Turbo, Carbs, Throttle Bodies, Boost???

[logic_guy]

I'm reading peoples progress threads more and more and coming across all different types of ways to improve power.

I'm completely lost when it comes to this kind of stuff and have no idea what the pro's and cons of each of these modifications are.

I know what a turbo does, but how does it compare to say T/b or carbs?

Can someone explain what they all do, pros and cons and what you'd use them for?

I've tried reading this long mashoosive thread (http://www.saxperience.com/forum/showthread.php?t=236140) but it still doesn't explain everything.

Thanks

[adzvtr]

throttlebodies make a nice sound, boost makes you go quicker.

[Barry123]

I'm ignoring carbs.
t/b's probably the least beneficial given the £/hp - but has the 'easier' upgrade path.
Buy car, put camz in, run along for bit, do the exhaust and the induction in time, then pop on the tb's and the then add the ecu. Sorted.

Turbo/supercharger - more costs involved from the start, but more power gained - not withstanding the life of other components (gearbox for instance)

[logic_guy]

So how do you get 'boost'? and exactly what does it do/ how does it work

throttle bodies just make a nice sound, i'm guessing more torque/ quicker acceleration?. How would that compare to a turbo?

[Mieran]

Carbs = black and white technology
Throttle bodies = too much money
Boost = best bhp per £

[Mieran]

Boost is generated by supercharger or turbo, they are called forced induction because they make 'air' and push it through your throttle bodie, while the standard engine sucks in air from the air filter

Turbo works of exhaust gases and supercharger runs of the engine by a belt

[Barry123]

with tb's you're pretty much limited by engine capacity - so there is a finite amount of power the engine can develop before you hit the limit of emissions and that for MOT.

With a turbo, because you're forcing more air in you're not limited to engine size in the same your are with tb's.

With boost you need a turbo/super charger. Super charging is probably the easier route. The charger needs to be connected to the air intake, and thus force more engine into the engine.

[Jungle]

So how do you get 'boost'? and exactly what does it do/ how does it work

throttle bodies just make a nice sound, i'm guessing more torque/ quicker acceleration?. How would that compare to a turbo?

engine tuning comes down to one thing... making a bigger bang. To make abigger bang you need more air. Carbs and ITB's suck a bit more air in but unless matched with cams headwork etc don't pull in that much more are. Boosting by turbo or supercharger, in it's most simplistic form just rams more air into your engine, you then make allowance by more fuel and easy as that more power.

As everyone says bang for buck boost is the way forward, but boost is alot more complicated.

[hard_corejoeboy]

Turbo uses exhaust gas to spool up a turbine which drives a compressor which forces air into the engine more air + more fuel = more power.

Supercharger does the same but is belt driven by the engine so whereas you will get lag with a turbo (as it needs exhaust gas to get going) with a supercharger the response is instant but you lose some power as the engine needs to 'power' it and its 'runs out of puff higher up the revs whereas the turbo will keep going.

Throttle bodies give you 4 throttle bodies basically one for each cyclinder main benefits are noise and throttle response and speed. Not as much power as turbo or supercharger will give you though.

Quick simple explanation there

[Damask]

buy the latest fast car, explains all of this ;)

[hard_corejoeboy]

Oh you forgot one thing. Brakes and tyres and suspension and tuition this will give you more 'power' than any turbo conversion.

With this you can beat BMW M3's with 140bhp even without knowing the track and taking the wrong line :D

[7unner172]

boost or nothing lol

[hard_corejoeboy]

Power is nothing without control :D

Best bang for buck?

Buying a shit load of fireworks and attaching them to the car..or treading on an IED

[logic_guy]

Thanks guys.

Great explanations there, i've thanked many.

I'm guessing with Turbo/ super charger, you'd need an upgraded crank shaft, bearings, pistons and piston rods?

If it is fast road that i'd be looking for, super charger would be ideal as its instant response?

[Jungle]

Thanks guys.

Great explanations there, i've thanked many.

I'm guessing with Turbo/ super charger, you'd need an upgraded crank shaft, bearings, pistons and piston rods?

If it is fast road that i'd be looking for, super charger would be ideal as its instant response?

No. For boost you need forged pistons and rods if you plan on doing big boost. Depends how much power your after.

Agree with S/C bieng instant and more usable power but T/C is more manly ;)

[hard_corejoeboy]

This

http://www.kamracing.co.uk/citroen/citroen-saxo/saxo-engine/throttle-body-kits.html

plus this

http://www.kamracing.co.uk/citroen/citroen-saxo/saxo-engine/camshafts/citroen-saxo-vts-fast-road-camshafts-cat-cams-1321708.html

plus a predator ecu

=fun!

[Mieran]

Best way of learning about turbos if you have no experience is getting a car that is already turbod from the factory then build one if you wanted at a later date when you have the knowledge you need

[hard_corejoeboy]

I think the most important thing is being able to go as fast as you can with the power you have.

When i had a VTR with 100bhp i wanted a car with 200bhp as i though that was what i needed to go fast.

FALSE all i needed was to be able to drive properly

I've learnt more about FWD in my 75bhp standard 5 door 106 than i ever did in my old car.

[Mieran]

B8s ftw

[hard_corejoeboy]

13 inch wheels and ditchfinders in the wet ftw!

[logic_guy]

This

http://www.kamracing.co.uk/citroen/citroen-saxo/saxo-engine/throttle-body-kits.html

plus this

http://www.kamracing.co.uk/citroen/citroen-saxo/saxo-engine/camshafts/citroen-saxo-vts-fast-road-camshafts-cat-cams-1321708.html

plus a predator ecu

=fun!


What sort of torque/ bhp?

[hard_corejoeboy]

My old car made 140bhp with just a kam exhaust and bmc cda and predator so i'd hope for 160bhp at least with all that.

160bhp would make it quicker than clio 182/type r etc

For under £2000 but i would seriously recommend changing brakes and suspension

[logic_guy]

I'm in a sticky hole atm. Debating weather to get rid of the R and get a S. Or get a S engine and put it in the R (It would be much easier doing the cams and what ever performance modification i plan to do, but i risk having a duff engine). That's nothing to do with this though to this thread though.

What ever i choose, i will be having B8's all round and some big, breaks before i do anything.

Thanks

[Ryan]

throttlebodies make a nice sound, boost makes you go quicker.

Throttle bodies give better throttle response/improvements in midrange and drivability without destroying the MA box each week :panic:

The main thing people ignore with bodies is the cam profile, a shit cam is always a shit cam profile.

[scot-ish]

they are called forced induction because they make 'air' and push it through your throttle bodie, while the standard engine sucks in air from the air filter

they just make air? what from nowhere like? dont you think they also suck in air from an air filter ? or does it just get made out of nowhere?

they compress air, so there is more air per m3 than with NA, hence the term "boost" meaning pressurised.

Oh you forgot one thing. Brakes and tyres and suspension and tuition this will give you more 'power' than any turbo conversion.

With this you can beat BMW M3's with 140bhp even without knowing the track and taking the wrong line :D

unless the m3 driver is absolute gash, then a 140bhp saxo, at standard weight, would be nowhere near a standard m3 around a track. :wall::wall:

[axsaxoman]

This

http://www.kamracing.co.uk/citroen/citroen-saxo/saxo-engine/throttle-body-kits.html

plus this

http://www.kamracing.co.uk/citroen/citroen-saxo/saxo-engine/camshafts/citroen-saxo-vts-fast-road-camshafts-cat-cams-1321708.html

plus a predator ecu

=fun!

or you could save money and do this
http://www.gmcmotorsport.co.uk/engine/throttle-bodys-and-parts/saxo-106-c2-gmc/atp-throttle-bodies/prod_573.html

and use these cams
http://www.gmcmotorsport.co.uk/engine/cam-valve-train/gmc-ultimate-road-cams/prod_614.html
+ your predator or someother stand alone ecu

[adzvtr]

been running boost for a fair few months now with some track abuse and my ma box is fine, aslong as ur considerate to the box there nt to bad, bad drivers give them a bad name.

also my throttle response is absolutly fine and mid range is mental
plus with 200+bhp its still very driveable everyday even in taffic,

i wander if that can be said for an na tuned to 200+

[hard_corejoeboy]

they just make air? what from nowhere like? dont you think they also suck in air from an air filter ? or does it just get made out of nowhere?

they compress air, so there is more air per m3 than with NA, hence the term "boost" meaning pressurised.



unless the m3 driver is absolute gash, then a 140bhp saxo, at standard weight, would be nowhere near a standard m3 around a track. :wall::wall:


Yes you have just proved my point exactly power doesn't matter at all its how you use it and how good you are at using it. That was exactly the point i was trying to make. Getting some tuition and practice is better than an engine conversion etc

[toxic]

or you could save money and do this
http://www.gmcmotorsport.co.uk/engine/throttle-bodys-and-parts/saxo-106-c2-gmc/atp-throttle-bodies/prod_573.html

and use these cams
http://www.gmcmotorsport.co.uk/engine/cam-valve-train/gmc-ultimate-road-cams/prod_614.html
+ your predator or someother stand alone ecu

are they as good as catcams 708 i am looking to go this way with my engine :y:

[hard_corejoeboy]

or you could save money and do this
http://www.gmcmotorsport.co.uk/engine/throttle-bodys-and-parts/saxo-106-c2-gmc/atp-throttle-bodies/prod_573.html

and use these cams
http://www.gmcmotorsport.co.uk/engine/cam-valve-train/gmc-ultimate-road-cams/prod_614.html
+ your predator or someother stand alone ecu

So for a smidge over £1500 you could have an awesome 170bhp engine?

nice!

[Ryan]

So for a smidge over £1500 you could have an awesome 170bhp engine?

nice!

Can do it cheaper if using the sandy brown/Colin satchel tb set up.

[blackie_2k5]

my vtr has 218bhp....and had 4 or 5 months of hard driving, VIA a turbo

and my box isnt gone yet, and its on 98k miles

[toxic]

my vtr has 218bhp....and had 4 or 5 months of hard driving, VIA a turbo

and my box isnt gone yet, and its on 98k miles

were did you get your turbo kit from m8 :y:

[Ryan]

my vtr has 218bhp....and had 4 or 5 months of hard driving, VIA a turbo

and my box isnt gone yet, and its on 98k miles

Torque kills boxes, it's why alot of boosted owners have had box issues (and thus switched to be).

But then 200 bhp isn't along compared to some of the nutters like Dean lol.

As with everything there's positives and negatives + prices etc... It's just not true when boosted owners try and claim bodies don't make a car go faster.

[hard_corejoeboy]

Personally i'd remove the brakes as they slow you down :D

[blackie_2k5]

were did you get your turbo kit from m8 :y:


ireland for bits, specced rest up myself

Torque kills boxes, it's why alot of boosted owners have had box issues (and thus switched to be).

But then 200 bhp isn't along compared to some of the nutters like Dean lol.

As with everything there's positives and negatives + prices etc... It's just not true when boosted owners try and claim bodies don't make a car go faster.

bodies do.. but to get to 200bhp in bodied saxo your looking at a FUCK load of money

my car currently has 230lbft of torque, the box will go, but for now its holding up fine, i was just making a point that they dont go all that often :y:

[hard_corejoeboy]

ireland for bits, specced rest up myself




bodies do.. but to get to 200bhp in bodied saxo your looking at a FUCK load of money

my car currently has 230lbft of torque, the box will go, but for now its holding up fine, i was just making a point that they dont go all that often :y:

Most people don't need over 200 bhp in a saxo. Hell the stock hatch boys had the same pace at brands as a 700bhp supra when i was there!

[Ryan]

bodies do.. but to get to 200bhp in bodied saxo your looking at a FUCK load of money
:

prices are changing alot and really only now are we seeing such good knowledge of the engines.

You can get 200 bhp without going rods and solids too (qep had some interesting results on the dyno when developing an engine).

Both give you two totally differently performing cars, some prefer the more linear power delivery and throttle response, others like a big turbo kicking in. Neither is better than the other over all and the engine spec is to fit to individuals specific needs/driving habits.

