Why turbo normalizer?

The difference in engine life is that the turbonormalized engine is
producing more average power over its lifespan. The only time that a
normally aspirated engine pruduces rated power is on takeoff at sea level, a
rare occurance. The turbonormalized engine produces full power a lot of the
time and at higher altitudes where the engine doesn't cool as well.
Additionally the turbonormalized engine will run hotter since the inlet air
is always going to be hotter (even with an intercooler)..

Mike
MU-2



"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
If differential pressure it now what wears out cylinders in turbo
engines are you implying that its over boosting? In the Mooney
community is mostly agreed that a 201 (non turbo) will give you twice
the cylinder life as a 231 (turbo). Other wear factors (heat, less air
over the cylinders) are the same for turbo-norm vs. regular turbo. The
only difference I can see is the "idiot" difference of accidently over
boosting.

That is my point. There does not appear to be any reason for anyone to
ever buy a turbo norm system. The engine runs just as hot/hard, etc at
altitude with a turbo norm vs. a regular turbo. The turbo norm
companies try to trick people into thinking that putting a turbo norm
on your engine will not wear your engine any more than normal asp
because you never get over 30". However, the argument appears to be
worthless, in truth a turbo norm wears out your engine just as fast as
a regular turbo.

-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
That is my point.

Huh?

There does not appear to be any reason for anyone to
ever buy a turbo norm system.

Why not?

The engine runs just as hot/hard, etc at
altitude with a turbo norm vs. a regular turbo.

No, it does not. With a regular turbo, the engine would run even hotter and
harder at altitude.

The turbo norm
companies try to trick people into thinking that putting a turbo norm
on your engine will not wear your engine any more than normal asp
because you never get over 30".

Which "turbo norm company" has made that statement?

However, the argument appears to be
worthless, in truth a turbo norm wears out your engine just as fast as
a regular turbo.

No, it doesn't.

I find it bizarre that you are complaining about statements made regarding
turbo-normalization compared to normally aspirated, but keep insisting on
making (incorrect) comparisons between turbo-normalization and regular
turbo-charging. The two are not relevant to each other.

If there's a specific statement from a "turbo norm company" that you take
issue with, let's see that statement and we can talk about it. Until then,
your inability to express your own discontent with any sort of consistency
makes it hard to even understand what your complaint is, never mind help you
understand what's wrong about it (assuming there is something wrong with
it).

Pete

"Why Choose a Turbo-Normalizer
Instead of a Turbo-Booster?"

http://www.m-20turbos.com/choose.htm

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
"Why Choose a Turbo-Normalizer
Instead of a Turbo-Booster?"

http://www.m-20turbos.com/choose.htm

With which statement on that page do you take issue?

Note that they are talking about using inter-cooling and "after-cooling"
(not sure what that is). For sure, inter-cooling can do a lot to address
the issue of higher operating temperatures, by counter-acting the
temperature rise that occurs due to compression.

Regardless, unless you are trying to say that you disagree with the entire
page, providing just the link really does very little to explain to us what
it is you have trouble with. I don't see anything obviously wrong with the
statements made on the page (though I can't comment on some of them, such as
the legalities of turbo-boosting the particular installations they are
talking about for example).

Pete

On 18 May 2005 19:52:12 -0700, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:

"Why Choose a Turbo-Normalizer
Instead of a Turbo-Booster?"

http://www.m-20turbos.com/choose.htm

Simple really.

I could add a turbo normalizer to my engine while changing little
else.

If I added a turbocharger, I'd have to put in lower compression
pistons, but depending on the STC could get more HP.

IOW, you can basically add the turbonormalizer to almost any engine,
but you can't do that with a turbocharger. If you limit the boost of
the turbocharger you have just turned it into a turbonormalizer.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
That is my point. There does not appear to be any reason for anyone to
ever buy a turbo norm system. The engine runs just as hot/hard, etc at
altitude with a turbo norm vs. a regular turbo. The turbo norm
companies try to trick people into thinking that putting a turbo norm
on your engine will not wear your engine any more than normal asp
because you never get over 30". However, the argument appears to be
worthless, in truth a turbo norm wears out your engine just as fast as
a regular turbo.

-Robert

Not true, if the engine is cooled with adequite airflow. If you have an
instalation that is marginal at cooling a non turbo instalation at altitude,
and you put a turbo norm engine in it, yes, it will overheat and wear out.
Put enough air across it, and it will stay cool at 65%. There are all kinds
of flying examples to support this.

What is the difference at flying a well cooled turbo norm engine at 12,000ft
at 65%, and at flying it at sea level and 65%, if you keep it cool ?
--
Jim in NC

Ok, so the turbo norm kits include a cooling system better than the
system used on regular turbos. I did not know that.

In article , Morgans wrote:
Not true, if the engine is cooled with adequite airflow.

And possibly a better cooling system.

I like flying a friend's Europa. It is turboccharged (i.e. turbo
supercharged, not turbo normalized), and has thermostatically controlled
liquid cooling, and automatic turbo control. Additionally, the constant
speed prop is set by putting the selector in 'Take off', 'Climb',
'Cruise' (you can also switch it into a simple variable pitch prop, or
make it constantly variable, or feather it).

Cruise is simply a matter of putting the prop switch into the 'Cruise'
detent and setting the MP at your desired power setting. Mixture control
is automatic, too. That's the way to fly.

I've never seen that engine run particularly hot.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
That is my point. There does not appear to be any reason for anyone to
ever buy a turbo norm system. The engine runs just as hot/hard, etc at
altitude with a turbo norm vs. a regular turbo.

True, but you don't kick a turbo norm's ass running it at 40 inches at sea
level, like you run a regular turbo. Ultimate HP production is the killer,
if they both are kept cool.
--
Jim in NC