Originally Posted by Braineack
Only if it involved a way to cause grevious bodily harm to Buster. (speaking of which, where the hell has Buster been recently?)
My thoughts on the matter, which are intuitive rather than empirical:
1- Air has mass. As a result, it also exhibits inertia.
Imagine a long tube, with air being forced into one end, and coming out the other end. The air is moving at a constant velocity.
You now close a valve at the end of he tube where the air had been coming out. As a result, two distinct things happen: the pressure inside the tube spikes and the whole column of air comes to a stop.
When you open the valve again, the column of air must once again accelerate from a standstill to its nominal velocity, and this takes time. During that period of time, the volume of air coming out of the end of the tube will be less than nominal.
Now, assume that a BOV were to be placed at the end of the tube just prior to the shutoff valve, and engineered to open when the shutoff valve was closed. By nature of the fact that the BOV is all the way at the end of the tube, the column of air is permitted to remain in constant motion. It is not forced to stop, and then required to accelerate back to nominal speed according to the state of the shutoff valve.
Having trouble with the analogy? Try picturing it with water, or guinea pigs, or cylindrical blocks of lead instead of air. Same concept.
2- Just because Mercedes does something a certain way does not mean that way is the most optimal from a performance standpoint. It may simply be the most optimal from a cost and manufacturing complexity standpoint instead. Heck, on most of their cars, Mercedes forgets to install the turbocharger altogether, and this is certainly not most optimal from a performance standpoint.