• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

 

Turbo vs no turbo

31
3
8
Location
Bullhead City, Arizona
Please forgive my ignorance on this. It's been a long time since I've owned a Duece. My last Duece was a White multi fuel with a turbo. I'm looking at buying a Duece locally that has the White multi fuel without a turbo. I thought all Dueces had turbos.
Is there a big performance difference between the 2 engines??
Thank you for any all info!!!
 

canadacountry

Well-known member
109
263
63
Location
Canada
As far as I recall the turbo on that particular engine was simply to clean up emission alone more or less, it didn't exactly have a large (relatively speaking) net performance gain in that respect so .. as one always say: take this tidbit with your own grain of salt
 

HDN

Well-known member
1,966
4,732
113
Location
Finger Lakes Region, NY
@HDN and others, this enough oily smoke for an alco? https://flic.kr/p/bsbyJa
When I was a kid my dad was a freight train conductor and engineer for a short line. They had a few RS-11s they ran and they smoked like that! They were also turbocharged and very fuel efficient - there's a reason Fairbanks-Morse still builds the 251 diesel engines!
 

biscuitwhistler37

Well-known member
236
723
93
Location
Michigan
From what I understand, there's only a performance difference when you turn the fuel up and dial the truck in, factory army tune is 5psi, air force/navy tune is 7psi (not sure why they're different). When tuned properly to 12psi, there is a very noticeable difference, although exhaust temp will run into the 1200s. Like stated, the turbo was just to clean the smoke trail up, not go slow faster.
 

Adrok

Member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
56
85
18
Location
Rochester NY
Having driven both, when they both are running PROPERLY ( a big IF, lol ) the turbo would get up to speed sooner. At times it 'felt' like it would handle a trailer and load with more confidence. BOTH handle a world better than the straight 6 gas job ( ours was a 52 automatic ).

I am a big fan of the non-turbo. Any perception of improved performance has never been enough to outweigh the simplicity and confidence of maintaining and running the non-turbo.
That said, I have never done an empirical test to measure and check performance other than acceleration with a load.
 

canadacountry

Well-known member
109
263
63
Location
Canada
not to be too offtopic here but @HDN right now I somewhat recall these two (theres more but my memory is a little stuck up tonight) particular interesting older locomotive quirks and maybe these are a bit related to certain military trucks too;

long inline engine that were known a few times to snap the crankshaft and still just keep running like as if nothing had happened (well, aside to that since the generator was only at one end of the block there was less actual power to the traction motors themselves..)
I think this was Baldwin

the flexicoil trucks on some smaller Alco units were really flexible to the point that even at least one engineer quipped they would watch things literally just fall off while the locomotive slowly bounced over really bad twisted and rusty rails
 

87cr250r

Well-known member
1,202
1,880
113
Location
Rodeo, Ca
Woodward PG governors can be ordered with a manifold pressure dependent rack limit to prevent smoking like the trains in the pictures. These systems were often bypassed. The 2-stroke EMD engines didn't require them.
 

canadacountry

Well-known member
109
263
63
Location
Canada
and hey @NY Tom don't forget to include the PRR GG1 as a 'honourable steam-era electric locomotive' too if you would like..or to recount;
body and/or chassis was built at a shop that did steam locomotive tenders,
spoked wheels just like steam locomotives,
cast iron bell,
hot in summer and cold in winter..hmm sounds very familiar,
spigot-worked sanders,
name corresponded to a steam locomotive in PRR terms (as a G class was a 4-6-0),
engineer had a similar view alike to from a steam locomotive (abit flat instead of round side to look past),
originally they had steamheat boilers built in cue finding a few action photos of a GG1 literally blowing a big blast of white smoke mid-roof (as obviously they had to be able to handle the same coaches that were scheduled behind K4 steamers etc),
the very original one (numbered 4800 yeah) was assembled with rivets like you'll had expected of a steam locomotive builder at the time too

[edit: and sorry to keep going offtopic here but umm..maybe its my fault? heh!]
 
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website like our supporting vendors. Their ads help keep Steel Soldiers going. Please consider disabling your ad blockers for the site. Thanks!

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks