NA or Turbo

[SP]

I was interested in seeing how people feel about NA vs Turbo. It seems that both options can produce very similar HP numbers in the top engines from the competition. From what I understand, Cornell had the highest turbocharged engine, and Rutgers had the highest non turbo engine. They both had very similar HP numbers, within only a few of each other, so i ask which is better, Turbo or NA?

[SP]

I was interested in seeing how people feel about NA vs Turbo. It seems that both options can produce very similar HP numbers in the top engines from the competition. From what I understand, Cornell had the highest turbocharged engine, and Rutgers had the highest non turbo engine. They both had very similar HP numbers, within only a few of each other, so i ask which is better, Turbo or NA?

[JWilson]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SP:
... so i ask which is better, Turbo or NA?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Turbocharged engines are great if they are designed well.. you have to make sure that the turbocharger performs optimally in the range of operation of interest to you, i.e. low, medium or high rpm ranges, you have to strike a good balance, and when you do you are the winner with a turbocharged engines... of course the higher air density of a turbocharged engine, in principle, means more energy.. denisty for engine breathing is like dollars in the stock market, higher density is better..

Jarod