Harlan

iTrader: (3)

So your saying don't turbocharge a Renesis because of the high compression? Also, I really don't know what will satisfy you in proving a design, technology in use (albeit not common) since the 60s on production cars isn't enough, and neither is stuff from Indy teams. Why not stick with the proven formula of add air and fuel, intercool and advance timing until boom then back it off on your rebuild because that's where most of our turbo builds go.

The poor design is the high compression engine. It was never meant to be turbocharged, and very few people have ever wrapped their heads around tuning it for FI. If water injection is just a "bandaid" and preturbo injection is as well, then I'm all for bandaids. An intercooler is fine too, but it's also a bandaid and it serves a DIFFERENT function.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

I haven't said anything about compression. The thread topic is about locating a turbo on top of a rotary engine. It's an extremely poor place to put it. It may stick up through a hood scoop or something, but it's still a fail IMO. It could be in the more traditional locations and likely function better without unnecessary issues.

Compression, meth injection, etc. all still apply regardless of the turbo location. They're not really relevant in the discussion about where the turbo is positioned. It's not even a Renesis engine.

Harlan

iTrader: (3)

I agree on top is a poor place to mount a turbo, side mount is best but no way we can fit it, and bottom mount is restricted in size but workable. It's all about what fits individual goals.

Rear mount is a HORRIBLE place to mount a turbo.