[blackie_2k5]

Most people don't need over 200 bhp in a saxo. Hell the stock hatch boys had the same pace at brands as a 700bhp supra when i was there!

some ppl do ;)

and just becuase the supra owner/couldnt or wouldnt put the power down, it doesnt meant he stock hatch boys have the upper hand, you dont know how the supra driver was driving, for all you know it could have been owners wife learing the car on track

probably wasnt, but again these arguement about one car raping another, you dont know this without speaking/seein both cars being driven at their limit

prices are changing alot and really only now are we seeing such good knowledge of the engines.

You can get 200 bhp without going rods and solids too (qep had some interesting results on the dyno when developing an engine).

Both give you two totally differently performing cars, some prefer the more linear power delivery and throttle response, others like a big turbo kicking in. Neither is better than the other over all and the engine spec is to fit to individuals specific needs/driving habits.

yeah there's alot more knowledge in the public's hands now, good news for us really, i have nothing against bodied cars, love the sound, i just like boost lol,


as said, 2 very diff cars, id like nothing more then 2 have one of each, the driving experience even at similar power ratios is MASSIVLEY different, but for now i can only afford one

so turbo for me :D

just need a diff'd box now ;)

[Ryan]

yeah there's alot more knowledge in the public's hands now, good news for us really, i have nothing against bodied cars, love the sound, i just like boost lol,


as said, 2 very diff cars, id like nothing more then 2 have one of each, the driving experience even at similar power ratios is MASSIVLEY different, but for now i can only afford one

so turbo for me :D

just need a diff'd box now ;)

The knowledge is great, to think when mine was made (about 6 years ago) it was crazy spec and not done by anyone really (bic still hadn't had his new engine) now we know alot more about getting power and have much better cam profiles available, there's some great engines out there now built on a budget, it just pains me when I see all the boost brigade pretty much slating na espec when people are thinking about going that route, people tend to ignore not everyone is after bragging rights from dynos at the pub.

[blackie_2k5]

totally aggree, but most ppl just want big power for little cost these days, boost makes that easier

bodied saxos are good fun cars, but as said, the bang for buck isnt as good, and when you can spend the same on a car and get X amount more power, its really only the obvious choice(well to me anyway), it really all boils down to what you want out of the car and your money

[hard_corejoeboy]

Agree all round...just to the average Joe they really need to learn how to drive properly first to make use of any extra power.

One bloke at work was going on about how he was screeching the hell out of his tyres and smoking them at his first ever trackday and that he was so good people were pointing.

Yes i kindly pointed out to him that turning in early and mashing the foot flat to the floor isn't the quickest line for a FWD haha!

[toxic]

totally aggree, but most ppl just want big power for little cost these days, boost makes that easier

bodied saxos are good fun cars, but as said, the bang for buck isnt as good, and when you can spend the same on a car and get X amount more power, its really only the obvious choice(well to me anyway), it really all boils down to what you want out of the car and your money

do you know were a good place to get a turbo kit might look into this boost thing :y:

[blackie_2k5]

depends on your budget

[axsaxoman]

are they as good as catcams 708 i am looking to go this way with my engine :y:

yes every bit as good if not better--but you expect me to say that
--any differences will be small as the duration +lift used on both these cams is to allow use of a single t/b as well as ITB,S and give a reasonable idle --physics dictates these things .
but if a 20% saving is not worth considering get the 708,s I have sold 20+ sets of these now and had no complaints of any kind
In a previous post someone was saying that the knowledge is now in the public domain --it always has been --but it how you match all the components of the engine together +then spen the money on getting it mapped right .
It still suprises me how many spend fortunes on bits shiney + otherwise ,then get very tight on getting it mapped correctly --not a recipe for getting the best from your project --there is no miracle 1 hour solution to dialing everything in to get the best

[Gareth_R]

it really all boils down to what you want out of the car and your money

And how much work you're prepared to do yourself.

E.g. - massive budget, go boost and can pay a company to do it (not that i would as they rip you a new bum hole)

Large-ish budget and prepared to do a little bit but not loads - no point going boost you'll give up halfway through. Bodies are the better route for this situation but you'll be gutted when someone spent the same about and got way more power with more upgrade options for the future

Modest to large budget, prepared to go the extra mile and put the effort in yourself - boost all the way!

limited budget - you'll struggle to do either

[toxic]

yes every bit as good if not better--but you expect me to say that
--any differences will be small as the duration +lift used on both these cams is to allow use of a single t/b as well as ITB,S and give a reasonable idle --physics dictates these things .
but if a 20% saving is not worth considering get the 708,s I have sold 20+ sets of these now and had no complaints of any kind
In a previous post someone was saying that the knowledge is now in the public domain --it always has been --but it how you match all the components of the engine together +then spen the money on getting it mapped right .
It still suprises me how many spend fortunes on bits shiney + otherwise ,then get very tight on getting it mapped correctly --not a recipe for getting the best from your project --there is no miracle 1 hour solution to dialing everything in to get the best

they sound good to me when its time to get them i will buy them off you with you tb :y:

[Jungle]

It still suprises me how many spend fortunes on bits shiney + otherwise ,then get very tight on getting it mapped correctly --not a recipe for getting the best from your project --there is no miracle 1 hour solution to dialing everything in to get the best

This is what makes me laugh as well. IMO the map is the most important part of the build... make sure you get a mapper you can trust!!!

[LeeM]

bodies get my vote on a saxo.
if you want big bhp figures to brag about then go turbo

[dannygti]

N/a is king

[Gareth_R]

Boost isn't just about big bhp it's about useable power - so much more across the rev range than n/a

[dannygti]

Boost isn't just about big bhp it's about useable power - so much more across the rev range than n/a

Finally someone who understands why some people use turbochargers:wall:

[Gareth_R]

i seriously thought about keeping my 16v engine, camming it, bodies, standalone etc

but from what i could see, i'd spend as much as i would turbo-ing, for the sake of what, 30bhp, and i'd achieve that extra 30bhp way up in the rev range and have to rag shit out of it everywhere to use it, because the power band was so narrow

so i looked at turbos, saw that i could put my foot down in third at 40 and maybe actually accelerate at a decent rate, rather than having to drop to second, and decided that suited me far better

pretty tough call though

[scot-ish]

so i looked at turbos, saw that i could put my foot down in third at 40 and maybe actually accelerate at a decent rate, rather than having to drop to second, and decided that suited me far better

yup, aslong as you get a decent turbo matched to the engine. otherwise you'll be worse off lagging away waiting on 4 or 5k coming round before you can even make boost.

as said, its no an easy choice, i would build myself, and play with turbo setup.

[Jungle]

i seriously thought about keeping my 16v engine, camming it, bodies, standalone etc

but from what i could see, i'd spend as much as i would turbo-ing, for the sake of what, 30bhp, and i'd achieve that extra 30bhp way up in the rev range and have to rag shit out of it everywhere to use it, because the power band was so narrow

so i looked at turbos, saw that i could put my foot down in third at 40 and maybe actually accelerate at a decent rate, rather than having to drop to second, and decided that suited me far better

pretty tough call though

you got that all wrong turbos only make power between 6,999 and 7,000 rpm N/A engines make power 1 and 10,000rpm there is the issue of no torque to go with it but torque is just for bragging in pubs

[willsy]

Ill certainly be heading down the boost route with the latest project.

Had TB's on the Saxo and honestly believe with the setup I had it was the worst money I spent on the car in terms of performance.

Sure if you're aiming for a very high spec N/A engine with all the trimmings and alot of internal work (Similar to/above the engine currently in AlexB's 106) then yes from my experience of a lesser spec internally and having been in Toad's car when it had AlexB's engine in, i'd agree that its a worthwhile modification but itll need high investment on the internals aswel to reap the benefits.

If you already currently have a decent map on a cammed 16v engine and you're simply looking to add TB's to that you'll be massively disappointed. Having had mine on the same set of rollers there was a pitifully low increase across the range figures wise (BEFORE: being cammed/mapped and AFTER having applied tb's to it), not worth the expense.

Usually thats a point thats made early on in these threads but can't see it having been mentioned thus far. If you're starting with a standard-ish engine common sense option both financially and for performance is with boost.

[toxic]

Ill certainly be heading down the boost route with the latest project.

Had TB's on the Saxo and honestly believe with the setup I had it was the worst money I spent on the car in terms of performance.

Sure if you're aiming for a very high spec N/A engine with all the trimmings and alot of internal work (Similar to/above the engine currently in AlexB's 106) then yes from my experience of a lesser spec internally and having been in Toad's car when it had AlexB's engine in, i'd agree that its a worthwhile modification but itll need high investment on the internals aswel to reap the benefits.

If you already currently have a decent map on a cammed 16v engine and you're simply looking to add TB's to that you'll be massively disappointed. On the same set of rollers there was a pitifully low increase across the range figures wise, not worth the expense.

Usually thats a point thats made early on in these threads but can't see it having been mentioned thus far. If you're starting with a standard-ish engine common sense option both financially and for performance is with boost.

Sounds like TB are just a waste of money then so why do people rave on about them :n:

[willsy]

Sounds like TB are just a waste of money then so why do people rave on about them :n:

They can be good and worthwhile but you have to spend alot (more than you'd spend on a boost setup) to get the best out of them

Adding them to a 'mild' spec engine is where theyre in the realms of a waste of money

[hard_corejoeboy]

You know what sod turbos, sod tb's get a trackday and tuition and buy yourself a video vbox and get better at driving first.

Turbo's and tb's are like black and white some people like one others liek the other...

[toxic]

They can be good and worthwhile but you have to spend alot (more than you'd spend on a boost setup) to get the best out of them

Adding them to a 'mild' spec engine is where theyre in the realms of a waste of money

so if you had 5000 to spend what would be the best for power when you put your foot down i was going to get catcams 708 and omex ecu Jenvey range TB :y: for now then forged pistons later on :y: but do like the sound of a supercharger will have to look into this first as its all new :y:

[dannygti]

With that setup IMO and experience wouldn't be much quicker than cammed engine. Noise would be better though

[willsy]

so if you had 5000 to spend what would be the best for power when you put your foot down i was going to get catcams 708 and omex ecu Jenvey range TB :y: for now then forged pistons later on :y: but do like the sound of a supercharger will have to look into this first as its all new :y:

Best person to ask based on experiencing both TB's and Turbo would be dannygti.

I've heard from various people that have experienced a passenger ride in both too with both of his recent setups, that his Turbo setup is ridiculously good in comparison to the old TB setup


EDIT: Speak of the devil, see the post above mine :)

[toxic]

With that setup IMO and experience wouldn't be much quicker than cammed engine. Noise would be better though

why would that be like :y:

[toxic]

Best person to ask based on experiencing both TB's and Turbo would be dannygti.

I've heard from various people that have experienced a passenger ride in both too with both of his recent setups, that his Turbo setup is ridiculously good in comparison to the old TB setup


EDIT: Speak of the devil, see the post above mine :)

i will have to look into boost more then :y:

[mangojace]

You know what sod turbos, sod tb's get a trackday and tuition and buy yourself a video vbox and get better at driving first.

Turbo's and tb's are like black and white some people like one others liek the other...

I agree with this. If you have loads of money then turbo/supercharge and do trackdays etc.But if its one or the other. Id defo choose loads of trackdays :D

[toxic]

With that setup IMO and experience wouldn't be much quicker than cammed engine. Noise would be better though

were would be a good place to buy a turbo kit :y:

[dannygti]

were would be a good place to buy a turbo kit :y:

I don't think the 15-20hp you get from throttle bodies, cams is that noticeable. You will see a big performance increase with 50hp but not 15ish..

There are a couple of places really, atspeed racing sell premium kits and build conversions, drive in, drive out. They are more expensive than most places but it's a good conversion.
Then there's cituning that do kits for a smaller budget. I think these kits are a great way to get on the boost ladder.

