is it true that reno are making one next year??
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
new clio turbo
- Thread starter renaultsport83
- Start date
is it true that reno are making one next year??
thanks R
Thats news to me......
They using the new megane 225 block ?
dont have a clue!!
i looked, loads of different searches, is it confirmed for production?
how do u mean N/A engines?
normally aspirated or naturally aspirated
ie not superchared induction or turbocharged induction
sorry im not really an engine whiz. whats the advantages of a N/A engine then? whats the difference?
The advantages of a NA car are weight, (turbos can weigh a fair bit), turbo lagg ( this is the time that it takes for the exhaust gasses to spin up the turbo ) and NA cars have a faster flow of exhaust gasses.
cheers for that, hence the reason that 172 are faster than some turbod cars?
Basically cars go fast because they combust a mixture of fuel and air, to make your car faster you need to increase the amount of these that is burnt in one cycle to produce more power which in turn makes your car faster.
one way to do this is to fit a turbocharger which is an air compressor thats powered by the exhaust fumes pushing through the veins on the turbo. The compressed air is then forced into the engine, because the air is compressed there is more air in the same amount of space, with fueling mods eg uprated injectors the fueling can be matched and power enhanced
Another way to do this is a supercharger which is really just a turbocharger/compressor that runs off the power of the flywheel/crank (no turbo lagg)
The normal way to increase the power on a NA car is to introduce higher flow exhausts, this helps because it means that the pistons dont have to exert as much force pushing the gases out of the car and therefor has more power to keep turning over with, another way is to introduce higher flowing air filtering elements an IKs which help getting more air into the engine, and finally chips can help by altering timings, fueling and rev limits.
Hopefully your not asleep
Craig
very usefull info mate.
Renault Laguna Coupe
Who cares? Its a great rumour
Quote: Originally posted by cliosportcraig on 30 March 2004
The advantages of a NA car are weight, (turbos can weigh a fair bit), turbo lagg ( this is the time that it takes for the exhaust gasses to spin up the turbo ) and NA cars have a faster flow of exhaust gasses.
turbos only weigh a kilo or 2 - that aint gonna slow your car
down our kid ???
Cheers Craig, very useful info there!
One thing though, dont Superchargers suck air accross the head, rather than compressing it and forcing it accross?
I thought this was the case, as this would explain why Superchargers (generally) give a smaller power increase than a turbo. Because there is no compression process. (They are just increasing the mass flow rate of air).
Just my thoughts, I am probably completely wrong!
Erm Tom... you even commented on it back http://forum.cliosport.net/display_topic_threads.asp?ForumID=2&TopicID=52084HERE
superchargers are mechanical - running off pulleys. this means they are effective for more of the rev range. some of the power is sapped due to engine having to turn the supercharger - hence less of a gainQuote: Originally posted by Chris Green on 31 March 2004
Cheers Craig, very useful info there!
One thing though, dont Superchargers suck air accross the head, rather than compressing it and forcing it accross?
I thought this was the case, as this would explain why Superchargers (generally) give a smaller power increase than a turbo. Because there is no compression process. (They are just increasing the mass flow rate of air).
Just my thoughts, I am probably completely wrong!
CHR15G (Great Name) and Dogmaul,
Cheers for putting me straight about Turbos / superchargers.
You learn something new everyday! Except Everytime I learn something new, it pushes old stuff out of my brain
Woaaahh! A lot of crazy ideas on here. I dont know anything about a new Clio Turbo from Renault next year.
Anyway, lets get started:
If you compare like-for-like in terms of power outputs, a turbo engine is almost always lighter. To make 150bhp out of a NA engine in roughly road tune youre looking at say 1.8-2.2 litres. There are probably standard road cars that use more or less than this capacity to make 150 but lets just say the majority are in that range. Anyway, a 2.0 engine is significantly heavier than say a 1.4-1.8 turbo engine that would make the same 150bhp in standard road spec.
A turbo is a compressor thats powered by the exhaust gases that are otherwise wasted down the exhaust, whereas a supercharger (otherwise known as a blower) is powered by a direct mechanical connection with the crank of the engine, in the same way that an alternator or aircon system is. This makes the turbo a more efficient form of compressing the air charge because you are making use of what would be wasted energy in the exhaust gas. A blower actually takes power off the crank of the engine so is not so efficient - it takes power to make it so to speak.
