Downsides of Forced Induction on track?

jetpilot747 · 10-02-2012, 01:54 PM

What are the downsides of using forced induction for track racing? Always wondered why the ALMS GT cars (even the GTE PRO class in WEC series) do not use forced induction and goes normally aspirated. I don't believe turbo lag is a big issue in high class racing series since they got the money and time to build the best engines. The Audi R15 Turbocharged Direct Injection did just fine in the WEC series

AlteredBe4st · 10-02-2012, 02:06 PM

Not 100% sure but it might be due to heat soak/ temperature on turbo vehicles.

radiantm3 · 10-02-2012, 03:16 PM

Extra weight, heat, and less than linear power band are my issues with it.

VCMpower · 10-02-2012, 03:17 PM

Power to weight amongst many other things are calculated to give a balanced setup of a race car. HP is not the most important part of a well tuned race car

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetpilot747

What are the downsides of using forced induction for track racing? Always wondered why the ALMS GT cars (even the GTE PRO class in WEC series) do not use forced induction and goes normally aspirated. I don't believe turbo lag is a big issue in high class racing series since they got the money and time to build the best engines. The Audi R15 Turbocharged Direct Injection did just fine in the WEC series

jetpilot747 · 10-02-2012, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VCMpower

Power to weight amongst many other things are calculated to give a balanced setup of a race car. HP is not the most important part of a well tuned race car

Wouldn't they be able to just push higher amounts of boost for better power to weight ratio than normally aspirated though?

scubasewj · 10-02-2012, 03:41 PM

probably increased heat. On my ESS VT2-600 my oil temps go to 300 and turns the engine check light on (but do not put it into limp mode) after 10 or so laps. Although I've only tracked my car once with the SC in 90-95 Degree temps.

jetpilot747 · 10-02-2012, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radiantm3

Extra weight, heat, and less than linear power band are my issues with it.

Wouldn't the power band issues be fixed with proper tuning and setup? Why would Audi use a turbocharger on their R18 if its an issue?

sleepless · 10-02-2012, 03:46 PM

The reason most race cars don't use forced induction is simply that it is banned by the rules.

jetpilot747 · 10-02-2012, 03:48 PM

Formula 1 cars are also looking to go back to turbochargers in 2014 but people are just complaining that "it doesn't sound as good" and will "ruin Formula 1." As far as performance goes, all the F1 engine manufacturers agree that going the turbo route will result in faster lap times.

Renault and Mercedes are very eager to implement the turbos on the F1 cars in 2014 lol

"We've got to change the engine at some stage. We will become irrelevant with the engine if we don't look to change. The world's changing and I think the new engine is a far more relevant engine for Formula One for the future. If we're going to get new manufacturers into Formula One, which I think is a good thing, then why will they come in to build an antique V8 engine? They won't. They will only come in with this new engine, so we want to attract manufacturers back into Formula One and this new engine is very important [in doing that]."

jetpilot747 · 10-02-2012, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepless

The reason most race cars don't use forced induction is simply that it is banned by the rules.

It's not banned in the FIA World Endurance Championship and the other Le Mans series though right?

The GT cars can have:

ENGINE CAPACITY: 5.5l max (normally aspirated petrol)
4.0l max (Turbo / Supercharged petrol)

VCMpower · 10-02-2012, 04:35 PM

I am saying the opposite to this. Too much power for the weight and down force ect. Put all the power you want, you have to transfer it to the pavement. These GT cars do not have the down force to drive upside down like, say, F1.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetpilot747

Wouldn't they be able to just push higher amounts of boost for better power to weight ratio than normally aspirated though?

jetpilot747 · 10-02-2012, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VCMpower

I am saying the opposite to this. Too much power for the weight and down force ect. Put all the power you want, you have to transfer it to the pavement. These GT cars do not have the down force to drive upside down like, say, F1.

What is considered too much power?

Longboarder · 10-02-2012, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radiantm3

Extra weight, heat, and less than linear power band are my issues with it.

Wow. You didn't have your blower for very long. Did you try water/meth? I had terrific results on the track with it.

VCMpower · 10-02-2012, 05:24 PM

you decide or the laws of physics will.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetpilot747

What is considered too much power?

radiantm3 · 10-02-2012, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Longboarder

Wow. You didn't have your blower for very long. Did you try water/meth? I had terrific results on the track with it.

No I decided I didn't want to keep putting band-aids on.

VCMpower · 10-02-2012, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radiantm3

No I decided I didn't want to keep putting band-aids on.

jetpilot747 · 10-02-2012, 05:41 PM

For an average joe and not a racing team, modding for 150+ WHP could be very costly. Would it be better to just go forced induction?

Longboarder · 10-02-2012, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radiantm3

No I decided I didn't want to keep putting band-aids on.

I see. The secondary market seems pretty good for these kits so I hope you recoup most of your cost.

Water/meth would have completely transformed that kit on the track but I understand your decision.

[Deactivated-Velos] · 10-02-2012, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetpilot747

What are the downsides of using forced induction for track racing? Always wondered why the ALMS GT cars (even the GTE PRO class in WEC series) do not use forced induction and goes normally aspirated. I don't believe turbo lag is a big issue in high class racing series since they got the money and time to build the best engines. The Audi R15 Turbocharged Direct Injection did just fine in the WEC series

It's all relative.

Keep in mind when factory cars (F/I or not) are used for endurance series, they are normally detuned from the factory settings. The cars are being ran at their limits for extended periods of time.

Also keep in mind larger turbo cars tend to be a bit harder to control on the track as the power is not as predictable as an N/A car. These things and more are considered when a race team is building a car for these types of series.

However, if we are talking about street cars being used on the track, etc... The needs and requirements are different as your running a different class, etc...

Superchargers also provide a linear power band which allows the driver to have a more predictable power curve.

There are more ESS Systems being used on the street and track than any other at the moment. They've also tested their systems holding maximum load for extended periods of time with no signs of wear or power loss. Which is what is seen on the track.

Assuming you're question is placed in order to better understand whats going on in order to apply the same ideology to your M3 in regards to upgrading for the track.

jetpilot747 · 10-02-2012, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean@VelosDesignwerks

It's all relative.

Keep in mind when factory cars (F/I or not) are used for endurance series, they are normally detuned from the factory settings. The cars are being ran at their limits for extended periods of time.

What do you mean by detuned from factory settings? Also, what if it wasn't endurance series and just running 30 laps? Would using forced induction be more beneficial than normally aspirated assuming that the driver has to skills to handle the power band of a turbocharged car?

Z K · 10-02-2012, 06:41 PM

Nothing wrong with turbocharged cars on track. They do run a bit hotter but nothing extra cooling can't cope with. Generally NA cars are more reliable as there are less moving parts and makes repairs easier which is an advantage in endurance racing. Otherwise there is no drawbacks.

WRC and other racing series all run all turbocharged motors exclusively for decades. IndyCar and Formula 1 used to all run turbocharged cars as well. Formula 1 is returning to turbocharged cars. The racing series that do not allow turbocharged cars is mainly due to regulations for that series. Otherwise turbo gives a big advantage to those that run it.

[Deactivated-Velos] · 10-02-2012, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetpilot747

What do you mean by detuned from factory settings? Also, what if it wasn't endurance series and just running 30 laps? Would using forced induction be more beneficial than normally aspirated assuming that the driver has to skills to handle the power band of a turbocharged car?

I'm referring to all out race cars that run for hours at a time. At that point cars are measured by hours not miles and it's a matter of longevity not power.

For a few laps every few months, it would depend on the quality of the system and the platform it's going on.

10-02-2012, 01:54 PM	#1
jetpilot747 Private First Class 22 Rep 106 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Toronto iTrader: (0)	Downsides of Forced Induction on track? What are the downsides of using forced induction for track racing? Always wondered why the ALMS GT cars (even the GTE PRO class in WEC series) do not use forced induction and goes normally aspirated. I don't believe turbo lag is a big issue in high class racing series since they got the money and time to build the best engines. The Audi R15 Turbocharged Direct Injection did just fine in the WEC series
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

10-02-2012, 02:06 PM	#2
AlteredBe4st First Pride 110 Rep 1,557 Posts Drives: M4 Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Connecticut.. iTrader: (8)	Not 100% sure but it might be due to heat soak/ temperature on turbo vehicles. __________________ Modded M4
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-02-2012, 03:16 PM	#3
radiantm3 Apex Everything! 976 Rep 4,378 Posts Drives: 2007 Honda S2000, 2017 GT350 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Cedar Park, TX iTrader: (6) Garage List 2011 E92 M3 [9.35] 2014 BMW i3 [10.00]	Extra weight, heat, and less than linear power band are my issues with it. __________________ 2011 E92 M3(Sold). 2007 Honda S2000 (Track Car). 2016 Cayman GT4 (Sold). 2017 Shelby GT350 (AKA Crowd Killer). My pet project: https://stickershift.com
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-02-2012, 03:41 PM	#6
scubasewj Private 7 Rep 78 Posts Drives: '09 E92 M3 Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: San Francisco iTrader: (1)	probably increased heat. On my ESS VT2-600 my oil temps go to 300 and turns the engine check light on (but do not put it into limp mode) after 10 or so laps. Although I've only tracked my car once with the SC in 90-95 Degree temps.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-02-2012, 03:46 PM	#8
sleepless Private First Class 10 Rep 118 Posts Drives: 11 E90 M3 Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Redmond, WA iTrader: (0)	The reason most race cars don't use forced induction is simply that it is banned by the rules.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-02-2012, 03:48 PM	#9
jetpilot747 Private First Class 22 Rep 106 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Toronto iTrader: (0)	Formula 1 cars are also looking to go back to turbochargers in 2014 but people are just complaining that "it doesn't sound as good" and will "ruin Formula 1." As far as performance goes, all the F1 engine manufacturers agree that going the turbo route will result in faster lap times. Renault and Mercedes are very eager to implement the turbos on the F1 cars in 2014 lol "We've got to change the engine at some stage. We will become irrelevant with the engine if we don't look to change. The world's changing and I think the new engine is a far more relevant engine for Formula One for the future. If we're going to get new manufacturers into Formula One, which I think is a good thing, then why will they come in to build an antique V8 engine? They won't. They will only come in with this new engine, so we want to attract manufacturers back into Formula One and this new engine is very important [in doing that]."
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-02-2012, 05:41 PM	#17
jetpilot747 Private First Class 22 Rep 106 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Toronto iTrader: (0)	For an average joe and not a racing team, modding for 150+ WHP could be very costly. Would it be better to just go forced induction?
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-02-2012, 06:41 PM	#21
Z K Major General 1887 Rep 5,506 Posts Drives: E90 M3, G20 M340i Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: San Francisco iTrader: (3)	Nothing wrong with turbocharged cars on track. They do run a bit hotter but nothing extra cooling can't cope with. Generally NA cars are more reliable as there are less moving parts and makes repairs easier which is an advantage in endurance racing. Otherwise there is no drawbacks. WRC and other racing series all run all turbocharged motors exclusively for decades. IndyCar and Formula 1 used to all run turbocharged cars as well. Formula 1 is returning to turbocharged cars. The racing series that do not allow turbocharged cars is mainly due to regulations for that series. Otherwise turbo gives a big advantage to those that run it.
	Appreciate 0 Quote