If anyone has benefited from improved turbocharging technology, it is the diesel engine. It downright woke up from a deep slumber. Just in case you can get hold of them, compare an SDI and a TDI from VW and you'll agree with how phlegmatic diesels used to be.

One speaks of up to double the power, not counting the enormous early torque, but perhaps even more helpful in normal road traffic. Only the electric drive can hold a candle to the diesel engine in terms of early acceleration. The petrol engine needs launch control with a lot of revs.

However, caution is advised because an approximation is taking place here. Suspiciously falling nominal speeds in gasoline engines are a sign of this. VTG technology is also slowly making its way here, i.e. gasoline engines with turbo-charging and direct injection throughout, all of which was once reserved for diesel engines.

If little by little it becomes like this, it naturally also receives its properties. Nevertheless, in this chapter we want to continue to deal with the exhaust gas turbo and find that it goes incredibly well with the diesel. It starts with the lack of the risk of knocking in the diesel engine. Furthermore, the first attempts already gave a positive picture, even if only a little more air was pushed into the combustion chamber in a completely unregulated manner.

In the case of a gasoline engine, this would mess up the lambda control. You just had to teach the diesel that it should push the control limits for the injection a little further. If you don't do that, you don't have more power, but you already have cheaper raw emissions. Most of the time, both were achieved by not fully exploiting the potential increase in performance.

If the diesel was already more economical, it has now become even better, because up to twice the performance naturally leads to slighter engines. If they had maybe two cylinders less, then for that reason alone they needed less. The higher pressures in the combustion chamber did the rest, and the resulting lower vehicle weight also contributed to this.

This is of course heavily overdrawn: If a vehicle needs less fuel, then a smaller tank is sufficient and this reduces consumption again, etc. This is of course heavily overdrawn, but this whole austerity policy, also provoked by lower mineral oil tax on diesel fuel, has fueled the sale of diesel vehicles enormously, especially among people who wanted (had to) cover longer distances in larger and more comfortable cars.

In addition, the turbocharger had a major impact on manufacturers. Suddenly a four-cylinder could be almost as powerful as an eight-cylinder. So why not just only offer four-cylinder, that reduces the manufacturing costs enormously. Even better, all four-cylinder units have the same engine, the only difference being the boost pressure. Earn more money by changing the software.

In any case, it would be extremely interesting to find out to what extent the internal engine precautions against higher wear really differ in engines of different power levels. Or whether it is more cost-effective to design (almost) all motors with the same protection and really only adapt the motor software. Well, depending on the power level, other turbos may be required, but that's about it, isn't it?

Only occasionally does it come out that you can have so much more horsepower afterwards with other engine software. No, this does not mean tuners with questionable methods, but the manufacturer himself. He sometimes even puts together a corresponding package for sale, but probably more for gasoline engines.