and fury as they raced toward a redline.  Ferrari engines love to rev,
   which is one of the main reasons we love Ferraris.

   Once thereas a turbo impeller muffling the screaming glory of that
   prancing horse, youare talking about an entirely different animal.
   Engines with turbos big enough to provide boost throughout the
   operating range produce peak torque at low revs and then gradually run
   out of steam, like turbodiesels do.  To combat that, gas-powertrain
   engineers artificially create broad torque plateaus by limiting boost
   at lower engine speeds.  That electronic trickery helps the engine more
   closely emulate a naturally aspirated one, but even that isnat enough
   for Ferrari.  The California Tas computer also looks at gear position
   and limits max boost in lower gears to encourage its driver to revel in
   the gears.

   Turbo lag.  Ferrari claims the Californiaas new turbo engine has azero
   turbo laga and ainstantaneous response,a then defines response time as,
   aless than one second.a Really?  In a car that can hit 60 mph in three
   seconds, one second, is anything but instantaneous.

   Immediate, predictable response is a requirement in any driveras car.
   Naturally aspirated engines react without delay to throttle inputs, but
   a turbo engine is vastly more complicated.  It has two torque
   curvesaone when it is off boost and one when it is at full puff.

   A naturally aspirated engineas output is determined by the position of
   the pedal and the engine speed, period.  Turbos change that into a
   complicated matrix with far too many variables for a driver to keep
   track of.

   Modern Ferraris do what you ask, when you ask, how you ask.  They are
   pretty much perfect.  Although their forth coming turbocharged
   replacements will almost certainly be faster, I fear they will be
   undriveable without assistance from an onboard supercomputer.

   It as sad that the marquee feels compelled by government policy to bolt
   turbos on to their lovely engines, when it wonat make a whit of
   difference to air quality.   And it is doubly sad that we all know it
   will change the way Ferraris drive.a

                           Warmest regards,  Chuck Engles