Pointless turbos?

[Hazell B]

Is there such a thing as a pointless turbo?

Few months ago the turbo on our old Land Rover 2.5TD started to cough stuff out, so a Land Rover mechanic said we should simply take it off and we'd notice no difference. He said lots of people do it.

So what was the point in it being a turbo vehicle in the first place? :confused:

[Woodeye]

There cannot be such thing as pointless turbo. My car doesn't have one, but I'm sure it still would need it... ;)

[bowler]

change your mechanic

[Rollo]

I've always though that pretty well much any turbocharger fitted by Saab has been pretty well useless for British and Australian roads when you consider that in the manual it talks of a shading in period that starts at 68mph.
This means that in the UK you get a range of 2mph of actual use out of it; in Oz it's less than 0.3mph.

It's all rather a bit silly to fit something for those markets when they actually require you to break the law to get any real use out of them.

Wouldn't the natural solution be to install a slightly bigger engine and give us the extra torque?

[tannat]

In a petrol application, turbos provide additional power at higher revs.

Yours is a diesel application, Hazell, so I'm uncertain of the benefit, but I know for a fact that practically all large commercial trucks have massive turbos in conjunction with a diesel application. There is a 'raison d'etre' for the turbo, perhaps exactly the same as with petrol engines (more power at high revs, which isn't too high with diesels).

Perhaps it is better stated, not exactly pointless, but you can get by without it.

Unlike wine in my diet. Comsumption may be pointles, but I can't get by without it.. :D

[Daniel]

change your mechanic

This man speaks the truth!!!!

[Hazell B]

change your mechanic

He saved us over £450.
He's a specialist.
He hasn't ever charged me a single penny.

Why in hell's teeth would I be stupid enough to change him? :rolleyes:

[speedy king]

Ermmmm i don't quite know the reason of this theory....

I have a 1.9 D-Turbo 306, the Turbo kicks in at 2,500 revs and i can say that if you use your gears correctly it makes a heck of a difference to the sluggish 1.9 Diesel, you can certainly feel the bite. With the Turbo it's as quick as the 1.6 petrol and a 2.0HDI Citroen C5, the standard 1.9 Diesle is more like a 1.4 petrol though...if not worse :s

Out of interest Hazell have you taken it off? If you do let me know what you think, just very curious on this topic...

[agwiii]

Is there such a thing as a pointless turbo?

Few months ago the turbo on our old Land Rover 2.5TD started to cough stuff out, so a Land Rover mechanic said we should simply take it off and we'd notice no difference. He said lots of people do it.

So what was the point in it being a turbo vehicle in the first place? :confused:

Can you take it off, and will the engine run? Yes. Will you notice a difference? Yes.

Diesels are throttled, and depend upon air volume. Gasoline engines have an accelerator, and typically have special jets, accelerators pumps, or enrichment devices. Increasing the fuel in a gasoline engine will cause it to accelerate. The similar ploy on a diesel will not have the same effect - it requires the air. The turbosupercharger provides that air and typically responds to the throttle position. Diesels -- other than the modern Benz diesels, are lower speed, higher torque, lower horsepower engines. Over the years, I had Mercedes 300-SDs. (Type 116, 126, and 140) They were generally driven with the throttle WFO except at cruise and they returned a nice 28 mpg at 75 mph. Before Mercedes fitted the turbo to their diesel (first the 5 cylinder 3.0 L, and then the 6 cylinder 3.0L.) they could not have powered the big S-class with a diesel. The turbo made it work. I also had a 300D turbodiesel, but that was the E-class and a different story.

I'm very skeptical about removing the turbo on your Rover. Get a second opinion.

[schmenke]

Hazell, I guess your mechanic figures that, in typical daily driving, you won't be revving the engine at sufficiently high rpm's for the turbo to provide any significant benefit. :mark:

[Hazell B]

Out of interest Hazell have you taken it off? If you do let me know what you think, just very curious on this topic...


We didn't take it off, in the end. We already had it booked into an auction and the advice was taken simply so that we weren't selling anything with dodgy bits on it. The auctioneer said he'd rather simply say that it had a failing turbo and leave the new owner to decide what they wanted to do - remove or replace.

Schmenke, that's what I had guessed. The turbo never made a sound while we used it normally (except the day I tried racing with it and blew the damned thing :p : ) and we were told they only really work when towing or thrashing. You don't thrash a Land Rover 110 pick up very often, there's no point! :laugh:

[speedy king]

Hmmmm only work while thrashing :s Explains why i say i can feel its effect quite well :s :(

[Hazell B]

I think the 'only works while thrashing' bit is more about it being a 15 foot long lumbering Landie :p :
There's no point in thrashing them, they don't go any faster :mark:

[speedy king]

...just make that whole in your pocket and fuel tank that bit bigger...?

I sware my car is ment to do 500 miles to a tank...it dosent feel it :s I need to learn to drive in economy mode, lucky i don't have a petrol.

[jim mcglinchey]

I was driving a Renault Master van 2.2 TD and Id forgotten how annoying a turbo set up can be. Theres hardly any power before the turbo comes on and you have to be in one gear lower than you would be in a normally aspirated, if you're just driving round town keeping to the speed limits. Great for the motorway but a pain about town.

[janneppi]

I've driven a MB Sprinter with a 3 litre turbodiesel engine, in fifth gear turbo seems to kick in around 80kph, it pulls well enough under it though, mind you i usually drive it with light loads.

[donKey jote]

I had a turbo removed from a Peugeot 505 when I was in England and I didn't notice a thing except reduced oil consumption and smoke output. :)

(The turbo was coked and hadn't worked for donkey's anyway :p : )

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/16/16_3_166.gif

[Daniel]

The car was still really ugly though Donks? :mark:

[donKey jote]

I thought it was quite nice, unlike the dog of the 504 :p :

[Daniel]

You know nuffing :p

505 was just an overweight ugly 504 ;)