Originally Posted by parkland

I agree to an extent; I think peak boost would remain the same, it would just take longer to get there.

Originally Posted by screwy

Huh... ok then. It's been fine since. I can just see the service advisors of the future.. "Have you tried turning it off and back on again?"

Originally Posted by RobFlag

Crazy, agree with slower response but would have thought that the waste gate would still not open till max programmed boost (24 psi?). Haven't had a chance watch the boost on the Edge at lower altitude but will next time and see if it's different.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I've stayed away from that particular thread and the those related as the nature of the comparison was based on exploiting practical/functional limits of the technological differences between the two powertrains. In short, one turbo design has an advantage in efficiency at altitude in that it can move more air versus the other turbo charger having a more balanced overall mapping for things like throttle response, fuel economy, etc.

The other major factor that comes into play is the engine power de-rate strategy that is activated when turbo operating temperature limits are reached. Each design has its thermal limits before things start to melt. I don't have the turbo mapping benchmarking data between the two, but assuming that the single compressor wheel is more efficient at altitude, it's probably safe to say that the 6.7L de-rates power slightly sooner than the 6.6L in that specific operating range. I'm quite sure that the engineering teams from both camps understand the others technical limitations considering that honeywell/garret supplies both turbos and that turbo selection is made after an exhaustive review of which alternative delivers the best characteristics for the given set of requirements for a particular application.