3800's And Elevation
05-16-2005, 01:34 AM
#22
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Farmington, Minnesota =MWBF '05 SURVIVOR= =CEBF '06 SURVIVOR= =August '06 COTM=
Posts: 9,130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BonEvilSSEi
AMANTIUM......Wolverine balls!
05-16-2005, 08:09 AM
#23
DINOSAURUS BOOSTUS
Expert Gearhead
Originally Posted by LakevilleSSEi
Originally Posted by BonEvilSSEi
AMANTIUM......Wolverine balls!
05-16-2005, 10:28 AM
#24
Senior Member
Posts like a Supercharger
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Menomonee Falls, WI
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
will and the others are right, forced induction is the way to go.........general aviation aircraft are turbo charged, not for increased power at sea level, but to maintian the engine'* preformacea at altitude by maintinaing manifold pressure, the added preformance at sea level is just a postivie side affect 
aircraft which are turbo or superchaged, have a higher service celing than normaly asperated engines...... an automotive engine would benfit the same
as you go up in altitude, the mixture with no adjustment, would evnetyally richen out not lean out , because of the abundance of fuel....... and lack of dense air....... richening will only foul the pugs or ruin the O2 sensor, or the cat converter.....it would not burn the heads....due to a lean condition.
nicky
aircraft which are turbo or superchaged, have a higher service celing than normaly asperated engines...... an automotive engine would benfit the sameas you go up in altitude, the mixture with no adjustment, would evnetyally richen out not lean out , because of the abundance of fuel....... and lack of dense air....... richening will only foul the pugs or ruin the O2 sensor, or the cat converter.....it would not burn the heads....due to a lean condition.
nicky
05-16-2005, 10:43 AM
#25
DINOSAURUS BOOSTUS
Expert Gearhead
Originally Posted by neekolas
as you go up in altitude, the mixture with no adjustment, would evnetyally richen out not lean out , because of the abundance of fuel
So maybe the PCM isn't able to compensate too much either way.
05-16-2005, 11:18 AM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
These cars are a wee bit diffrent... The 96 and later NA'd bonnie will be better than my 95 simply due to the MAP sensor.... The 87-95 NA'd does not have a Map sensor... It simply uses the MAF to measure the density of the air.... Bla Bla Bla....
Let me tell you at 4000Ft my 95 has a hard time... It will still go, but it struggles...
If you had an SC'd 3800 at 4000 Ft the struggle would be nowhere near as bad...
I lived in colorado for a long time, 6200 Ft elevation in the area of Colorado Spings I lived in.... That made cars seem weak... Get them down to seal level and all of the sudden its a powerhouse.... By the time you got to 10000 ft you might just as well be pulling a flintstone....lol... Ok so I went a littler overboard with my analogy
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Let me tell you at 4000Ft my 95 has a hard time... It will still go, but it struggles...
If you had an SC'd 3800 at 4000 Ft the struggle would be nowhere near as bad...
I lived in colorado for a long time, 6200 Ft elevation in the area of Colorado Spings I lived in.... That made cars seem weak... Get them down to seal level and all of the sudden its a powerhouse.... By the time you got to 10000 ft you might just as well be pulling a flintstone....lol... Ok so I went a littler overboard with my analogy
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
05-16-2005, 02:20 PM
#28
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Hans
Cosistantly get 30mpg highway on a 94 (l27 n/a 3800)
got 29mpg on my old LG3 on the highway.
4000 - 6000 feet
got 29mpg on my old LG3 on the highway.
4000 - 6000 feet
I did pretty good through the mountains too... 29 at the worst point.... and 33 was the best... Nice cool crisp air...
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
05-16-2005, 03:18 PM
#29
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Originally Posted by jr's3800
Originally Posted by Hans
Cosistantly get 30mpg highway on a 94 (l27 n/a 3800)
got 29mpg on my old LG3 on the highway.
4000 - 6000 feet
got 29mpg on my old LG3 on the highway.
4000 - 6000 feet
I did pretty good through the mountains too... 29 at the worst point.... and 33 was the best... Nice cool crisp air...
Total Est. Time: 39 hours, 54 minutes Total Est. Distance: 2586.55 miles
a little drive.
but your hp advantage and steeper ratio would probably kill me, torque is close enough
05-16-2005, 06:55 PM
#30
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, if you are driving an N/A car, you are definitely going to notice power loss wehn you get up into seriously high elevation like Pike'* Peak or the Divide, and you'll also notice fuel mileage decreasing.
A boosted vehicle won't suffer nearly as much, and you will notice very little in the way of power-loss until extreme altitudes, and not a whole lot even then.
A boosted vehicle won't suffer nearly as much, and you will notice very little in the way of power-loss until extreme altitudes, and not a whole lot even then.