GTti
Member +
On from the recent topic, what do you think will be better? Look at the two graphs the revs the torque and power. Imagine using the gears and what revs you're in when taking a corner on a track - or the beneifits of changing up a gear earlier to produce the quick torque and power response midrange?
What about reliability? Strain on the box and clutch / drivetrain with more torque, but less strain on the engine as no need to continue past 7,000RPM.
I could have two MAP's on the ECU and simply swap turbos over depending on the track, I can imagine that graph 2 would be better for a fast track like Castle Coombe, yet 1 could be beneficial to a more twisty circuit.
Someone must of had the experience of both setups in a GT world. The specific guy with these printouts told me he's going back to the standard turbo - it feels faster and response is impressive and he doesn't run out of gear.
I must also mention that the pronounced drop off on graph one wouldn't be as bad as in the graph - this is because the boost was dropping off.
Standard 18psi
Hybrid (Larger compressor) 18psi
What about reliability? Strain on the box and clutch / drivetrain with more torque, but less strain on the engine as no need to continue past 7,000RPM.
I could have two MAP's on the ECU and simply swap turbos over depending on the track, I can imagine that graph 2 would be better for a fast track like Castle Coombe, yet 1 could be beneficial to a more twisty circuit.
Someone must of had the experience of both setups in a GT world. The specific guy with these printouts told me he's going back to the standard turbo - it feels faster and response is impressive and he doesn't run out of gear.
I must also mention that the pronounced drop off on graph one wouldn't be as bad as in the graph - this is because the boost was dropping off.
Standard 18psi
Hybrid (Larger compressor) 18psi
Last edited: