Jim Wahl posted, " Also, both you and Bill are dead wrong about boost lowering when you improve air flow. It increases boost, up to the maximum efficiency of the turbo."
Now, we have two opinions; Jim, who currently runs a turbo car and Jeff, who ran one for "years," accorfing to one of his previous posts. Who ya gonna believe?
I'll defer to the guy currently running one,for the time being.
Increased boost from engine mods could create a problem, unless you control the boost to factory specs, which is the logical thing to do, if you want to remain legal. Excessive boost (beyond facxtory specs) should only be allowed after the normally-aspirated cars figure out how to manipulate the weather to increase barometric pressure, since that's all they have pushing past the intake valve to accomplish cylinder filling.
Your mileage may vary.... that's just my opinion, again....
Insofar as chassis considerations are concerned (tranny gear ratios, and the poor (limited) final drive ratio selection), it seems to me that this "problem" hasn't manifested itself in ways that you can tell from here.
By that, I mean, if the performance-killing gearing is all that bad, WHY do turbo cars continue to domainte the #1 qualifying spot at many national events?
THEY DO!
Jim, you mentioned "the bottom line." You are also a very intellligent guy, yet, you read my post and pointed out the error in my assumption in the boost question (up, or down, with mods), and spoke of the gear ratio problems that FWD cars have that are not suffered by RWD cars, but never once mentioned the problem that was the crux of my post: IE: WHY do turbo cars, which make up probably less than two percent of the cars competing at national events, consistently nail down over twenty percent of the #1 qualifying slots, annually (and have for the last 4-5 years)???
THAT was the burning queston.... but, you chose to ignore it. At least you didn't dispute it. It's true.
It's very easy (though time-consuming) to access the archives at Fast News on the Summit website and look up the Final Qualifying for any national event within the last several years, and check to see who's the #1 qualifier at that race.. The Class will identify the car as a turbo car, if you are familiar at all with the type cars that run those classes (and, I know that you are.) I encourage anyone who doubts this scenario (the over 20-percent turbo qualifiers) to do their own investigation. If I am wrong, I will publicly apologize on this forum. I haven't investigated this year yet, since it's not over, yet.
In the spirit of fairness, how can you justify allowing ANY BOOST you can wring out of a turbo combination, when those forced induction cars are already garnering virtually ten times the number of #1 qualifying slots they would logically and numerically be entitled to, given ther "population" in Stock Eliminator????
Just tell me that, please.
On a lighter note; I go to breakfast with a bunch of Buick Grand National and T-Type racers (hobbyists), every Saturday. Many of them wear tee shirts that say:
"I KNEW THE LIGHT WAS GREEN; I WAS WAITING FOR THE BOOST!!!"
