Haha, +1.

↓↑report

Turbolytes!!!!!

↓↑report

This is interesting considering Ferrari's parent company FIAT is linked with Chrysler now. Chrysler was the first to use variable vane technology to defeat turbo lag in a production car:

http://www.allpar.com/model/csx.html

"The 1989 CSX-VNT was again based on the Shadow ES, but with a list of changes that was Shelby's most comprehensive to date. The engine was based on the previous year's 2.2 Turbo II, but was upgraded to what Chrysler called the Turbo IV through the world's first production use of a Variable Nozzle Turbo, or VNT.

Based on Formula 1 technology, the Garrett turbo utilized moving vanes to manage the amount and speed of exhaust gasses passing through the turbine, causing it to act like a small turbo that "spools up" to boost quickly at low engine rpm, thereby reducing 'turbo lag'. At higher engine RPM, the vanes opened to allow more volume to pass (albeit at a lower airspeed), changing it into a bigger turbo and eliminating the need for a wastegate because the boost level could be controlled by computer management of the VNT vanes."

↓↑report

"Turbo lag? Turbo lag's already done with. I thought it was commonly held that post 2.0T GTI turbo lag was done for? "

The problem is that Ferrari engines are high-revving screamers, and don't have a lot of power down low; that could make any turbo lag more noticeable vs. something like, say, the Ford 3.5 liter GTDI which has enough low end power to mask the time it takes for the turbos to spool up.

"Then again, VAG was using DSG for half a decade before ferrari got around to putting it into their cars."

and motorcycles were using them for decades before anyone got around to putting them into cars.

↓↑report

Yeah, lag is gone from 2.0 litre engines, not necessarily Ferrari V8s. More combustion chamber volume = more air for turbos to compress = bigger turbos needed = more lag. Obviously this all is inconsequential with a 2.0L engine but not with twice that.

↓↑report

Jim: Can you show me a 20 year old motorcycle that used two clutches and no direct human-clutch interface? Zamafir is referring to flappy paddle gear boxes.

Nateb: What you're forgetting is that More combustion chamber volume = more air to spool turbos = smaller turbos needed = less lag. There's no reason that a variable vane turbo can't work on a big V8.

↓↑report

Hmm? No. Lag isn't even on the endangered list. You're thinking of the dead spot from a high pressure system. This can be fixed almost completely with various systems that alter the port the exhaust gas goes through before meeting the turbine vanes (dual entry/dual spool or variable vane).

I find it very funny you point to VW when VAG is one of the companies with the least effective anti-dead spot mechanisms. They just use low pressure turbos, reducing output instead of using better systems like the Porsche variable vanes, Toyota/Mazda/GM dual entry/twin spool.

Real lag comes from the fact that turbos are powered by exhaust gases and there aren't exhaust gases at low throttle openings (like idle) to keep the turbos spinning. So once you call for the power, you have to wait for the turbos to get back spinning again.

↓↑report

it's not that funny, vag's pretty up front about using smaller turbos to defeat lag, and the lag's gone, thus it makes sense mentioning it.

that said, it'll be interesting to see where the 3.0T takes them, especially if we start seeing more supercharged models in the lineup.

↓↑report

Lag isn't gone. You're thinking of the dead spot caused by the turbo being inefficient since it is at a bad spot in its compressor map.

VW will employ a lot more effective systems at combating lag (outside of their combined supercharger/turbocharger system) as they wish to get better and better outputs without making their engines larger.

↓↑report

@ Farris

You've got it backwards. All other things being equal, tiny turbos flow less volume of air than bigger ones. Specifically "more air to spool turbos = smaller turbos needed" is wrong. More air to spool turbos will mean you can fit much bigger turbos for tons of high end power but you can't simply affix tiny turbos to the engine and thus have no lag. Ferrari engines are screamers first of all which means tiny turbos would be maxed out at about 4000 RPM, WAY before redline. They'd be pretty useless after that RPM because they'd completely out of the sweet spot for the compressor so they'd just overheat the engine bay and oil system. You'd basically see a dyno graph start at zero HP, shoot up to a pretty small number and then plateau.

So far the best solutions developed are twincharging (a supercharger to increase torque during lag time and more exhaust air from idle to spool the turbo quickly), variable vane turbos (turbos that can be effectively smaller than their full size then larger when airflow increases) and sequential turbo systems (with a smaller turbo to minimize lag and a larger one for high airflow duty). Also you can buy an aftermarket kit that uses nitrous to spool your turbo more quickly. None of those actually eliminate lag though, only reduce it (or more accurately the feeling of lag by adding another form of boost like a small snail, nitrous or supercharger).

↓↑report

@ Jim , Porsche was using dual clutch in their racing cars decades before VAG.

↓↑report

haha, you said VAG...

↓↑report

I imagine heat was a huge stumbling block; further, I can't imagine there's a brushless motor that would be small enough to package yet still bring some benefit. There is a hell of a lot more energy in the exhaust stream to spin that turbo than you could get from a small electric motor.

↓↑report

@Jim
My understanding of the design was the electric motor was there just to spool the shaft to get it moving when you first tipped in the throttle before the exhaust started to move, not add any benefit once the exhaust was moving. My assumption is they were satisfied with larger displacement (3.8L) and smaller turbos instead. But again I only read a few paragraphs on the design so it's hard to say if it would work or not.

↓↑report

I cannot comprehend how this will be effective. It takes a lot of HP to spin those turbos up, especially if you want to do it quickly. So if you want an electric motor to do it, it's gonna be big. Look at the size of your secondary AIR injection pump and you're just getting into the ballpark. You know, the doodad with a 60A fuse in your fuse panel. Now you're going to have two of them? That's a lot of space and cost taken up.

Shorter version:
The WRC doesn't even use this type of a system and cost isn't a big issue there. How is it going to work for the average Joe?

↓↑report

LS7 - what system does the WRC use? I've seen the drivers press a button just prior to launching on a stage, with commentary that they are "pre-spooling the turbo" for the launch. Is this some kind of electric motor setup?

Since they only use it on the start, and are pretty much at the top of the rev range for the rest of the stage, I imagine this mitigates the heat/power concerns you mention above.

↓↑report