# Turbochargers **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 18, 2009, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turbochargers/506840 "2009-08-18T14:04:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2009, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turbochargers/506840/21 "2009-08-19T02:27:31Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > It’s not that it can’t be done but people don’t buy 365 hp cars to see how to squeeze a nickle out of the gas tank. The Ford SHO was built to play and it was a way of getting big block V8 performance under the hood of a Taurus. Case in point: my clunker (a MY2001, 275 hp/ft-lbs, 4.6L naturally-aspirated V8) is rated under the new guidelines for the same fuel efficiency as the SHO, i.e., 18 mpg under the same EPA rules. That’s a _considerable_ amount of extra fun without having to use a lot of gasoline (i.e., I’m perfectly happy with my 18 mpg, and actually get considerably better than that in my use). Oh, and given that there was no mileage improvement, I’ve decided to keep my good-as-new “clunker” and worry about getting the SHO when I’m back in the 'States. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2009, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turbochargers/506840/22 "2009-08-20T03:19:44Z")
> [@Balthisar](#): > > Case in point: my clunker (a MY2001, 275 hp/ft-lbs, 4.6L naturally-aspirated V8) is rated under the new guidelines for the same fuel efficiency as the SHO, i.e., 18 mpg under the same EPA rules. That’s a _considerable_ amount of extra fun without having to use a lot of gasoline (i.e., I’m perfectly happy with my 18 mpg, and actually get considerably better than that in my use). > > Oh, and given that there was no mileage improvement, I’ve decided to keep my good-as-new “clunker” and worry about getting the SHO when I’m back in the 'States. I looked at one at Oshkosh and it looks like they are going after the Chrysler 300 with the big block hemi. The doors are “tall” on the inside as is the center console. It has the ganster look of the 300. Unfortunately they hide the engine under plastic unlike the beatiful SHO engine of years ago with the nice intake manifold. There is no way you can show up at a car meet with the hood open and expect anything more than a yawn. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2009, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turbochargers/506840/23 "2009-08-20T04:34:17Z")
> [@Rocketeer](#): > > Apropos of almost nothing, once when I was a young man I test drove a Mitsubishi Colt Turbo. It had about 13 horsepower until the turbo spooled up, then had about 193. Accelerating was strange: > > Hunnnnnnn **WAAAAAAA!!!** shift hunnnnnn **WAAAAAAAA!!!** shift hunnnnn **WAAAAAAA!!!** Yeah, but wasn’t it fun? Er, I wouldn’t know, since my Colt was a 1400cc/4spd and didn’t realize its milieu until I started playing Kamikaze with Chicago’s cab drivers. They were toast since that little bastard was designed to battle cabbies in Tokyo. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2009, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turbochargers/506840/24 "2009-08-20T04:35:50Z")
> [@dropzone](#): > > They were toast since that little bastard was designed to battle cabbies in Tokyo. My mom ran two cabs off the road in Yokosuka. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turbochargers/506840.md?page=1)