flynfrog wrote:SteveRacer wrote:
Someone stated that an ICE is going to lose 40% power from top to bottom of the mountain. I bet that number is for a non-turbo motor as a turbo will lose a significantly smaller amount.
40% is to sea level and yes a turbo helps but there isn't much O2 up there.
Actually SR is correct..
Indeed, it was almost a century ago that Pikes Peak was selected for/as a high altitude base by Stanford Moss
for carrying out field research - & developing early ICE aero-engine turbo-charger tech..
The self compensation of compressor/turbine pressures over the atmospheric altitude gradient was seen
as advantageous compared to fixed mechanical supercharging ratios.
Of course, the primary basis was to maintain sea-level engine power at altitude by turbo compensation,
rather than over-boosting, but the principles still apply..
http://www.enginehistory.org/Piston/Int ... Cdev.shtml