What are your thoughts on this. (On a New Holland T9050/ Case Steiger stx 485) =485 hp


http://www.newholland.com/h4/product...000Turbo%2Ejpg

How can this make more then 5 crank hp?

I figure it will be a warranty nightmare at best

 

Turbocompounding has been around for years. It does add efficiency. You see they are only claiming 8% for it.

 

Case Internation has a 10 year 10,000 hr warranty you can bet it was tested and built to last

 

That isnt compound. The intake air only goes through one turbo. The exhaust gas is routed through a secondary "turbo" that is turning it into a mechanical advantage of sorts, by way of the gear on the back of the second turbine.

 

Turbocompounding has been used in Europe for years with good results...Why not over here. Everything I've read says it's mostly trouble free, and if it picks up efficiency, what the heck?

Pretty technical this morning, ain't I??
Chris

 

Cummins has ventured into it a long time ago but my best guess is that that extra power is not worth the cost of the added turbo/engineering/production costs.

 

Wouldnt that extra energy be used a little more efficiently in a actual compound turbo setup.

At least you can still get a Cummins QSX in the stx 535

 

It's not compound turbos, but it IS turbocompounding.

 

No, to be compounding it has to compound something, preferably intake air. It doesnt even qualify as a twin set. If anything it could be called a scavenger, maybe?

 

I believe even the Titanic was turbocompounded on its steam engines.

Read this...amongst others.

http://www.bowmanpower.co.uk/Turbocompounding.html

http://www.holset.co.uk/files/2_5_1_...d%20system.php

http://www.histomobile.com/histomob/tech/2/113.htm

 

I tried to tell ya'll earlier...

---

https://www.dieseltruckresource.com/...d.php?t=123953

 

Seems like a lot of $ to get a small return.

I stand corrected, Wannadiesel. Guess there is a difference between compounding turbos and turbo compounding.