First things first... Buy yourself a book on forced induction and do lots of research on here and 106 owners etc

[axsaxoman]

Finally someone who understands why some people use turbochargers:wall:


if you think that then it goes double for s/c as there is no lag or any spool up point where traction is an issue caused by an uncontrollable increase in bhp over a small rpm range.
200@wheels is plenty for any road car with just FWD-,providing it comes in an orderly manner
,if you want to be able to put it on the road in both wet+dry conditions and on twisty roads ,not just drag racing
even works maxi cars didn,t have that much
gt28 series beiing a prime case --low power till you hit 4k + ,then goes mad

I have just specced an irish c2 rally car --which has to use a restrictor as all rally cars do ,--i supplied info + bits and he built it
220bhp @ wheels @6300rpm dropped to 190@7k (due to restrictor)--tested on hub dyno in ireland --not mine ,
he used our GMC ultimate road cams + pistons and only 9psi I don,t think you can complain at that
copuled with his 6 speed paddle shift sadev st82. it makes it a real weapon on all surfaces
I asked him if he wanted any more power --"no its plenty "and that from a man who has run evo,s etc for years,but didn,t like the costs
HIs first rally couple of weeks ago-- he reported to me had 130 entries he came 11 th overall --all other cars infront were ex wrc 4wd cars with gearbox that cost more than the whole c2.

we have a customer in cumbria who wanted basically the same idea -like a turbo but not -power from lower rpms
--no restrictor it made 303@fly @6400rpm , 267@wheels
his instructions to us was stop at 300--so we did , but again no lag ---.

we have other cars ,used daily running 250+@wheels and no lag -
I personally would stop a bit short of that for a daily drive

the point I am making is that turbo is not any better than s/c --just a different + personal choice and if its 400+bhp you want + lots of lag +little of a real mot pass then turbo is the way.
what you going to do with 350bhp@wheels I do not know .certainly nothing in the damp or on a twisty road

[toxic]

I don't think the 15-20hp you get from throttle bodies, cams is that noticeable. You will see a big performance increase with 50hp but not 15ish..

There are a couple of places really, atspeed racing sell premium kits and build conversions, drive in, drive out. They are more expensive than most places but it's a good conversion.
Then there's cituning that do kits for a smaller budget. I think these kits are a great way to get on the boost ladder.

First things first... Buy yourself a book on forced induction and do lots of research on here and 106 owners etc

yes i will get a book on boost first and reserch best way :y:

[dannygti]

I'm sorry John but you don't half make me laugh sometimes..
With all due respect, where are these gt28 That have nothing untill 4k then goes mad??
You can spec a 28framed turbo to make full boost by just after 3k.. Not heard of a boost controller? You must be using some hefty wastegate springs..

I'm all for s/c. I like them infect, so much so I want my mate to buy one of your kits.. BUT although a s/c has no lag it also won't make the lowdown (3-4k) midrange (5-6) as a turbo of equivalent spec. You can drive round lag, if you couldn't the Audi quattro, f40, evo, impreza's, skylines, supra's, noble m12, gt2rs, 959 wouldn't be so successful ???

[mangojace]

I'm sorry John but you don't half make me laugh sometimes..
With all due respect, where are these gt28 That have nothing untill 4k then goes mad??
You can spec a 28framed turbo to make full boost by just after 3k.. Not heard of a boost controller? You must be using some hefty wastegate springs..

I'm all for s/c. I like them infect, so much so I want my mate to buy one of your kits.. BUT although a s/c has no lag it also won't make the lowdown (3-4k) midrange (5-6) as a turbo of equivalent spec. You can drive round lag, if you couldn't the Audi quattro, f40, evo, impreza's, skylines, supra's, noble m12, gt2rs, 959 wouldn't be so successful ???
+1 :y:

[e8_pqck]

CT20b on the celica GT-Four hits full boost at apx 2800 and pulls all the way to the redline.

You just have to match your turbo and cams to get the best out of it.

TD04 is also a fast spool and can take quite high boost.

[scot-ish]

i agree, you can have a turbo specced for what you want, i used to run a 350bhp starlet, running TD05, and was full boost (1.65 bar) at 4300 rpm. thats still 3000 rpm of power, and with a decent diff, and launch control, it didny half shift keep it in the revs when you drive and its usable.

s/c are good, but imho, i would still probably pick a turbo'd setup over a s/c'd one.

[Sandy309]

Had TB's on the Saxo and honestly believe with the setup I had it was the worst money I spent on the car in terms of performance.

If you already currently have a decent map on a cammed 16v engine and you're simply looking to add TB's to that you'll be massively disappointed
Having had mine on the same set of rollers there was a pitifully low increase across the range figures wise (BEFORE: being cammed/mapped and AFTER having applied tb's to it), not worth the expense.


Sounds like TB are just a waste of money then so why do people rave on about them :n:

Sounds to me like it wasn't very well done. The common misconception is that all TB set ups perform the same and most mappers will do a good job. The difference between a good TB conversion and a bad one, is huge and most TB set ups are bolted on as available with little thought given to what makes it work. People always talk about the breathing, but that's not the issue, it's tuning... both tuning of the tract design to get a good pulse response and setting it all up properly.

I hate reading threads like this were the old bhp/£ debate rears its head, many factors are ignored to make the point and I think the comments about N/A vs Boost tuning producing very different cars are the sensible ones. You can't just steam roller N/A, saying it's a waste of money; I don't think it is and neither do most of my car related friends! I'm an induction bark junkie and boost bores me, I make no secret of that; but I understand it excites some people more than a good N/A engine.

Car modifying is not a business operation, it's not defined by a financial bottom line, it's not really a sensible thing to do at all on that level. It's whatever you want it to be.

[willsy]

Good reply Sandy,

My setup was done by a very reputable company where alot of people on here have had dealings with before.

My main point from personal experiences is that to get the very best out of TBs there does have to be alot of time and effort put into the build, and by all accounts there are very few that can match the knowledge and service which you're currently offering, very reliable engines with great performance but there's alot of investment to get to that stage.

The vast majority of people aren't aware of the whole pie and believe that by simply fitting TBs alone will be as simple as fitting cams and will reap similar benefits.

The amount of people who already have a cammed engine still see applying TBs on their own as a great performance enhancing mod when in reality it isn't.

Very few have the money available to put into a good setup, without that it isn't a wise investment.

[axsaxoman]

You can drive round lag, if you couldn't the Audi quattro, f40, evo, impreza's, skylines, supra's, noble m12, gt2rs, 959 wouldn't be so successful ???


all the car you mention have much more complicated ecu systems most have 4wd and none of them are fwd most of cars you mention have engines twice the size or more +not running at high boost+ have had millions spent on mapping --so not a realistic comparison with a home built budget limted saxo turbo kit.

it didny half shift keep it in the revs when you drive and its usable.

thats my point you have to keep it spooled up and there is always a narrow band of rpm where it suddenly has a large increase in power,which means you can never flatten the throttle until after the corner and car is pointing striaght not in FWD car

[Gareth_R]

but with an n/a car you have to keep it in the power band as well - its just as bad if not worse - at least with a turbo coming on boost you can control it rather than just waiting for the power to build

[axsaxoman]

but with an n/a car you have to keep it in the power band as well - its just as bad if not worse - at least with a turbo coming on boost you can control it rather than just waiting for the power to build


you won,t control the way a turbo comeson boost anywhere as easily as you can a s/c and there is never any lag .
if all you want is something that spins wheels ,shatters gearboxs +drive shafts at the slightest provocation turbo is the way ,you want something you can backoff the power halfway into a corner cos you got it wrong and then hit the gas again and have instant power or actually power sliide the front end by only throttle application then its n/a or s/c
If lag was not a problem --why would somone devlop an anti-lag system ???

[Gareth_R]

yes, because every turbo setup is tuned right up to the limit with huge bhp in mind. No one ever makes a low boost application with a suitably sized turbo, designed with driveability in mind.

[dannygti]

Nice post sandy, although i echo what willsy said, I have seen/been in over 10 throttle bodied cars and only one really pleased me with performance.. But it's a lot of money's worth.


John, the more you talk about turbos the less convinced i am you know what your talking about..and at one time I thought you were very knowledgable, non biased.

Half those cars I mentioned are old school turbo design, with new ball bearing turbo/ceramic you can get awesome results..
You do realise Most people don't just whack the biggest turbo on they can find do you? There are lots of ways to control boost to give you pretty much any power band characteristics you could wish for.. Of course there could be compromises but there will be with any engine.

Oh, and people use anti-lag so they CAN use a huge turbo and have low down power..

[Ryan]

Sounds like TB are just a waste of money then so why do people rave on about them :n:

Nope, just people don't make the most of them.

Bodies allow you to run wild cams (which it's alot harder to do on standard inlet without getting serious scavenging of some cylinders). People think that bolting on some tbs to a car running some 708s will suddenly give them another 5 million bhp..

A well set up na saxo can be a very capable car, and as said previously responds totally differently to a boosted one, but then it depends if you want to spec an engine set up what's right for you or just keep sticking it on rolling roads to cock wave.

[dannygti]

Ryan, your engine is one of the few
That I would say has a DRASTIC improvent over standard.. Alex b's is the other but these are 5k+ engines..
A turbo conversion is a good way for someone without that budget to make that power and more torque.. That's another good option surely?

Also the willy waving comment can be said for a lot of people, there's people who have had a high performance n/a engine built to get those nice peak figures etc

[Ryan]

Ryan, your engine is one of the few
That I would say has a DRASTIC improvent over standard.. Alex b's is the other but these are 5k+ engines..
A turbo conversion is a good way for someone without that budget to make that power and more torque.. That's another good option surely?

Also the willy waving comment can be said for a lot of people, there's people who have had a high performance n/a engine built to get those nice peak figures etc

Mine was well over the 5k figure but as I said earlier it's relatively out of date now compared to those built on alot less of a budget. I'm sure if Ian was building it again it would be done alot differently. Some prefer a more linar power delivery over something that shoves you in the back, others want to be revving it's tits off, some want power from 2-6k so many variables to consider and in reality neither is the best for everyone.

Look at the engines out there and you can get alot of power with say, jp4 head, pistons and still staying hydro cams (ph4/734 variants). Bike bodies plus something like a predator means power can be had for very good money.

As I said though I'm not slagging off turbos, personally I'd go supercharger but it's down to what people want from an engine, some seem to ignore some of the big positives about bodies just by looking at a peak bhp figure.

[mangojace]

Mine was well over the 5k figure but as I said earlier it's relatively out of date now compared to those built on alot less of a budget. I'm sure if Ian was building it again it would be done alot differently. Some prefer a more linar power delivery over something that shoves you in the back, others want to be revving it's tits off, some want power from 2-6k so many variables to consider and in reality neither is the best for everyone.

Look at the engines out there and you can get alot of power with say, jp4 head, pistons and still staying hydro cams (ph4/734 variants). Bike bodies plus something like a predator means power can be had for very good money.

As I said though I'm not slagging off turbos, personally I'd go supercharger but it's down to what people want from an engine, some seem to ignore some of the big positives about bodies just by looking at a peak bhp figure.

What was yours pushing btw? Saw a nice video of yours on photobucket a few months back and sounded nice!

[Ryan]

What was yours pushing btw? Saw a nice video of yours on photobucket a few months back and sounded nice!

Depends on the rollers lol...

It made 186 a month ago on hard rollers, higher on other rollers... Either way it's a bit different to standard.

But as said previously probably spec wise has alot of room for improvements if I can be arsed.

[dannygti]

Mine was well over the 5k figure but as I said earlier it's relatively out of date now compared to those built on alot less of a budget. I'm sure if Ian was building it again it would be done alot differently. Some prefer a more linar power delivery over something that shoves you in the back, others want to be revving it's tits off, some want power from 2-6k so many variables to consider and in reality neither is the best for everyone.

Look at the engines out there and you can get alot of power with say, jp4 head, pistons and still staying hydro cams (ph4/734 variants). Bike bodies plus something like a predator means power can be had for very good money.

As I said though I'm not slagging off turbos, personally I'd go supercharger but it's down to what people want from an engine, some seem to ignore some of the big positives about bodies just by looking at a peak bhp figure.



Yes ry your cost more than 5k, was the best parts back when it was built. Granted a 200hp can be built for less now but your still talking 5k

I don't think the 734's, pistons bodies make for 'that' fast a car tbh, paulm had that spec and with due respect to Paul it was
That fast.. Where when I drove toads car it was FAST!! I really do think you need to spend the extra to get the big performance... But that's just me, I've been spoilt by driving some very fast cars and perhaps I need a little more to get the right sensations?


One thing i will say is so long as you enjoy the car then it's all good...

I've been having naughty thoughts of a 106 with ford duratec engine and 270hp on bodies with sequential but that's for another time ;)

[hard_corejoeboy]

What i've realised since this thread.

If you want supercharged get a cooper s
If you want turbocharged get a supra

If you want throttle bodies in a tin can:

Get a saxo!

