The choice of the best engine between atmospheric and turbocharged
Very topical issue around which the set of disputes and talk goes. Some claim that nothing is better than the checked classics in the form of atmospheric internal combustion engine is not present. Others are sure, atmospheric already of the past, and the present and the future behind turbocharged motors. Choosing between the atmospheric engine and as turbocharged, it is necessary to rely not on opinions of other motorists, and own preferences, requirements and opportunities. Engines really different in design, characteristics and opportunities. But it does not do some of them unambiguously to the best, and another by the worst. It is necessary to sort features of motors that will allow to draw the corresponding conclusions.
All heard features of atmospheric internal combustion engine about atmospheric motors, but it is precisely clear to not everyone that it means. In classical understanding it is the gasoline engine of internal combustion which design provides pumping of air from the environment. Special carburetor buckets are for this purpose used. When the oxygen getting in the motor mixes up with the fuel particles sprayed by spray jets the so-called fuel blend is formed. It is necessary for burning in combustion chamber. Work as atmospheric as follows: from the atmosphere there is air in draft process; fuel and oxygen mix up in necessary proportions (usually 1 to 14); the mixture of fuel and oxygen arrives in combustion chamber; volume extends; there is pressure upon the bucket; rotation is transferred to the crankshaft; the car goes. And in case with atmospheric motors process of suction or in draft of air arises because the relieved tension in intake manifold is created. When choosing
atmospheric or the turbocharged engine superfluous will not know about the principles of their work and design features. It will allow to understand in advance what possible problems you will face and also how difficult will be repair in this or that situation.
As we compare characteristic differences of the turbine motor atmospheric and the turbo engine, it is necessary to learn also about features of internal combustion engine equipped with turbo-supercharging. It is known that the quality of combustion of automobile fuel and amount of the developed energy for pushing of buckets depend on that how many air moves in cylinders. Than bigger volume has internal combustion engine, it is more than the power of subjects and torque the atmospheric is capable to give out. So we have approached in what the main difference of the atmospheric and turbocharged engine. The turbo differs in what is equipped with the system of compulsory retraction of air which happens under pressure. The atmospheric of such system differing from it has no. Increase in power at preservation of rather small engine displacement was the main objective during creation of turbo. On atmospheric internal combustion engine it directly depends on the motor volume as only this way it is possible to increase power and to increase torque. Turbocharged engines, using compulsory pumping, have managed to do without increase in volume.
It is important to consider that atmospheric motors differ in the increased reliability and resistance to detonation. Qualitative and effective greases and also competent resetting of gas distribution allow to make the most exact injection of fuel blend. Gradual development has allowed to improve the efficiency of atmospheric . But all the same they concede to turbine motors in power proportion component per engine unit of volume. To improve technical parameters, for atmospheric have begun to increase the sizes and quantity of cylinders. But such measures cannot be considered effective and expedient as at the expense of it design weight considerably increases. The turbo allows to receive high power without accumulation of operating volumes.
Strong and weaknesses of atmospheric internal combustion engine the Atmospheric engine exists for a long time, and here his turbocharged competitor has appeared relatively recently. In many respects because of it motorists do not even try to look for difference and any key distinction, and simply choose what they trust to. Nobody argues that
atmospheric really have a number of advantages. Of them are main: long term of operation; the simplified design and the simple device; available repair; possibility of service by own hands; adequate oil consumption; lack of global problems during operation. Such motors are capable to overcome huge number of kilometers. Their run at adequate leaving and operation passes for 1 million. It is necessary to change oils only in time, to carry out the correct leaving and in due time to remove old filters. At such relation even through 500 – 600 thousand kilometers of run of any major repair it is not necessary to think. Details and knots of the engine of atmospheric type are very steady against wear, they long time keep the working capacity. The most reliable atmospheric are capable to endure not one body. That is there were cases when the engine was removed from one car and put on another as the body has already developed the resource, and there is no internal combustion engine.
