[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: 2002 - No More Turbos

Let's not get all worked up, yet, anyway.................turbos actually can
be cleaner than NA engines.......(excluding the NOX problem)
As for the direct injection, I was involved in investigating a system for 2
cycle engine (and 4 cycle), very impressive...............was much much
cleaner than the carb. system (on the 2 cycle) and had as much power and
response, BTW developed locally (CA),
-----Original Message-----
From: ptimmerm@mashtun.JPL.NASA.GOV <ptimmerm@mashtun.JPL.NASA.GOV>
To: rwo@u.arizona.edu <rwo@u.arizona.edu>; rao@pixar.com <rao@pixar.com>
Cc: alex@matrix.com.pl <alex@matrix.com.pl>; ptimmerm@mashtun.JPL.NASA.GOV
<ptimmerm@mashtun.JPL.NASA.GOV>; quattro@coimbra.ans.net
Date: Friday, March 13, 1998 6:14 PM
Subject: Re: 2002 - No More Turbos

>I have to say that I am not thrilled with the idea of turbos
>going away, it's just that emmisions is creating a selection
>process where certian engine type will vannish, rotaries first,
>then what?
>I believe that Porsche is doing alot of the engineering work
>on the various turbo cars that Robert mentioned.  I have
>long suspected both Saab, Volvo and Audi use Weissach as a a contract
>engineering house.  Two cases for, 1.) RS2 demostrates link
>to Ingolstat 2.) I5 Turbo shows up in anothers line as soon as
>it goes away from Audi's.  Volvo, Saab, and Audi are some of
>the smaller car firms, and Porsche does more business on
>contract consulting than selling cars.  Does Weissach have what it
>takes to make it into the next century? probably.  But I still
>don't understand the technical issues involved very well.
>paul timmerman