[Ryan]

Yes ry your cost more than 5k, was the best parts back when it was built. Granted a 200hp can be built for less now but your still talking 5k

I don't think the 734's, pistons bodies make for 'that' fast a car tbh, paulm had that spec and with due respect to Paul it was
That fast.. Where when I drove toads car it was FAST!! I really do think you need to spend the extra to get the big performance... But that's just me, I've been spoilt by driving some very fast cars and perhaps I need a little more to get the right sensations?


One thing i will say is so long as you enjoy the car then it's all good...

I've been having naughty thoughts of a 106 with ford duratec engine and 270hp on bodies with sequential but that's for another time ;)

Was Paul driving as that prob didn't help haha...

His engine wasn't alot diff to toads really, daves was ph4, pistons and a jp4 head (after a brilliant engine builder destroyed the old head/bottom end). Its not got solids a really laity exhaust manifold etc...

[Ryan]

What i've realised since this thread.

If you want supercharged get a cooper s
If you want turbocharged get a supra

If you want throttle bodies in a tin can:

Get a saxo!

Supra? One of the biggest barges out there? Cooper s - where the standard charger is a piece of shit? (hence why alot get sold on eBay cheap)..
:hug:

[dannygti]

Was Paul driving as that prob didn't help haha...

His engine wasn't alot diff to toads really, daves was ph4, pistons and a jp4 head (after a brilliant engine builder destroyed the old head/bottom end). Its not got solids a really laity exhaust manifold etc...

Lol ain't saying nothin :D

Don't know why but toads just felt rapid, not sure if it was because it was very light?

Really most tb'd cars with normal cams etc
Make between 120-135@wheels, then the ones with pistons + better cams make 135-150@wheels would you agree but for some reason toads makes 166@wheels... That's a strong engine.

Ross dagleys (granted lot spent) made over 200@wheels at just 5psi and it probably makes that from 3.5k all the way to 7k... That's a good spread right there lol

[scot-ish]

What i've realised since this thread.

If you want supercharged get a cooper s
If you want turbocharged get a supra

If you want throttle bodies in a tin can:

Get a saxo!



your an idiot, not one of your posts has been relative to the thread title, you go on and on about driver driver driver, and yer probably shite driver. get over it, and start yer own thread about driving tuition or summit.

[Ryan]

Lol ain't saying nothin :D

Don't know why but toads just felt rapid, not sure if it was because it was very light?

Really most tb'd cars with normal cams etc
Make between 120-135@wheels, then the ones with pistons + better cams make 135-150@wheels would you agree but for some reason toads makes 166@wheels... That's a strong engine.

Ross dagleys (granted lot spent) made over 200@wheels at just 5psi and it probably makes that from 3.5k all the way to 7k... That's a good spread right there lol

Cam profile... And as usual the joys of inlet/exhaust lengths and bore etc...More important I'm sure you would agree in an na set up than boost, then mapping on top for both can equally make or break an engine. Like I said earlier most ignore the main benefit of the bodies and just slap them onto some 708s thinking it will suddenly transform the car. Much like how some think slapping a whopping great turbo on is the way to go ignoring the flow rates and way it will also perform.

Again though that engine (dave/Alex) isn't or could be replicated for alot less than 5k, you can get away without rods, and Alex is now using bike bodies etc.. It was just at the time poor dave got a bit raped by the company.

It's all horses for courses as said, some dont want a large chunk of torque kicking in on track etc... (as I say spec an engine to a driving style and habit). Which sadly on here seems to get overlooked and some people just slate one and bang on about another...

[J222JRA]

My advice to anyone thinking of doing engine work is to experience both boost and n/a in a saxo and see what you prefer.


I have.........both are epic, but for me it has to be N/A ( a proper build not a mild one)

[dannygti]

Ryan, Alex has my old bodies and they are a decent bit of kit..

Having tried both in the same car I will give my opinion when people ask,, from a performance point of view the throttle bodies are WAY off the pace, in another league, even to toads car.! There's no escaping that..

From a noise, fun, value, feel point if view then that's entirely opinion.

[Ryan]

Ryan, Alex has my old bodies and they are a decent bit of kit

I know he does, but they're considerably cheaper than a set of say shiny ATs and yet don't seem to have dropped the power off going on the same rollers.

hence saying these days na tuning isn't as pricey as it was say 5 years ago.

[dannygti]

Actually Ry those bodies would cost more than at power new. The kit was £2k but it had ecu etc

[Ryan]

Actually Ry those bodies would cost more than at power new. The kit was £2k but it had ecu etc

2k kit? Thought they were a set of bike bodies? Which used can get for very very cheap.

Or is the price to replace the bodies from a dealership?

[dannygti]

No mate they are proper webcon bodies, come with everything.. Nice
Bit of kit, nicer than most Jenveys etc come powder coated. 2k would be for a turnkey throttle body setup including ecu' injectors, breathers, trumpets etc. They don't male the
For the TU though

[toxic]

Nope, just people don't make the most of them.

Bodies allow you to run wild cams (which it's alot harder to do on standard inlet without getting serious scavenging of some cylinders). People think that bolting on some tbs to a car running some 708s will suddenly give them another 5 million bhp..

A well set up na saxo can be a very capable car, and as said previously responds totally differently to a boosted one, but then it depends if you want to spec an engine set up what's right for you or just keep sticking it on rolling roads to cock wave.

million bhp lol

[Ryan]

No mate they are proper webcon bodies, come with everything.. Nice
Bit of kit, nicer than most Jenveys etc come powder coated. 2k would be for a turnkey throttle body setup including ecu' injectors, breathers, trumpets etc. They don't male the
For the TU though

Fair enough thought he had bike bodies on there now you see. Again though they can be got cheap and as sandy is showing can make some good power on various engines.

It's a shame the kms ones are no more, they were pretty good value at the time.

[toxic]

Depends on the rollers lol...

It made 186 a month ago on hard rollers, higher on other rollers... Either way it's a bit different to standard.

But as said previously probably spec wise has alot of room for improvements if I can be arsed.

what was your set up on your car :y:

[Ryan]

Basic spec info is..


Qep bv head + catcam 803s (solid litters etc..)

Forged bottom end although the pistons are not massively oversized to over 80mm iirc.

Pugsport direct to head bodies
Pugsport maxi/cup whatever you want to call it 3 piece 4-2-1 manifold
2.5 ex bore custom exhaust..
Emerald management

[dannygti]

Fair enough thought he had bike bodies on there now you see. Again though they can be got cheap and as sandy is showing can make some good power on various engines.

It's a shame the kms ones are no more, they were pretty good value at the time.

Sandy is king of na, the blogs he makes are brilliant. If I was to want a great n/a engine he would be my man

[Ryan]

Sandy is king of na, the blogs he makes are brilliant. If I was to want a great n/a engine he would be my man

Been good to see him using this forum tbh, nice to see someone willing to help (and fully understand some info he keeps to his chest when its for say a customers race engine).

I may be trying to discuss a few ideas with him on optimising my set up, as feel for what it is there are a few areas that could improve the whole thing massively.

[toxic]

Sandy is king of na, the blogs he makes are brilliant. If I was to want a great n/a engine he would be my man

what is n/a lol :oops:

[Darkslider]

Naturally aspirated, i.e not forced induction. Forced induction is boost either via turbo/supercharger or w/ever.

[KamRacing]

I dont like these debates because I'm rather fond of both. A well setup tb conversion with some proper thought to the components and the design significantly improves over the standard engine. Personally I love the throttle response, the relationship between my foot and the throttle is (almost) instant. It also suits the way I like to drive on track and on the road. Sandy makes some great engines making good power all through the rev range but he thinks about the engine as a whole rather than bolting on 10 bits that should give power.
Flip the coin and I'm rather fond of the torque delivery of a well setup boosted application. For sheer acceleration you cannot beat it. Just watching cars like Atspeeds in action and you just laugh as it hurtles past everything.
I think the main issue I have is I love driving through corners and maximising entry and exit. Maybe too much money gets spent on engines or its just an over eager driver but the videos I see of turbo 106's and saxos they struggle for tyre traction on the exit and as they accelerate through the gears. Certainly a different technique is required but I fear often theres an obsession with power figures rather than making a car use all its components to its best. Does a supercharger help this? I dont know but I guess the same mistakes can be made whatever.
I read ross and danny build threads with great interest as they think about each component they fit and analyse the effect afterwards. Not many would fit a smaller turbo again after getting big power..

[blackie_2k5]

Been good to see him using this forum tbh, nice to see someone willing to help (and fully understand some info he keeps to his chest when its for say a customers race engine).

I may be trying to discuss a few ideas with him on optimising my set up, as feel for what it is there are a few areas that could improve the whole thing massively.

cant aggree more with the above, ive pm'd sandy a few times with issues/concerns i may have had, and hes always gotten back to me in pretty good time to help/try point me in the direction i need to be heading :y:

not many ppl....especially as busy as he is, will do that for complete strangers, hes even had input into my progress thread when i had issues without even asking

as for the debate :p

same as always, it depends what you want, as said, 9/10 ppl is most power for least money, for the price bodies just cant yield the power a charger can, not without spending more....

i prefer being pinned in my seat, with a massive burst of acceleration, whilst struggling to keep the car in a straight line, as the rear end squats and the front end becomes weightless :A:

so tbh i was always in need of a turbo :D

[RDKells]

Power is nothing without control :D

Best bang for buck?

Buying a shit load of fireworks and attaching them to the car..or treading on an IED

Lmao.

But, sorry to hijack, I know what a cam is in simple terms, asin a circle with a bit sticking out used to push things up and down, but how do they increase power in an engine/where do they go/ etc?


(Sorry log1c)

[RDKells]

what is n/a lol :oops:

Naturally Aspirated ie not using forced induction (turbo) ((<I think))

TY GRAN TURISMO!

[Ryan]

Lmao.

But, sorry to hijack, I know what a cam is in simple terms, asin a circle with a bit sticking out used to push things up and down, but how do they increase power in an engine/where do they go/ etc?


(Sorry log1c)

Basically a 'wilder' cam has more lift and duration.

In other words the valve ends up being pushed open further for longer - more air getting into the cylinder and thus more power (when mixed with the fuel correctly)..


Obviously theres a fair bit more to it but thats the basic idea.

[blackie_2k5]

Lmao.

But, sorry to hijack, I know what a cam is in simple terms, asin a circle with a bit sticking out used to push things up and down, but how do they increase power in an engine/where do they go/ etc?


(Sorry log1c)

camshafts are bits of metal with "lobes" on them, these are the actual cams

they control the valves, inlet and exhaust, and how how high(this is know as lift) and for how long (known as duration) the valves open, a normal engine will have certain profile on the lobes of the cams, this dictates the lift and duration,

it in turn lets so much air/fuel mixture into the combustion chamber, it fires and produces a certain amount of power... normal engines run a safe profile giving a good spread of power across the range etc, and also a good idle.

by changing the profile you can run "wilder" cams which may have a higher lift/longer duration, which lets MORE air/fuel mixture in then normal cams

more mixture means bigger bang...which means more power, when doing this you normally change the power band.. e.g. higher up rev range etc, this would make less economical/more awkward driving in a standard car..hence manuacturers not doing this first off

with certain profiles, the standard inlet will not let in enough air to either run the car and allow it to idle, or use the power properly, this would make an undriveable car with pretty poor power id have thought

thats where you TB's come in, one for each cylinder, this allows the correct amount of air for a good idle, and maximising the power the cams can give you...

BUT with wilder cams etc the power band will still shift and make for a more awkward "road car" but if doing this... its normally not an issue to the owner

AND some cam profiles require alot more supporting work the head/valve train to be able to run correctly/safely :y:

hope that helps

[blackie_2k5]

damn ryan!... i start writting and go for a piss...and BOOM!

[Ryan]

damn ryan!... i start writting and go for a piss...and BOOM!

and i said it in far less text haha!!

(but less detail).