The non-failure operation and simplicity of operation are the main trumps of atmospheric engines. They do not demand the most quality fuel or unique high-quality greases. Even if at operation of the car on bad fuel something fails, to return the atmospheric to life will not make big work. More serious requirements are imposed concerning the competent choice and use of engine oil. Usually it is changed through 15 – 20 thousand kilometers of run. For atmospheric the quality synthetics and semi-synthetics conforming to requirements of car maker is considered optimal solution. Also the fact that in atmospheric internal combustion engine use of mineral oils in the absence of synthetic or semi-synthetic analog is quite allowed is interesting. With engines on which there is turbo compressor such number will not pass. Mineral water in them cannot be filled in categorically. At the expense of the simplified design great number of car owners independently are engaged in scheduled and repair work at themselves in garage. And if it was necessary to address to car service, be sure that services HUNDRED during the work with the atmospheric motor will be rendered much cheaper, than with the turbine motor at similar failures. But you should not think that atmospheric engines so ideal, and they have no shortcomings. If to compare to turbocharged power units, then the following weaknesses are shown: rather impressive weight of all design; lower parameters of power; smaller torque; lack of possibility of work under big loading; problems with operation in the conditions of big height (there the discharged air because of what oxygen badly gets into cylinders); on small turns there is not always effective absorption therefore the engine behaves unstably. World auto production knows set of examples of how the companies create high-power engines without use of turbo compressor. The turbine is not always obligatory element for creation of really productive engine.
Plus and minuses of turbine motors Comparing the turbocharged and atmospheric motor, it is necessary to consider advantages and shortcomings of engines where the turbo compressor is used. The turbo charged power unit has indisputable advantages before atmospheric. But in some parameters it considerably concedes to the competitor. Consider that when comparing the turbocharged and atmospheric engine you need to draw own conclusions. Everyone waits from the acquired car of certain characteristics and opportunities. Some need measured and economic driving. Others want to receive the maximum speed and adrenaline. In many respects depends on it what engine specifically for you will be the best. The main advantages at internal combustion engine with turbo compressor only 3. Namely: the raised power indicators; excellent torque; small noise level (at the adequate exhaust system). If to speak especially about quantity, then superiority on advantages is obvious on the party of atmospheric. But if you want to receive high power level, then all advantages of the atmospheric motor will not play special significant role any more.
Besides advantages, turbine motors have shortcomings. They are shown in the following: Requirements to qualitative characteristics of working liquids. If you have car with turbo compressor, then it is necessary to choose only the most quality engine oils, to refuel at expensive gas stations. It involves the raised maintenance costs and operation of the car with the turbocharged power unit. Work at the increased temperatures. In such service conditions life cycle of internal combustion engine gradually begins to be reduced. If to be more precisely, the fuel and oil filters wear out quicker. It is necessary to watch the level and condition of lubricant liquids, degree of impurity of filters regularly. Otherwise it is possible to miss the moment when the compressor or other expensive elements of the engine fail. Fuel consumption. It is necessary to pay for the high power and the increased torque with big expense. Even at measured driving consumption will be all the same higher, than at atmospheric with similar volume of the power plant. Operational term. To meet the turbine motor the million plus city will hardly turn out. Turbocharged engines are not calculated on long operation. If to compare to atmospheric motors, at turbo compressor installations the motor potential is much less. Repair and service. As it was already told earlier, at approximately similar failures the cost of repair of the engine with turbo compressor will be much higher. The same can be told about routine maintenance. Expendables for turbo engines are more expensive. Experts. As the era of turbocharged engines is only at the dawn, it is rather difficult to find competent experts in our country. Not each mechanic even from large car service is ready to undertake repair of turbo compressor. Work with such knot demands certain knowledge and skills. Handicraft repair often leads to even more sad consequences. Agree that the list of shortcomings really impressive. Turbine motors require to themselves special attention, careful leaving and impressive financial expenses. But even under such circumstances it will not be possible to prolong considerably motor potential and to reach values of ordinary classical atmospheric engines.
We sum up the results We have considered the turbocharged and atmospheric engine. Therefore we can draw certain conclusions concerning what of them is better. The turbine is good for those who need high performance, the increased capacities, excellent dynamics and speed. But it is necessary to pay for all this. If you are ready, and the listed shortcomings do not stop you, then really optimum choice will become concrete for you the turbocharged power unit. Atmospheric more adequate in respect of fuel consumption and oil, leaving, service and costs of operation, than the turbocharged engine. But also atmospheric cursors can be rather productive and powerful that is visually proved in BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Infiniti, Porsche and Lexus car makers. To tell unambiguously that better, it is impossible. It is too individual question which directly depends on requirements and opportunities of each certain motorist. Those to whom are necessary reliability the profitability and adequate cost of operation, but who does not pursue high rates of power and torque, stop the choice on atmospheric power units. If main goal of acquisition of the machine is obtaining excellent dynamics and the maximum speeds, despite everything, then you unambiguously will suit the engine with turbo compressor.
Each of the considered motors possesses strong and weaknesses. It is necessary to place competently priorities, to understand the purposes and tasks which are set for the car and also to be realistic about own opportunities. Only this way you decide whether it is worth buying the car with turbo compressor, or to stop on the checked classical atmospheric engine.