Because there is a direct mechanical connection, however, a blower has no lag; it simply rotates with the engine, forcing comnpressed air into the inlet all the time. In normal road driving at all kinds of RPM, a turbo is constantly spinning up to speed and slowing down again, but not, like a blower, in perfect sync with the engine speed, but rather, it takes a bit of time for the exhuast gases to spin it up to speed when power is needed, and you get a kind of elastic band effect known as turbo lag - you have to wait a bit for the power to come in.
Power characteristics of supercharged and turbocharged engines are kind of opposite to each other. The fixed gearing of a supercharger and the way in which its effects cannot be avoided because of its direct connection to the crank mean that by its nature it has to be much more efficient at low- medium revs, where the majority of road driving is done. This is a generalisation but for road use it is the case. Every compressor is efficient at a particular running speed and inefficient when running slower or faster. A blower is no different. Therefore once you reach high revs, a blower runs out of puff and can no longer efficiently compress air and may even restrict it. A turbo is the opposite. At low revs there is not enough energy in the exhaust gases, because of the low engine speed, to get the turbo spinning at its optimum rate. Therefore it is not really working and is not compressing the incoming air. However, as revs rise, the turbo starts to spin up to operating speed and boost gradually builds until it hits its sweet spot. Therefore in general, turbos work most efficiently in the mid-high range of the revs and not really at all low down. This is where the idea of superchargers having low-down power and having to wait for turbos to come on boost come from.
A normally/naturally aspirated car uses no forced induction and because of this can only take in as much oxygen into its cylinders to burn fuel as atmospheric pressure will allow. Therefore you get to a point where no matter how you design a NA engine, you simply cannot make any more power because it will be as efficient as it can possibly be. For example, 250-300bhp is probably the furthest you could ever go with a 2.0 NA engine and todays technology and this would be undriveable as an everyday road car. With forced induction, as long as you build the engine strong enough, have a big enough compressor, supply enough fuel and keep the system cool enough there are few limits on how much power you can make. F1 cars used to run 1.5 litre turbos with something like 1000bhp for qualifying laps.
NA cars are in a way easier to drive and exploit their power, because once you have a feel for the car, you always know how much pull youll feel at every point in the revs, eg. every valver owner knows not to bother taking on anyone below 4500 revs, but once youre there, off you go and the power band is useful all through to around 6500. I should imagine, although I dont know that a supercharged engine would be similar in predictability if not in top end boost. A turbo is slightly more unpredictable, but many drivers enjoy the surge of acceleration when the turbo comes on boost and starts to really fly.
The last correction Id like to make is that you cannot just bolt a turbo on to an engine to get more power. It really, really isnt that simple - you need to find room for all the extra plumbing, you need to completely alter the way that fuelling is metered, have a way of reading boost levels, depending on boost capabilities you will need highly uprated charge-cooling and fuelling systems, lowered compression, strenthened internals that will handle boost pressure, much bigger bore exhaust systems and induction filtering capable of supplying the amount of air flow needed. If you just bolted a turbo onto a NA engine somehow and ran it with no other mods you would be broken down at the side of the road the first time you put your foot down!
Im sure I can make out 2.0 T badges on the new Clio pictures. Turboing it would be an easy way for more power they can just use a derated Megan engine.
Since the hot hatch hp war has been going up all the time. By 2005/2006 when its released theyll need about 200hp. Also even if they get the 200hp out of the 172 engine N/A they will need to think about future engine life sticking a turbo engine in there from the outset means you can facelift the car later in life easier.
Volvo S60 T5
Ive got a spare 172 engine which Im modding with a turbo and a few extras.
Best thing with the 172 engine is that the block has the oil feed in place and the oil drain in place for the turbo, the Avantime 2.0T has the same engine block as the 172 with a few different parts inside, and different manifolds.
Also same engine Block as a Laguna 2.0T.
Most of the stuff I need I can get from Reno, the only real worry is where to locate the intercooler, Ive got a spare laguna intercooler but I got a feeling I aint gona be able to fit it on my clio, so looks like Im stuck with a poxy sh*ty little scenic one.
Similar threads