[RDKells]

camshafts are bits of metal with "lobes" on them, these are the actual cams

they control the valves, inlet and exhaust, and how how high(this is know as lift) and for how long (known as duration) the valves open, a normal engine will have certain profile on the lobes of the cams, this dictates the lift and duration,

it in turn lets so much air/fuel mixture into the combustion chamber, it fires and produces a certain amount of power... normal engines run a safe profile giving a good spread of power across the range etc, and also a good idle.

by changing the profile you can run "wilder" cams which may have a higher lift/longer duration, which lets MORE air/fuel mixture in then normal cams

more mixture means bigger banger...which means more power, when doing this you normally change the power band.. e.g. higher up rev range etc, this would make less economical/more awkward driving in a standard car..hence manuacturers not doing this first off

with certain profiles, the standard inlet will not let in enough air to either run the car and allow it to idle, or use the power properly, this would make an undriveable car with pretty poor power id have thought

thats where you TB's come in, one for each cylinder, this allows the correct amount of air for a good idle, and maximising the power the cams can give you...

BUT with wilder cams etc the power band will still shift and make for a more awkward "road car" but if doing this... its normally not an issue to the owner

AND some cam profiles require alot more supporting work the head/valve train to be able to run correctly/safely :y:

hope that helps

Wow, I get it, thanks man. So cams + throttle body = ty for some N/A?

[tichy]

I've seen a thread on here with some one having Tb's and turbo what's that sort of setup get you in terms of power and the way it delivers the power

[blackie_2k5]

I've seen a thread on here with some one having Tb's and turbo what's that sort of setup get you in terms of power and the way it delivers the power

its not really worth it, you could get the same amount of power with a charger through a single larger inlet then you could with bodies,

ive not read much into it, but its cost a hell of a lot more then normal bodies or turbo as you have to have a sealed inlet made for the bodies to blast the boost into

and from what ive read.....although alot seem to have gotten round this apparantley?....its meant to be alot harder to map and give good idle(due to the TPS), aswell as an alleged snappy throttle

i dont know how much truth there is to the last bit as thats just what ive read..

[Ryan]

its not really worth it, you could get the same amount of power with a charger through a single larger inlet then you could with bodies,

ive not read much into it, but its cost a hell of a lot more then normal bodies or turbo as you have to have a sealed inlet made for the bodies to blast the boost into

and from what ive read.....although alot seem to have gotten round this apparantley?....its meant to be alot harder to map and give good idle(due to the TPS), aswell as an alleged snappy throttle

i dont know how much truth there is to the last bit as thats just what ive read..

The problem people have had with the set up has been down to wrong TB choice and poor plenum design.

Sybez's was crazy when it worked, there are a few cars on the market that run the set up from stock, some of the ford boys seem to be keen on doing it. I know Sy's apparently had a snappy throttle from some posts I read which I believe was put down to the size of the butterfly + supercharger.

JP4 inlet on the TU5 does seem to respond very well though and shouldnt blow to bits being metal..

[tichy]

Yh I heard they were harder to map just thought is ask lol and roughly how much did your boost cost you to set up I'm looking at doing something like this sometime just not got to save the pennys first just want like a guide price yours is about the ideal power for what im after

[blackie_2k5]

ai, i think it was sybez's i must have been reading about?

blocks85 is running turbo/bodies on his car with no issues(that ive seen), as said ive not really read much into it so i dont know, it seems a total waste of money and more of a whore spec then anything else IMO

why spend all the money to get minimal to zero benefit when you can get the same power/driveability without?

if this isnt the case someone please fill me in as id actually be quite interested to know what youd gain if anything..... but even if you do gain anything its still not gonna be worth the spends or itd be alot more widely known by now

but as always.. each to their own i suppose

[blackie_2k5]

Yh I heard they were harder to map just thought is ask lol and roughly how much did your boost cost you to set up I'm looking at doing something like this sometime just not got to save the pennys first just want like a guide price yours is about the ideal power for what im after

if thats aimed at me then i have no real idea anymore becasue of changing spec etc so much, but at a good guess id say including the car it owes me no more then 4k all in, and ive still got lots of stuf waiting to fit to it

[Ryan]

Steve red 106 S1 (mates with dave P)

Hes running boost and bodies, but then hes also running very lairy cams and has had a serious amount of headwork done too (or had done)...

I believe ultimately you can get more power/totally change the characterisitics of the engine by doing it this way it just requires alot more thought process

[tichy]

Yh it was aimed at you I should of used the quote thing Realy and that's a good price tbh made me want to do this Evan more now and you haven't done any internal work or have you

[tichy]

Ryan what do you mean by changes the charicterists of the engine in what way can you explain please just trying to learn about engine mods more sorry to be a pain

[blackie_2k5]

Yh it was aimed at you I should of used the quote thing Realy and that's a good price tbh made me want to do this Evan more now and you haven't done any internal work or have you

no mate, its not that hard to do once getting going, just cost, lots of saving ;)

Ryan what do you mean by changes the charicterists of the engine in what way can you explain please just trying to learn about engine mods more sorry to be a pain

and probably how it revs, where it makes peak power, how the power is delivered etc



hmmmm food for thought tbh ryan

[axsaxoman]

I am very aware of what is available in turbo,s now ,but all you ever see on here and other forums is talk of units withwith old design blades and very little if any modern control systems .
please show me a grpah of power /rpm and boost level at 500rpm internvals of the type you are endorsing agianst what ,most peole are using.
I have said right at the start that just going for big numbers is wrong for the type of it is and the FWD car ,the way the power comes on ,
.
my bias ,if you wish use that term is born out of what I see on this and other forums of projects started --and half of which never get finished and the short time that the projects are used before they are sold or stripped and the bits sold on.
you must also admit ot being biased the other way
I am still waiting to see a really good manifold for a turbo as well that mounts the turbo at a proper height that gives a good oil drain and doesn,t require the relocation of everything --
why has someone not made a proper cast iron manifold that would move the turbo to a better postion --no need at at all for the tubular type on a road going car at the the power levels most use .--an expensive bit of bling the tubular one + they always distort after being fitted and a pain to remount again
As i have already said its a personal choice turbo or s/c but for simplicity of fitting the s/c wins hands down every time and can give more than enough power simply with no under bonnet heat problems ,no need to intefer with std oil supply system ,no extra water cooling system ,
I know if i had two cars in the workshop to do ,one turbo + one s/c the s/c would be rolling out the door alot quicker than the turbo one--you won,t fit complete turbo system + intercoolers + oil system + ex system extra water cooling etc in less than a day .
my views are based on the completed project and how much+ how hard it is to get there .
I will say it again i have nothing against turbo,s in principle on the right type of car

[axsaxoman]

ai, i think it was sybez's i must have been reading about?

blocks85 is running turbo/bodies on his car with no issues(that ive seen), as said ive not really read much into it so i dont know, it seems a total waste of money and more of a whore spec then anything else IMO

why spend all the money to get minimal to zero benefit when you can get the same power/driveability without?

if this isnt the case someone please fill me in as id actually be quite interested to know what youd gain if anything..... but even if you do gain anything its still not gonna be worth the spends or itd be alot more widely known by now

but as always.. each to their own i suppose

the reason the turbo+ t/bodies wroks ok is with a turbo you have no boost until you have already opened thwe throttle --you have made hot gas ,wound u the turbo .
with the s/c when you crack the throttle the boost is already there ,so it made sybez,s car very jerky when going from very light throttle to large throttle opening --thats why there is no need in either turbo or s/c --unless you are running cams that don,t work till above 6k+ up to say 9k --then you would need them ,but that a specialised drag car ,cos you can more than enough bhp without them + drag car you don,t expect the engines to stay in one peice very long.
he reason steve was directed towards for going t/b with the s/c was to cut down the power at lower rpms to save the g/box+ he wanted a very large rpm range--if you were going to go t/b,s and boost the GMC/ATP units would be a good choice as they are not too big --but again only really neede if going to very high rpm --so you can have nice bottom end when not much boost is available

[Mieran]

I must say, the turbo 'lag' is being exaggerated a bit in this thread.

If someone never driven a turbo'd car and had a look in this thread they'd probably think you need to floor it for 10seconds then power comes in.

I would love to drive a supercharged car one day though to see what it feels like.

[e8_pqck]

thats what i was thinking.

John does have a point and i like the vids of AXO eating evo's. However, the super charger is quite expensive to buy - £1500 before even fitted where a turbo is like £150 so i think this sways a lot of people.

[dannygti]

I do agree John that massive advantage of the s/c kit is it's much easier to install.. It can be fitted by someone with little experience in 2 weekends which is a great sales advantage, also another reason why I'm hoping my friend will do a s/c as he doesn't have time to make a turbo kit from scratch nor the expendable income to pay a company for a drive in, drive out conversion.

[Jungle]

I must say, the turbo 'lag' is being exaggerated a bit in this thread.

If someone never driven a turbo'd car and had a look in this thread they'd probably think you need to floor it for 10seconds then power comes in.

I would love to drive a supercharged car one day though to see what it feels like.


Definately! Only time lag is really an issue on a 200-300bhp saxo is if its either not been set up right or someone can't drive.

[blackie_2k5]

only time ive ever found lag be a pain to me personally... was a a set of lights on a motorway, was behind a super quick rallye, he was talking to someone else as lights changed, rolled away and i just slipped into second off boost about 15mph, he was still in first, i wasnt expecting him to floor it but he did, i had nothing, off boost going to slow for 2nd too fast to drop into 1st without risking damage to box or shafts, single only time

[axsaxoman]

thats what i was thinking.

John does have a point and i like the vids of AXO eating evo's. However, the super charger is quite expensive to buy - £1500 before even fitted where a turbo is like £150 so i think this sways a lot of people.

I know of nowwhere you can buy a new turbo +exmanifold +oilsystem=water cooling system for £150 .
you are not comparing like with like I agree if you were gong for a s/h t2 180bhp set-up then providing you are not using a readliy available manifold like the dp or cituning then it will be cheaper --
and using a t2 the lag is less noticable as it spools up at lower rpms+ cannot make big boost anyway .
but if you do a like for like comparison then the dp kit is over 2k --and it doesn,t include everthing you need anyway -you even have to remake the bracket for the actuator ,so the like for like would be my s/c+ bracket + oil system +rollers + belt at £1750 --all the other bits are same sort of price what ever way you go --ecu ,injectors intercooler ,internal engine mods etc etc
if you are quite happy to run stock internals i can promise that the s/c will run higher boost levels than a turboand keep internals happy ,because of the way the boost comes on and no "spikes" in transitional fuelling which all turbo,s have and you can run higher comp levels ,so of boost is better.when i tell people that 7-8psi is max on std internals +std comp ratio
that is a level I know will not cause any problems ever -- not a possible max and it might go pop sometime --presuming fuelling is correct -my view from doing this a long time is that eventually the top ring groove will collapse running higher --
when i do not know ,so i would not promise anything else and would advise to go for 7psi to be really safe ,
but that will give you 50-60% increase of power--if you want it lower in the rpm ,providing you limit top rpm (for charger life) then you can have that too.

[Jungle]

I know of nowwhere you can buy a new turbo +exmanifold +oilsystem=water cooling system for £150 .
you are not comparing like with like I agree if you were gong for a s/h t2 180bhp set-up then providing you are not using a readliy available manifold like the dp or cituning then it will be cheaper --
and using a t2 the lag is less noticable as it spools up at lower rpms+ cannot make big boost anyway .
but if you do a like for like comparison then the dp kit is over 2k --and it doesn,t include everthing you need anyway -you even have to remake the bracket for the actuator ,so the like for like would be my s/c+ bracket + oil system +rollers + belt at £1750 --all the other bits are same sort of price what ever way you go --ecu ,injectors intercooler ,internal engine mods etc etc
if you are quite happy to run stock internals i can promise that the s/c will run higher boost levels than a turboand keep internals happy ,because of the way the boost comes on and no "spikes" in transitional fuelling which all turbo,s have and you can run higher comp levels ,so of boost is better.when i tell people that 7-8psi is max on std internals +std comp ratio
that is a level I know will not cause any problems ever -- not a possible max and it might go pop sometime --presuming fuelling is correct -my view from doing this a long time is that eventually the top ring groove will collapse running higher --
when i do not know ,so i would not promise anything else and would advise to go for 7psi to be really safe ,
but that will give you 50-60% increase of power--if you want it lower in the rpm ,providing you limit top rpm (for charger life) then you can have that too.

My turbo, manifold and oil feed/return together cost about £500, and as you said all the other bits with regards to fuelling, ecu, mapping etc would be the same for s/c or t/c.

Mine is fully spooled up to 1.3 bar by 3,000rpm and IMO thats bang on as if i'm smashing it why would i have the revs any less than 3k anyway?

