Fill me in on the turbochargers

[wolc123]

Actually, emissions are improved in the simplest, easiest to understand way possible. Any job requires a fixed amount of work to complete. The power gain from the turbo allows the same size engine to complete more work in less time and using less fuel. The less time spent burning diesel fuel, the lower the emissions. The amount of emissions produced is directly proportional to the amount of fuel used. Engine X may take 13 hours to plow a field, burning 10 gal of diesel while engine T might do it in 10 hours, burning 8 gallons. The ground speed might be the same, but the 65 hp would handle one more plow bottom, giving it a wider cut. Total emissions produced doing the job therefore would be about 20% less with engine T, as would the fuel bill, plus the "extra" time could certainly be well spent on most farms. Depending on fuel usage, this pretty much makes this a "no-brainer" when it comes to larger tractors doing "real" work. If fuel was still under $1.00/gal, turbos would not be so popular today.

 

[dave1949]

Interesting thread.

I've often wondered about turbo vs no turbo when looking at some of the Kubota line-up. I often notice engines with the same displacement used in two hp offerings, the higher hp using a turbo.

For what I do with a tractor, which includes a lot of putting around with very light engine loads, it sounds like the turbo version may not be the best choice.

 

[the old grind]

Have to remember that diesels have no throttle plate like gas engines, and there is no such thing as an air/fuel ratio with them. There is only so much power to be harnessed from burning a set quantity of fuel whether gasoline or diesel, which provides more NRG/volume.

Turbos are a part of engine tuning, and if they're to be compared to gasoline engines it's that they make more horsepower by burning more fuel. There is no free lunch or free hp to be gained, only more hp per cubic inch and/or reduced emissions within a certain rpm range thru improved flow, etc.

A diesel tractor's 'throttle' is not like a car's, ie not a throttle in the familiar sense. It adjusts the governor, which regulates fuel to maintain rpm, such as adding more as load increases or reducing to maintain idle speed when load is relieved. If turbos were a magic ticket to better efficiency they would be on a lot more engines than they are already. Does anyone think that NA engines aren't tuned by design for the best compromise of power and efficiency when not turbo'd??

 

[ShowroomShine]

The Deere system wasn't just thrown onto an existing design to increase power, it was a complete package put together with the intent to lower emissions.

What ShowroomShine was saying is that if you take engine X that makes 50hp, and you throw a turbo on it to get 65hp, the emissions won't be improved in any significant way.

:thumbsup:

 

[jeffgreef]

Well guys, as if it matters at this point, you've convinced me not to get a turbo. I generally prefer simpler over more complicated, and a turbo is just more stuff to go wrong. Sounds like there aren't many in my intended size range anyway. Now I'm thinking about a Yanmar grey market unit from Fredericks of Alabama, partly because those older units from the 1980s are dirt simple and rock solid.

Thanks for all your input and experience. You guys have a wealth of info to share.

 

[nova3930]

Now I'm thinking about a Yanmar grey market unit from Fredericks of Alabama, partly because those older units from the 1980s are dirt simple and rock solid.

I can't tell you if they're any good or not but Fredericks sure does have a lot of 'em on the lot over there. Pretty neat dealer setup they've got too. Worth going in to look even if you don't buy anything...

 

[downslope]

Tell that to Deere then. The 5045E, 5055E, 5045D and 5055E have turbos strictly for emissions reasons. Heck, the 5045E/D make less power then their older N/A counterparts.

Do these Deere 5045E, 5055E, 5045D and 5055E meet Tier4 emissions standard in their current state or will JD have to be upgrading them soon?

 

[Verticaltrx]

I honestly don't know, ours is a few years old now. I'm betting they are because I haven't seen anything new on the horizon in that size. I do know that the newest ones seem to be 'leaned out' even more than the one we have, I think the air intake preheater comes standard now to get them to start in the cold. The 5045E is probably our hardest starting tractor in the winter.

 

[RollingsFarms]

My 5203 had pretty bad turbo lag and I never really saw much benefit for having a turbo on it. Don't get me wrong, the power was there, it just had serious lag. Now, my 5325 also has a turbo but it doesn't have near the turbo lag my 5203 had. The 5325 rolls the black smoke and takes off when you need it to, the 5203 barely smoked and took longer time to get up and go it seemed like.

 

[Verticaltrx]

My 5203 had pretty bad turbo lag and I never really saw much benefit for having a turbo on it. Don't get me wrong, the power was there, it just had serious lag. Now, my 5325 also has a turbo but it doesn't have near the turbo lag my 5203 had. The 5325 rolls the black smoke and takes off when you need it to, the 5203 barely smoked and took longer time to get up and go it seemed like.

Interesting, I had forgotten that they made those changes to the 5x03 series partway through the production run. Our 5203 was one of the earlier ones (black undercarriage) and it does not have a turbo. Those symptoms sounds a lot like our 5045E, very sluggish. I guess that's what happens when you put turbo on a motor that doesn't need it.