Originally Posted by swamp2
No, absolutely wrong again. You can choose to have you own special little definition of a term but when that is at odds with everyone else (everyone in a very real and practical sense) then you end up living in your own isolated world where no one can communicate intelligently with you. Don't let your personal preferences and biases turn you into an isolationist. It's really quite a silly little game and definition you have here and I think you actually know that.
Ha ha, you do crack me up, you chop and change to look good in any discussion....a classic argumentative.
Maybe you don't take automotive engineering as any kind of science, but I certainly do, so will not rename something that is known in engineering circles because the masses know it as something else. Next we will be making up words like Nukular or engine dampener
Afterall it was you who previously stated - The language describing science must be very precise to be correct!
And as for biases turning one into an isolationist, your overwhelming bias of the s65 and NA comes across very clear. If you were a neutral engineer, you would have shot down the 'instant throttle response' description of an NA. As we engineers all know ALL engines suffer from 'Lag' whether they have a turbo or not. You need to be precise describing science.