Not wanting to get into this debate on here as I've got better things to do but just thought I'd give a real world example of a experience trubocharging a car as you make it sounds more difficult and expensive than it actually is.

[axsaxoman]

I thank you for your input ,if you could post a graph to show this and alaso quote spec of turbo used etc i,m sure everyone would be very appreciative,pictures would be even better

[blackie_2k5]

for what ive paid im pretty happy with my set up, its not been cheap, and isnt to the spec of most, but as said its just something for me to toy with, its been the first set up ive done, and ive learnt alot more then i used to know about turbo charging by doing it.

brief spec is:

90bhp silvertop in 98bhp shell
running mid-low 8's compression wise via 2mm ferriday decomp and 1.9mm MLS gasket
custom made manifold and down pipe with waste gas seperator, 316 stainless
2.5" custom made stainless system with custom centre box
440cc/min injectors
rallye inlet & vtr TB
200sx s13 garrett t25 turbo running 15psi
predator standalone with quicky loom re plugged for chassis

i know that it will blow up at some point, but at the cost of another vtr engine and service parts i dont mind blowing a few up ATM, i will be building a new car next year, 16v most likely, and may just go supercharger to try it out, it will be of alot higher spec

my latest dyno run gave me these graphs and an average of 218bhp, it has apaarant fueling issues which have haunted the car since "completed", now confident its either fuel pump or FPR

hence the richness up top, it also had a very restrictive induction on whichhas now been replaced with a free and force fed system- but its yet to be mapped for this(hadnt below), and the difference on the road from changing it was astounding to say the least.. its also running a pretty tame ignition map aswell presently

here are the graphs
http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss328/blackie_2k5/06082011443.jpg
http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss328/blackie_2k5/06082011442.jpg

[Jungle]

I thank you for your input ,if you could post a graph to show this and alaso quote spec of turbo used etc i,m sure everyone would be very appreciative,pictures would be even better

It's a TD04 off a classic Impreza WRX, don't know exact housing sizes though, custom stainless manifold and oil feed and return made to order. Can't put up the Dyno graph at the minute as i left in a rush saturday night and left it at the Dyno (doh!).

Pictures of the build and spec are on my progress thread.

In all honesty i know very little about cars compared to you and some others on here but I've just thumbled my way through the build lol. I knew what i wanted and I have common sence to build it so it performs well as a fast road car not a lag monster.

Edit: Copied spec from my build thread, not sure how accurate this is anymore cba to check it...

1.6 8v Rallye Engine
Spoox Smaller Radiator with custom header tank
Uprated Spark Plugs
Magnecore Competition Leads
Focus RS Injectors
GM 3 Bar Map Sensor
Walboro 255 Fuel Pump
Modified Inlet Manifold
Custom Exhaust Manifold
TDO4 Turbo
GR Performance Custom Stainless Steel Exhaust
Front Mount Intercooler
GR Performance Custom Stainless Steel Boost Pipes
Custom Oil Feed & Return to modified sump
Tial 38mm External Wastegate with G-R Performance Screamer Pipe
Battery relocated to boot
Innovate Wideband Lambda and AFR gauge
DTA S40 Pro Ecu
Custom Engine Loom
Blitz Electronic Boost Controller

[Gareth_R]

Just a shame that tam had to extend the front of his ax by two inches to fit the supercharger in!

[mangojace]

Superchargers can GTFO ...
Endless-R R34 GTR time attack machine - YouTube
4.30 mins ;)

[e8_pqck]

Superchargers can GTFO ...
Endless-R R34 GTR time attack machine - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuLNBbM9Iqo)
4.30 mins ;)

looks like a handful and that box is getting a hammering!

[dannygti]

^^^ fuck

[axsaxoman]

Superchargers can GTFO ...
Endless-R R34 GTR time attack machine - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuLNBbM9Iqo)
4.30 mins ;)


perfect example of why you wouldn,t want a BIG turbo in a saxo .freewheels round the corners and its not front wheel drive ,can,t nail it till its straight --and a skyline at 3litres or more is hardly a saxo -runs like a bag of shite on idle gearbox alone would cost more than a whole saxo .
not really doing the turbo cause much good when nearly all the cars we are talking about will be full road cars and not pure track cars.
either the car is badly set-up or thats the worst driver i have ever seen "sawing at the steering wheel" in the corners

[dannygti]

Shut up John :D

[mangojace]

perfect example of why you wouldn,t want a BIG turbo in a saxo .freewheels round the corners and its not front wheel drive ,can,t nail it till its straight --and a skyline at 3litres or more is hardly a saxo -runs like a bag of shite on idle gearbox alone would cost more than a whole saxo .
not really doing the turbo cause much good when nearly all the cars we are talking about will be full road cars and not pure track cars.
either the car is badly set-up or thats the worst driver i have ever seen "sawing at the steering wheel" in the corners

A skyline at 3 litres or more? Where are you getting your facts from John? Its a rb28! Cant nail it to the straight.LOL videos make things look slow,have you ever seen a time attack skyline?

Sure they would make mince meat of your car!

Your just turning business away as some customers actually want turbo's over superchargers, but each to there own! Bit like when you wouldnt give the spec of your own camshafts when customers asked.

Atspeed 106 Turbo - Trax 2011 - YouTube i guess colins is crap to with it being turbo?

[KamRacing]

No power seems to be able to be put down from the apex so its not fast on corners but its a missile on the straight. Thats the problem with that cars power delivery and chassis setup.

[adzvtr]

hows about we stop arguing about which is better and learn from this

NISSAN SKYLINE R35GT-R TWIN TURBO & TWIN SUPERCHARGED - YouTube

[mangojace]

Twin chargers Yoooo

[adzvtr]

Twin chargers Yoooo

2 chargers and 2 turbos, FTW

[mangojace]

2 chargers and 2 turbos, FTW

That r35 is very underpowered for that though tbh lol!

[e8_pqck]

hows about we stop arguing about which is better and learn from this

NISSAN SKYLINE R35GT-R TWIN TURBO & TWIN SUPERCHARGED - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aSR5Vd4eRM)

yeh, i like it when i he says:

hai, yai chai, wahai mai chai nikkei

[e8_pqck]

A skyline at 3 litres or more? Where are you getting your facts from John? Its a rb28! Cant nail it to the straight.LOL videos make things look slow,have you ever seen a time attack skyline?

Sure they would make mince meat of your car!

Your just turning business away as some customers actually want turbo's over superchargers, but each to there own! Bit like when you wouldnt give the spec of your own camshafts when customers asked.

Atspeed 106 Turbo - Trax 2011 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESMSld3pS9o) i guess colins is crap to with it being turbo?

what are the 2 cars that go past at 2:30?

[Mieran]

what are the 2 cars that go past at 2:30?

New GTR

[maddison_vts]

Here you go axsaxoman...
this is a rolling road printout of my old low boost set up turbo vts. Completely standard intrernals and built for around half the cost of a supercharger setup. The car was very very predictable and I had NO ISSUES putting the power down at all, I could put my foot to the floor in 2nd and get no wheelspin due to the linear power delivery. It also returned 43mpg and didn't skip a beat the whole time I had it. I never once broke a driveshaft, or had traction issues. The turbo would spool from 1,500rpm and hold boost until 7,000rpm. This dyno printout was when it was on 9.5psi, I ran it for quite a while at 12-13psi still with no issues.

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/lee_vts/rrresult.jpg

edit, as you can, this was dyno'd in may on quite a hot day and it was also the back end of a dyno session and iirc it was about the 15th car on the rollers so you can imagine the heat in the garage. Had I taken the car back on a nice cool day, no doubt I would have seen a few more ponies on the printout...

[e8_pqck]

was that with a decomp?

[maddison_vts]

was that with a decomp?

no, standard engine, 1.9mm head gasket, but still won't be far off the standard compression ratio

[e8_pqck]

Fuckit, thats what i have - who can map a KMS in Leeds? Time to turn her up!

This is what i mean in my other thread - these bottom ends and pistons are pretty strong.

Ive been reading a few people running higher boost with no problems - if it goes bang a new engine is cheap as chips anyway..

[maddison_vts]

Fuckit, thats what i have - who can map a KMS in Leeds? Time to turn her up!

This is what i mean in my other thread - these bottom ends and pistons are pretty strong.

Ive been reading a few people running higher boost with no problems - if it goes bang a new engine is cheap as chips anyway..

to be honest, I put the reliability I had down to the mapper - sandy brown.

I can't recommend this guy enough. The car drove fantastic, it was reliable, I never had any issues with the work he did on it and I had the car on the dyno at alan jeffery enginetuner and they complemented how well set up it was which was quite a thing to say imo.

[blackie_2k5]

thats the thing with it, good mapping is key on these things

e8 long as you find some one who knows what theyre doing you should be fine, as said the engines are pence anyway

EDIT- maddison that is VERY linear for a turbo :D

but sandy is more used to N/A mapping isnt he?, so id guess this plays a part in the way he maps the power in ...?

[Jungle]

WOW that is smooth!!!

[e8_pqck]

thats the thing with it, good mapping is key on these things

e8 long as you find some one who knows what theyre doing you should be fine, as said the engines are pence anyway

EDIT- maddison that is VERY linear for a turbo :D

but sandy is more used to N/A mapping isnt he?, so id guess this plays a part in the way he maps the power in ...?

In Leeds, going to call AET tomorrowsee if they can fit me in before I take it to Cottesmore on the 23rd. Anyone used them? They built me a turbo for my GT-Four and did a great job.

[blackie_2k5]

if theyre reputable they should be fine mate. AET as in the company that makes wideband and stuff like that?

EDIT- hold the phone im thinking of AEM :homme: neber mind ..

[Jungle]

As requested got a picture of my graph...

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r174/jungle_2007/Dyno.jpg

[maddison_vts]

Yeah, was really happy with the results of it all. As you can see with the graph, there is no 'violent torque/power increase' to strip gears or break traction as gmc always quote. It was brilliant and very useable. The only transmission issues I ever had were through me being over aggressive with it.

I'd like to see someone supercharge one with as much power, in a such a smooth delivery, on the same budget and on standard internals. Not going to happen imo, therefore turbo over supercharger any day if you ask me!

Not forgetting the fuel economy either or the fact it had no lag...

And to add to all of this, I went through the whole of last summer with no cooling fan and I did use the car every day, so the 'dangerous under bonnet temperatures' isn't exactly true either.


Its all horses for courses, I can totally understand the attraction of ITB's, personally I prefer boost and if you're going boost then turbo is the better and more cost effective route imo.

axsaxoman - After reading everything you think of turbocharged setups it appears you're stuck in the days of the old escort rs turbo's and sierra cosworth's where there was mega lag and then a massive hit of power that just caused wheelspin. Yeah, thats a crap system. However, times have changed and I'm sure you're aware that technology has advanced. It just seems that you want to sell everyone a supercharger and then try and justify it by pointing out problems with turbo's that really just aren't problems anymore...

[blackie_2k5]

tbh after all i read on here before/during my build.... i was expecting to have gone through a box or 2 by now, my box if it hasnt been changed...got nothing to suggest it has, is now on 98k, and has done about 4 or 5k hard driving since the turbo went on, at current and for a good 2k at least its got about 230lbft going through it and its showing no signs of going yet, no noises or anything, and going off my graphs my boost does come in fairly strong in a big lump

my main worries are the shafts...but they seem fine for time being also, as said in the thread e8 made about bursting engines... i think too many ppl take too much stock in what happend a good few years ago, and as youve mentioned, times and technology has moved on

[logic_guy]

9 Pages of info!

It'll take me half an hour to read through all this.

[adzvtr]

Yeah, was really happy with the results of it all. As you can see with the graph, there is no 'violent torque/power increase' to strip gears or break traction as gmc always quote. It was brilliant and very useable. The only transmission issues I ever had were through me being over aggressive with it.

I'd like to see someone supercharge one with as much power, in a such a smooth delivery, on the same budget and on standard internals. Not going to happen imo, therefore turbo over supercharger any day if you ask me!

Not forgetting the fuel economy either or the fact it had no lag...

And to add to all of this, I went through the whole of last summer with no cooling fan and I did use the car every day, so the 'dangerous under bonnet temperatures' isn't exactly true either.


