Speaking of turbo and fuel economy

[michaelwoodcock]

Originally Posted by rh77

6- and 8-cylinder vehicles tend to benefit the best from a belt-driven super-charger.

RH77

I believe you should just get a supercharger!
the AMR 600 should do it for you!
run a very low psi, like 4 max, and you should see some gains. You will want to properly set it up and everything. Superchargers are better for carburated engines because, fixed displacement superchargers give a very predictable boost, that can be carburated. Turbo chargers usually require EFI to run their best, as a carb cannot be tuned easily for a turbo. A supercharger would be the way to go! just keep the boost down, and you COULD see some gains. it would deffinately make it more drivable
not to mention, the slow, steady increase in power provided by a supercharger is easier on the engine and transmission components than an abrupt increase often given by a turbo

[DarbyWalters]

A small Aerodyne turbo would be the right size (maybe) but with a carb you would have to do a "draw thru" type arrangement. The Aerodyne was the turbo used on the older chrysler/dodge shelbys ectr. It has its own oil system which make it very easy to install...or easier I would say...no oil lines or cooling lines.

I would look at motorcycles that have done the turbo thru carbs to get an idea of what you are in for.

[StorminMatt]

Originally Posted by DaX

BAM. Finally someone agrees with me.

Agreed. Turbos save fuel if a smaller turbocharged engine is used to replace a larger, naturally aspirated engine. This way, when power is not needed, the power plant basically becomes the equivalent of a smaller naturally aspirated engine. BUT, keeping the same engine in a car and turbocharging it is going to REDUCE efficiency. Not only will you be tempted to run in boost. But there is the added inefficiency caused by the intake and exhaust restriction of the turbo itself. AND, if you lower compression in order to avoid detonation, this lowers off-boost efficiency further. The bottom line? If you want the best fuel economy, keep it allmotor. Boost only if you want more power.

[Wyldesoul]

I would have to disagree. A small, light duty turbocharger set for perhaps 2psi or so would do quite a bit of good for FE. It would negate all pumping losses, and if you freed up the exhaust, the added back pressure would be a negligible increase in exhaust pumping loss.

I mean, heck. I had a 93 mustang 2.3, and an 87 thunderbird, with the same engine, but turbocharged, and they got the same MPG, despite a 1000 pound difference. (Heck, the t-bird got better MPG on the highway)

[GasSavers_Dust]

I don?t want to go against what everyone is saying, but I think that you could easily turbo the carb. Read up in the carb section and theturboforums here. I think that if you lowered your gearing, the turbo would help you out. Little engines have only enough power off boost to move the car (for arguments sake), and the turbo is there for when you need more power. I have a 660cc kei-car here in Japan. My friend has the turbo version. Night and day difference. My 225 hp 300 ft lbs roots supercharged car weighed probably 2 tons, but got 32 on the highway, because the engine turned 1700 rpms at 70. That?s 4 less than my mother?s 3200 lb 2.0L 130 hp NA car. If you build it right, Forced induction will help you.

[rvanengen]

Originally Posted by Matt Timion

I think we have a winner. I was looking at Metro engines today wondering if they would fit in my car or not. I then realized that that type of conversion would cost almost as much as a cheap electric conversion.

Honestly, I'm better off spending money and getting a GOOD electric conversion. I'll get good batteries, etc. The problem with my n600, however, is battery space. There is barely room for people let alone batteries. Perhaps the solution is to spend the extra money on the Lithium Ion batteries to conserve space/weight.

A couple VERY promising battery companies from another EV list:

<< http://www.kokamamerica.com/kokam_catalog.pdf >>

<< http://www.thunder-sky.com/products_en.asp?fid=66 >>

For your application (not necessarily your wallet ) I would go with the first one...very small...easy to tuck into side walls, etc.

[philp100]

I can't see where a turbo (in conventional form) on your carb'ed engine would be a good thing for FE. Most of the stuff I remember about turbos on engines without electronic controls has compression ratios down to about 6:1 in order avoid detonation under boost. This usually kills power when not in the boost.
This talk about running a low pressure turbo set-up is kind of interesting. I had never really thought about that before this thread. I will have to read up on that.
There are many turbo kits out now for small displacement engines. Motorcycle and snowmobiles have quite a few aftermarket kits for them. Probably not very FE oriented but closer to the right size turbine/compressor required for a 600CC motor.
Didn't Honda sell a 600cc turbo'ed v-twin motorcycle in the '80s?

[GasSavers_Dust]

With the right carb, you can run it just like a FI engine. Carbs aren’t what they were 30 years ago. There are a lot of boost carbs being built, both in blow through and drawthrough configurations on the turbo forums board.I think a search for japanese kei-car turbos might get you what you are looking for. There are also alot of 1000cc turbo cars over here. The bigger turbo would put you into boost later, and keep you out of boost during most driving. I think that once you learn how to drive a boosted car, you can do pretty well in the MPG arena.

[landspeed]

Originally Posted by Sludgy

Turbocharging a twin cyclinder engine like your N600 could be tough, because of the pulsed exhaust flow from the engine. Turbos like steady flow. It's much worse than a 4 cylinder, which isn't terribly good to begin with.

The Subaru Impreza is 2 cylinder, in effect