Turbo is nice for power.... but.. it dimishes the overall length of motor life.

 

but what about the SS's that chevy has with a supercharger dose that make the motors life short also.

 

Its not the turbo that reduces the life of the engine. Its the abuse from the Idiot behind the wheel. My fried Oreo has a turbo on his truck. He hasnt hade any trouble from it. But he upgrade his computer, intake and exhaust. If have to make allowances for the added power. If you take a stock engine and add a turbo but dont improve exhaust and intake, you will have problems.

 

They never said the actual 1/4 mile time, though they did say it should be reduced by more than .4 due to the weight increase. I would love to see photos of the installation. Either air intake is from the back and a single tube under the car flows into the intake manifold, or there are 2 long hoses under the car-one feeding the turbo and the other returning the pressurized air. By the time it reaches the manifold, one would think it has lost some of it's boost. Where are the hoses run, and how are they kept cool? I believe a supercharger like on the Cobalt would be far simplier.

Besides, they tested the 2.2. What about the 2.4???

I do not understand why car companies all seem to turbo or super charge their smaller displacement or cylinder engines. Does it not make sense to take the highest HP motor to work on, since it already has the advantage of higher output???