Its all horses for courses, I can totally understand the attraction of ITB's, personally I prefer boost and if you're going boost then turbo is the better and more cost effective route imo.

axsaxoman - After reading everything you think of turbocharged setups it appears you're stuck in the days of the old escort rs turbo's and sierra cosworth's where there was mega lag and then a massive hit of power that just caused wheelspin. Yeah, thats a crap system. However, times have changed and I'm sure you're aware that technology has advanced. It just seems that you want to sell everyone a supercharger and then try and justify it by pointing out problems with turbo's that really just aren't problems anymore...

you do have to spend more on a charger to get better gains, however the power delivery is a little less harsh on drive train,.

urs was very linear m8, it was a gt17 with uprated actuator wasnt it. was epically quick aswell.
how long did the box i gave u last in the end???

[KamRacing]

tbh after all i read on here before/during my build.... i was expecting to have gone through a box or 2 by now, my box if it hasnt been changed...got nothing to suggest it has, is now on 98k, and has done about 4 or 5k hard driving since the turbo went on, at current and for a good 2k at least its got about 230lbft going through it and its showing no signs of going yet, no noises or anything, and going off my graphs my boost does come in fairly strong in a big lump

my main worries are the shafts...but they seem fine for time being also, as said in the thread e8 made about bursting engines... i think too many ppl take too much stock in what happend a good few years ago, and as youve mentioned, times and technology has moved on

sounds like you have mechanical sympathy in your foot :D

[mangojace]

oh dear wheres John gone?

[adzvtr]

looking at this thread tho its an arguement that will never be won.
there are those that swear by turbo and argue it till there blue in the face.

there are those that swear by charger and argue till there blue in the face.

both have there benefits both have there down falls.

and then the n/a arguement is the same.
i think everyone can agree tho

getting 200bhp which ever way its done is pretty epic in a saxo/106,ax etc.
and boost how ever it comes is WIN

[axsaxoman]

I,m here ,you cannot compare s/h stuff + home built --no labour or jig costs cost involved when comparing with ready made kits .
it would at least 8 years ago I suggested that the std scoby or evo turbo would be a far better match than what most were using and I have always offered to do a turbo conversion from scratch if someone wanted ,but as to making kits ready to bolt on with new parts --the pricing will not be any cheaper than the s/c .If you can make bolt on kits for £5oo with all the boost controls and oil+water plumbing then i suggest you are in the wrong job.
unfortunatley if i quote for a job the customer expects my costings to be accurate -not a vague historical guessof what was done
making big power at low rpms --not a problem you just decide on the rpm range as you have and gear the charger to suit-- I notice your graph doen,t even go to 6k and no sign of it dropping ,so you will excuse me thinking that this is not the best of graphs to get any sensible information from-- were you worried about it going bang?
you are showing you have alot of power from an 8v at low final rpm
i wonder if the 16v turbo lads would not consider that a little unbelievable 240@wheels @around 5800rpm--or 280@flywheel from a std 8v with just 1.3bar of boost

the more i look at the graph the less it looks like a boosted graph ,normally the torque comes up and is then afairly straight line and the bhp goes up as a function of rpm -it certainlty is an unsual shape ,can you explain ,and i mean this in a nice way --why it is that shape.

[maddison_vts]

you do have to spend more on a charger to get better gains, however the power delivery is a little less harsh on drive train,.

urs was very linear m8, it was a gt17 with uprated actuator wasnt it. was epically quick aswell.
how long did the box i gave u last in the end???

Yeah, it was a gt17 with a different acutator. Adz, you don't need to edit your post to come across more polite mate, I won't be offended or get in a tantrum about it lol :y: ;)
I don't deny I had numerous gearboxes in my saxo, most of which though were when it was n/a. I was very very aggressive with it which resulted in breaking a few gearbox casings. The only time I had an actual box fail was when I stripped 3rd gear in the wet one day, it broke traction and I kept it pinned (not a great idea, I admit) as soon as it hit anti skid the car regained grip immediately and stripped the gear. I still put this down to aggresive driving though as I don't think many gearboxes would put up with that level of abuse. After that, I had your standard open diff box in there. That lasted roughly 6 months before the diff began to make some worrying noises so that came out and the vts box went back in with the quaife diff in it. By this point I'd learnt my lesson that driving with a little more mechanical sympathy will save me playing the 'change the gearbox game' which had stopped being fun :zainy: After that I had no more transmission issues.

Before I turbo'd mine I had put a lot of thought into which route I was going to take with it, the reason I chose turbo over itb's or s/c was;

.the most bhp for my £
.noise, i do love the noise of turbo's :cool

To me, it seemed the most cost effective way of getting a quick car.

The point I was trying to make was that boosted cars don't have to be all or nothing.

Each to their own, like you said adz everyone will argue that the one they have is the best route to take. Its to be expected, no doubt had I supercharged mine this post would be reading how much better they are and the benefits of them etc etc.

you did see first hand how much abuse my engine took and how much time it spent above 7,500rpm and I think this goes to show that regardless of the state of tune be it s/c, turbo or itb's, mapped correctly these engines are fantastic.

[axsaxoman]

Here you go axsaxoman...
this is a rolling road printout of my old low boost set up turbo vts. Completely standard intrernals and built for around half the cost of a supercharger setup. The car was very very predictable and I had NO ISSUES putting the power down at all, I could put my foot to the floor in 2nd and get no wheelspin due to the linear power delivery. It also returned 43mpg and didn't skip a beat the whole time I had it. I never once broke a driveshaft, or had traction issues. The turbo would spool from 1,500rpm and hold boost until 7,000rpm. This dyno printout was when it was on 9.5psi, I ran it for quite a while at 12-13psi still with no issues.

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/lee_vts/rrresult.jpg

edit, as you can, this was dyno'd in may on quite a hot day and it was also the back end of a dyno session and iirc it was about the 15th car on the rollers so you can imagine the heat in the garage. Had I taken the car back on a nice cool day, no doubt I would have seen a few more ponies on the printout...

now that looks more like a boosted graph --you can see where the turbo starts to run out of puff at top end and torque drops even though bhp is still rising
i think i would be changin gear well before the 7800 --little difference in power once above 6500rpm = it will help engine life

[maddison_vts]

now that looks more like a boosted graph --you can see where the turbo starts to run out of puff at top end and torque drops even though bhp is still rising
i think i would be changin gear well before the 7800 --little difference in power once above 6500rpm = it will help engine life

I had the shift light set at 6,500rpm. It pulled well to 7,000rpm but after that you could feel it didn't have any more to give. Draw back of using a fairly small turbo I guess

[adzvtr]

no worries lee, didnt edit it to sound nicer i missed the part about u being agressive with the box lol.

ye m8 i know for sure u didnt mother the car and it kept going,
you did what i wanted to do before me lol.

its funny cause u were all for charging first and i was all for turboin.
decided to charge as u already had a turboed one round here, wanted to be different.
the best thing i could suggest is if u drove mine to compare the difference.

u might be suprised on how aggressive even the charger is really.

[Jungle]

I notice your graph doen,t even go to 6k and no sign of it dropping ,so you will excuse me thinking that this is not the best of graphs to get any sensible information from-- were you worried about it going bang?
you are showing you have alot of power from an 8v at low final rpm
i wonder if the 16v turbo lads would not consider that a little unbelievable 240@wheels @around 5800rpm--or 280@flywheel from a std 8v with just 1.3bar of boost

the more i look at the graph the less it looks like a boosted graph ,normally the torque comes up and is then afairly straight line and the bhp goes up as a function of rpm -it certainlty is an unsual shape ,can you explain ,and i mean this in a nice way --why it is that shape.

Ignopring all the first bit at is irrelevent and difficult to understand.

Limiter is set at 6,500rpm as with the old controller boost used to drop off well before then. This graph was during a quick mapping session the night before trax, so didn't have time to mess about moving the limiter. It doesn't go all the way trhough because we were in the process of putting more timing in so wasn't doing full 0-limiter runs as like i said we were in a rush, shortly after the clutch started to slip so we called it a day. Gaz did me that map in approximately 30 minutes as I needed to take the car out and bed the brakes in so i was rushing him. This graph was never meant to be a propper power run but you wanted evidence so i got it for you.

I don't know why it's that shape and i don't know what shape you think it should be but that's just how it is. I don't fully understand mapping so can't answer, I don't see why it matters though that proves how smooth the power comes in.

Sorry mate but all you've done is tried to call me a liar after i proved you wrong. It's not on and I'm sure if Gaz saw this he wouldn't be happy that your calling him a liar as well as he prides himself on his honesty with customers! :wall:

[maddison_vts]

Yeah, I was sold on s/c up until a couple of weeks before I got all the turbo bits. It was just a sudden change of heart and the winning factor was cost. I wanted it fully done and converted, mapped etc in 2 weeks and funds just didn't allow to get all that done in a 2 week slot with a s/c. No regrets though, and tbh I'd do it again but go for more power the second time round. (I doubt it will ever happen though given I've just bought another s14a lol)

Get yourself out on a sunday night soon I'd love to go out in it tbh just to see the differences in how it responds :y: You got any ideas on what power it is yet?

edit - this is to adz lol

[adzvtr]

Yeah, I was sold on s/c up until a couple of weeks before I got all the turbo bits. It was just a sudden change of heart and the winning factor was cost. I wanted it fully done and converted, mapped etc in 2 weeks and funds just didn't allow to get all that done in a 2 week slot with a s/c. No regrets though, and tbh I'd do it again but go for more power the second time round. (I doubt it will ever happen though given I've just bought another s14a lol)

Get yourself out on a sunday night soon I'd love to go out in it tbh just to see the differences in how it responds :y: You got any ideas on what power it is yet?

edit - this is to adz lol

id hate to say at the moment, id like to think its around 250 atw.
will find out on the 7th november when it goes for cam timing and final mapping. but needs a new fuel pump b4 then as it starves for fuel when really going for it.
need to book a couple sundays off work so can get to some meets. u can take it out then make a true comparison for both.

[maddison_vts]

id hate to say at the moment, id like to think its around 250 atw.
will find out on the 7th november when it goes for cam timing and final mapping. but needs a new fuel pump b4 then as it starves for fuel when really going for it.
need to book a couple sundays off work so can get to some meets. u can take it out then make a true comparison for both.

thanks very much :y:

With the fuelling issue, for the time being keep the fuel above half a tank and you should find it stops it. Obviously a new pump will be better long term and if you will be showing it a lot of track use then maybe a swirl pot and or baffled tank?

I think the TQM guys are organising a rolling road day soon but I think it will be before november so it will be no good for you but if its after you've had it mapped you should pop along. :y:

[adzvtr]

thanks very much :y:

With the fuelling issue, for the time being keep the fuel above half a tank and you should find it stops it. Obviously a new pump will be better long term and if you will be showing it a lot of track use then maybe a swirl pot and or baffled tank?

I think the TQM guys are organising a rolling road day soon but I think it will be before november so it will be no good for you but if its after you've had it mapped you should pop along. :y:

ye m8 ive just priced up a swirlpot setup with a bosch 044 pump and sytec filter and stuff, thats what ill be doing as its gunna see alot of track next year.

have to say at trax my first session apart from the rain it was ok, (tank half full)
on the 2nd session after 2 laps it kept cutting out at around 110, and on the corners. light was on lol

[axsaxoman]

get that fueling sorted NOW--by the time you find its run lean and detonated its too late ,engine wil be gone --especially if running std internals

[axsaxoman]

Ignopring all the first bit at is irrelevent and difficult to understand.

Limiter is set at 6,500rpm as with the old controller boost used to drop off well before then. This graph was during a quick mapping session the night before trax, so didn't have time to mess about moving the limiter. It doesn't go all the way trhough because we were in the process of putting more timing in so wasn't doing full 0-limiter runs as like i said we were in a rush, shortly after the clutch started to slip so we called it a day. Gaz did me that map in approximately 30 minutes as I needed to take the car out and bed the brakes in so i was rushing him. This graph was never meant to be a propper power run but you wanted evidence so i got it for you.

I don't know why it's that shape and i don't know what shape you think it should be but that's just how it is. I don't fully understand mapping so can't answer, I don't see why it matters though that proves how smooth the power comes in.

