Ferrari planning to use turbocharging in future engines

hey .....pennfootball....heres the only subject you might be knoledgable of from you ferrari posters and 1/8 scale models that you own...lololol

Hahahaha...funny!

No one loves you!

About time! Powerful N/A engines are always big, heavy, boat anchors.

Or they lack torque requiring you to rev well pass 6000rpm before you reach any reasonable power levels.

— LexSucks:

> About time! Powerful N/A engines are always big, heavy, boat anchors.

Have you ever heard about high revving powerful modern engines, like the Civic Type R or S2000 I4 or V8 from the BMW M3? Or about twin injection V6 from the Lexus GS 350?

All these engines are also very light.


Joe_Limon:

> Or they lack torque requiring you to rev well
> pass 6000rpm before you reach any reasonable power levels.

I have never heard about anyone complaining that Ferraris need to rev over 6000 rpm to get any serious power.

What's more, I always thought that Ferrari are about passion, free and revving spirit. I mean, Nissan GT-R was always criticized for lack of these because of its turbocharged engine.

*shrugs* why have 500hp at 9000rpm when you can have it at 6000rpm? The slower engine speeds will boost the overall efficiency of the engine as well as there is less friction to overcome.

downtoearth,

Those are very nice engines indeed but they represent about as far as we can go with N/A engines(with the current materials and manufacturing methods) IMO. Forced induction engines aren't as restricted as an N/A engine when it comes to making power. FI engines also are more fuel effective (for the most part), and turbo lag is a virtually a thing of the past. What's not to like?

I guess there's more than one way to skin a cat but the tables seems to be turning towards FI engines. Or at least more FI engined vehicles seems to be available these days imo. It wasn't like that 10 years ago.

I'm just gonna leave it up to the engineers. They are much smarter than I am.

Didn't VW create a motor with both a turbo and supercharger that got rid of any turbo lag?

They did, it wasn't very reliable, it was heavy, and it wasn't on a performance engine.

— lock:

> Didn't VW create a motor with both a turbo and supercharger
> that got rid of any turbo lag?

No, it was Nissan. In 1988.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_MA_MA09ERT

Volkswagen caught up with this technology in 2005 or so.

@downtoearth:
"This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2008)"
Also, where does it say that this engine was produced in '88?

aw... I love naturally-aspirated engines so much! I guess I can trust Ferrari's decision. They should know what they're doing. Interesting thing is that they still have to focus on naturally-aspirated engines in F1 - imagine the best N/A engines with high-end horsepower with the best turbos and their low-end torque!

N/A engines, dependig of the technology could be very light, as an example the AMG 6.2 the MB use in the all AMG 63 series is lighter and with more power and torque than the BMW M3 4.0 Engine for 2 Kilograms less, now that does not look like a big deal, but if you see that the AMG is 2.2 liters bigger and provide 150 hp more and almost 200 pounds of extra torque with less weight, that makes sense. The engine is so good that even the new SLS is using it. Now If ferrari is going to use turbos they will have to buy a 911 and do some reverse engineering. Do you remember the Quad4 of the oldsmobile Aerotech?..it was 2.0 liters 4I developing more than 1000hp the car had posted a top speed over a mile of 267.88 mph (431.10 km/h). enjoy the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mQvE5lykic

OH MY GOD!
Word of the day; PROOF-READING
look it up and then come back here.

btw:
M3 V8: 202 kg
63 AMG: 206 kg (in the SLS where it has been re-engineered)
plus consider the fact that the BMW engine is made heavier by the fact that it has to live its life taking 8400 rpm whereas the AMG will never go beyond 7200 rpm: the crankshaft can be made thinner and lighter.

Is there a such a term called "dual-stage turbo pressurizing system"? There's a high chance that as soon as such term turns viral on the Internet, we'll soon be seeing engineers using terms such as "Porsche triple-stage direct turbo injecting pressurizing management stability program system," aka PTSD-TIP-MSPS! aha Poor Clarkson

Sounds like they are saying that they will use turbochargers when they actually develop a turbo engine. Ferrari took a while to develop their own engine with direct injection, even mainstream brands started using direct injection before Ferrari did. Not to say that weren't able to greatly improve their engines with direct injection. I expect that it will take Ferrari a few years to develop a a turbo engine, but I am sure it will be a good one.

The F40 was like a switch, it was ok fast then all of a sudden it tried to kill you as the larger turbo spooled after the smaller one was up! Ferrari engines have come a loooong way since. For one they don't need an engine out service anymore since the 360, two they use chain driven cams. Turbocharging might add a host of new problems in terms of service because if they wear out, which turbos do, replacing them will be a a nightmare. It's not just lag that is the problem. Lag can be minimized but having a car that offered better emissions and fuel economy is key...not just performance gains. Ferrari is at a time where the market is down, and the legal man can ban these cars tomorrow...so there is a lot of uncertainty at Ferrari right now. They also are going gaga with going green, using alternative E85 type alcohol and so forth. Ferrari will not even sell old turbocharged F1 cars to their rich privater clients! This will be a challenge and they will work it out eventually like for did with the Ecoboost, but at a higher level to maintain industry leadership. Time will tell if this is "Montezmollo's revenge" to sell more cars, or something that can make them a more sustainable company. Probably both.

Lower revs work for better fuel economy. I personally don't care about saving the extra 50lbs of engine weight, enough so to have to compromise several mpg and a hundred thousand extra non maintenance miles.

One possibility is a supercharger. That has virtually no lag. Or, if Ferrari wants to really make things interesting, bolt an electric motor to a supercharger. That would eliminate the parasitic nature of the supercharger. The electric motor would guarantee the same boost level at any engine rpm, OR be able to increase or decrease it at will. SAAB did some tests with this concept a while back, but I don't know what became of it.