Date: 1 Feb 2005 14:57:42 GMT From: Dave Hinz <DaveHinznospamcop.net> Subject: Re: Saab newbie
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:39:38 GMT, Valued Customer <nonospaml.com> wrote: > On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:37:49 -0700, "Zon" <johnnospamy-to-group.please> > wrote: > >> >>"Valued Customer" <nonospaml.com> wrote in message >>news:b9tov0lo13bm7m1dpst8for72gq5kjfr50nospamcom... >>> If you live above 5000' then 91 is the best octane you can find! >> >>That's right. The excuse is that octane requirement is lower, because of >>less dense air. And that is true, for normally aspirated engines. >>Unfortunately, it does not apply to turbos, as far as I have understood. > > Why wouldn't it apply to turbos? Because the turbo will boost until it gets the air density it wants, regardless of local atmospheric pressure. With naturally aspirated, you get what you get and that's all there is. So, a turbo with an air mass meter will be even more dramatically better than a naturally aspirated model, at altitude. Dave Hinz
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
