Both do the same thing- compress the fuel/air "charge" as it enters the
combustion process, filling the cylinders more fully. The difference seems
to me to be the source that powers the mechanism, exhaust gas or direct
engine drive.
This is a gross simplification ignoring the fine points of relative
efficiency at different points on the power curve. I do not have the
expertise to discuss these points, and they vary with engine type, car
weight, type of competition, etc.
Jim Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-mgb-v8@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-mgb-v8@autox.team.net]On
Behalf Of David Kernberger
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 9:57 PM
To: mgb-v8@autox.team.net; buick-rover-v8@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: F-85 jetfire article
3/11/03
James,
If this is the magazine I think it is, the title is "Collectible
Automobile." I also saw the article and, for the most part, felt it was
well done. One interesting item was the contention of the author that a
turbocharger is NOT a supercharger. Anybody care to get into a discussion
on that issue?
Regards,
Dave Kernberger
--------------------------------------------------------
>Lists, I was in the grocery store the other day and spied a copy of a
>magazine, I think it was called classic automobile, that had a feature
>article on the Olds jetfire. There were, of course, plenty of pictures of
>the car, but there were 4 pictures that appeared to be factory pics of the
>engine mounted on an engine stand with all piping, etc intact. I have
never
>heard of this magazine before, but I thought I would pass it on for any
>historians out there.
>
>James Nazarian
>71 B tourer
>71 BGT V8
>85 Dodge Ram
///
/// mgb-v8@autox.team.net mailing list
/// Send admin requests to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// Send list postings to mgb-v8@autox.team.net
/// Edit your replies! If they include this trailer, they will NOT be sent.
///
|