Sorry mate but all you've done is tried to call me a liar after i proved you wrong. It's not on and I'm sure if Gaz saw this he wouldn't be happy that your calling him a liar as well as he prides himself on his honesty with customers! :wall:

so basically you are agreeing with what i am saying the graph is not an accurate represention of what you have and the figures cannot be taken as fact -- that fine then

[Jungle]

Because we didn't rev it all the way through?

I said you can build a 200bhp+ turbo saxo for less than a supercharger would cost and if set up right the power won't suddenly come in after loads of lag and kill everything.

You asked for a graph.

I've given you one that proves exactly that, and because he let off 500rpm before my limiter I am a liar? Like i said didn't want to get into this arguement just wanted to put some evidence in as you were flooding it with supercharger hype. Now I've given you evidence your ignoring it and talking shit. Nice work.

[blackie_2k5]

so john...while we're on the subject, the graphs i posted previousley, would you say they look "ok" other then the apparant richness up top?

ive not really had any feadback on them at all, the car certainley drives well, has god spread of useable power through the box, and tails off about where it should for the turbo im using, looking at graphs i can see from mapped s13's running the same turbo, it seems to follow pretty much the same lines as those.....

http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss328/blackie_2k5/06082011443.jpg
http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss328/blackie_2k5/06082011442.jpg

[mangojace]

Just ignore john peeps! he's just a narrow minded person who thinks all turbos are terrible with lag and will destroy driveshafts! From a business point of view your just turning customers away with your attitude!

[Jungle]

tbh that's what i was thinking, his attitude has definately put me off of dealing with GMC

In fact looking back at my graph could be just how the printer is set up, to show it only to peak BHP, which would be exactly what it shows, dont know will have to check with Gaz. Like i said though wasn't a power run this was just one of many runs we did doing the quick map for Trax.

[scot-ish]

His attitude put me off dealing with him quite a while ago, a few guys say a few cheeky things locally "Hi, im John and i'll charge you ££ just to talk to me" so you guys should be grateful off getting information on the forum for free. After many of my mates used them locally in the last few years, that has also put me off GMC, one of my mates starlets running 300+ bhp went in for a RR there, john decided before it went on that "no way in hell, will this sort of car, make that sort of power" little does he know, the 1.3 has broke 500 bhp now., anyways, chris came out with a graph of 260- or something around that. went up to another RR in glasgow and made 318 i believe within 3 days, no changes made.

here is johns graphs,
TD05 16g, doesnt really come into its own till just 5k rpm, and powers all past revline, but imho you can see from the graph, john eased off at 6400, the car rev limit was mapped at 7500. i know, as i had a car more or less the same spec, and this car had a bit more headwork, same mapper, mine made 327.

http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp225/youngrankin/pics.jpg
http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp225/youngrankin/pics1.jpg
you can see a few power dips, but can clearly see he's let of the throttle and not used the rev range on the dyno.

this is only one of the poor dealings i know about.

there is another, recently with a charged saxo that went back to him, with after being worked on, needed some wheel nuts retightened 10 mins after leaving gmc.

[-shuggles-]

exact same with me, hard to get a straight answer and awkward to talk too when all you are doing is trying to ask a question about something when you where going to be giving him 2k+ of business

[dannygti]

Everyone's allowed opinions etc but I would hate to see this turn into a anti GMC thread..


Let's talk about the topic in hand. Boost+bodies


I'm sure it says in the bible turbos are better than superchargers anyway ???

[scot-ish]

I was brought up being told a turbo was better. didnt need a reason why, its just Gospel. and all the engines i work on are turbo'd. so must be true.

[adzvtr]

I'm sure it says in the bible turbos are better than superchargers anyway ???

blasphamy danny
ur as bad as john lol.

[KamRacing]

surely a supercharger and turbo should be combined.

[adzvtr]

surely a supercharger and turbo should be combined.

would be best allround id say. boost throughout the whole range.

[dannygti]

[QUOTE=KamRacing;5556241]surely a supercharger and turbo should be combined.[/QUOTE

I have been seriously considering this.. Twincharging has had some very interested and impressive results.
The reason I discarded the idea is my external wastegate would be in the way.

[adzvtr]

[QUOTE=KamRacing;5556241]surely a supercharger and turbo should be combined.[/QUOTE

I have been seriously considering this.. Twincharging has had some very interested and impressive results.
The reason I discarded the idea is my external wastegate would be in the way.

i have been, i think it would be possible with the positioning of the turbo using the miltek manifold from cituining.
not sure how difficult it would be mapping it tho

[toxic]

What are the ball bearing turbos like to aid spool up time are they any better than the journal and thrust bearings turbos.

[mark1311]

TSI powered saxo... that would be epic.

[Mieran]

surely a supercharger and turbo should be combined.

And throttle bodies

[-shuggles-]

And throttle bodies

and lexus lights..

[blackie_2k5]

and lexus lights..

too far :p


would like to see it tbh

in a rear wheel saxo, thats hadte wheel base lengthened by about 8-12"

would make a sweet drift car :D

[-shuggles-]

too far :p


would like to see it tbh

in a rear wheel saxo, thats hadte wheel base lengthened by about 8-12"

would make a sweet drift car :D

fuck off :hug:

Just buy a s13

[blackie_2k5]

fuck off :hug:

Just buy a s13

ive got the turbo off one :homme:

does that count?

[-shuggles-]

ive got the turbo off one :homme:

does that count?

but you don't get the jap fanboy scene points with it :p

[Ryan]

but you don't get the jap fanboy scene points with it :p

Exactly, therefore hes less of a cunt :cool:

[blackie_2k5]

but you don't get the jap fanboy scene points with it :p

thats cool...they can get fucked tbh :y:

long as im happy :D

[-shuggles-]

Exactly, therefore hes less of a cunt :cool:

still a cunt tho

thats cool...they can get fucked tbh :y:

long as im happy :D

ahmen brother

[Ryan]

anyways, chris came out with a graph of 260- or something around that. went up to another RR in glasgow and made 318 i believe within 3 days, no changes made.


Just something that jumped out at me here.... The accuracy of rolling roads isnt anything to do with johns attitude.

A car making less power on one set of rollers over another set is very common, hence why you get people commenting on some rollers being hard and others being very very overquoting.

[blackie_2k5]

im not a cunt you cunt, well maybe a little bit of a cunt, takes a cunt to spot a cunt, so you must also be a cunt? i must be your kind of cunt

cunt cunt cunt cunt cunt

:y:

[Ryan]

well at least this thread made it 10 or so pages.... ;)

[-shuggles-]

im not a cunt you cunt, well maybe a little bit of a cunt, takes a cunt to spot a cunt, so you must also be a cunt? i must be your kind of cunt

cunt cunt cunt cunt cunt

:y:

I don't know weather to be turned on because you sound like a 10 year old or reply with calling you a cunt again

cunt

[maddison_vts]

2 quotes for you all lol...

'haters are gonna hate',

'buy jap and you'll get there and back...'

:p;)

[Ryan]

2 quotes for you all lol...

'haters are gonna hate',

'buy jap and you'll get there and back...'

:p;)

heres another

Id rather sell my soul than own a honda :hug:

[maddison_vts]

heres another

Id rather sell my soul than own a honda :hug:

now come on, they have made 2 decent cars. s2000, nsx.
granted the rest suck :fcuk:

[adzvtr]

2 quotes for you all lol...

'haters are gonna hate',

'buy jap and you'll get there and back...'

:p;)

not always true, the french crap made it there and back and track at trax bud sadly the jap car didnt. one blown honda lol

[Ryan]

now come on, they have made 2 decent cars. s2000, nsx.
granted the rest suck :fcuk:

Honestly I used to think they were quite cool, after being in one - no thanks, and its not just because of that utterly horrendus 1980s style elec dash.

[maddison_vts]

not always true, the french crap made it there and back and track at trax bud sadly the jap car didnt. one blown honda lol

lol, forgot about that! You can't blame the car for that though :panic:

[blackie_2k5]

2 quotes for you all lol...

'haters are gonna hate',

'buy jap if youve been on the crack...'

:p;)

:y:

back on topic now as ryan pointed out :p

[scot-ish]

Just something that jumped out at me here.... The accuracy of rolling roads isnt anything to do with johns attitude.

A car making less power on one set of rollers over another set is very common, hence why you get people commenting on some rollers being hard and others being very very overquoting.

it is his attitude though, when he tells you before it goes on the rollers that "a car like that, will never make that power" and then proceeds to take his foot of the pedal when the turbo is not even in its peak range.

[KamRacing]

TSI powered saxo... that would be epic.

fast but so boring. I drove a 300bhp TT and it was fast but a dull power delivery

And throttle bodies

too far lol. A decent flowing inlet manifold and larger throttle body would do the trick

[KamRacing]

Just something that jumped out at me here.... The accuracy of rolling roads isnt anything to do with johns attitude.

A car making less power on one set of rollers over another set is very common, hence why you get people commenting on some rollers being hard and others being very very overquoting.

true

Honestly I used to think they were quite cool, after being in one - no thanks, and its not just because of that utterly horrendus 1980s style elec dash.

you can bolt a supercharger or turbo kit on and instant 350-400bhp :D

it is his attitude though, when he tells you before it goes on the rollers that "a car like that, will never make that power" and then proceeds to take his foot of the pedal when the turbo is not even in its peak range.

we are but men. I worry there is an expectation that tuners have to be whiter than white. He has an opinion and expresses it. Is it always right - no...same goes for me. As for taking his foot off, well thats not really a topic for this thread. Deal with it at the time rather than feeling bitter for the rest of your life. John thinks superchargers are the best all rounder. I think people will have to learn to just agree to disagree rather than bicker like children

Superchargers have their place. Certainly I think they make very good road conversions and I love the GMC kits. They do very well on track too. I'd love to sell a kit like it. Bolt on and its neat and tidy.
Home brew is going to be better value for money IF you have the ability to do it. Also theres a lot of trial and error involved. I certainly would not have the time. You may save money but there are flaws.
Turbos have their place as well. Ultimately more efficient due to using waste gases so in theory can produce more power. We forget that to compare the two you need to standardise parts. Rather than this bickering I would prefer a discussion on the differences between the same size turbine and compressor on the two applications. There are a billion turbos and superchargers on the market so virtually every home build is going to be different but if we can use some similarities you might see some different power deliveries showing.
The Atspeed one has been mentioned but thats a £9k build at least. personally I think its corner exit power delivery is terrible but its mental on the straights. Thats not a car for me. Does a supercharger give a more linear power delivery to suit the way i drive?
Whats the effect of off boost driving, cam choice etc have on the builds. Superchargers can get away will longer duration cams as they are driven off the crank etc etc

It was a good discussion so lets get back on track

[Damask]

so heres one, what sort of gains does Nos give? im guessing its not like nfs or fast and furious make out ;) and of course its only temporary

[mangojace]

how longs a piece of string? It can give as many gains as you would like lol! Mate uses it on his 670 bhp track skyline though!

[axsaxoman]

it is his attitude though, when he tells you before it goes on the rollers that "a car like that, will never make that power" and then proceeds to take his foot of the pedal when the turbo is not even in its peak range.

If i took my foot off at6400 how come there is a line showing to over 7k .
its along time ago ,but i can say for sure i would ask customer what rpm he wanted go to and unless there was a over heating problem or something i would have gone to that --.
I don,t go in for flash bhp readings and a powr run will take at least 17secs --so maybe the power jsut dropped away as the intercooler heated up --that si the usual reason why turbo,s are just given a very short dyno run --to show a flash bhp reading not a steady one .
if an old designsmall capcacity engine could make 500bhp I would why the WRC makers cars can get nowhere near that figure ??
they spend millions and only get just over 300 on WRC cars.
I leave it to common sense of readers to decide which is most probable .
car makers of the world have got it wrong or maybe the 500 bhp is not a REAL sustainble figure + just a flash reading.
If you look in the seat coupra R handbook where it quotes torque it has a note beside it whic hindicates the torque figure is after 1minute --how much proof do you want that flash figures are not real --if they could have just taken a reading and printed it they would as it would be a higher figure ,but they know no one would get the much higher figure consistantly. and would have customer complaing it was down on power

[mangojace]

If i took my foot off at6400 how come there is a line showing to over 7k .
its along time ago ,but i can say for sure i would ask customer what rpm he wanted go to and unless there was a over heating problem or something i would have gone to that --.
I don,t go in for flash bhp readings and a powr run will take at least 17secs --so maybe the power jsut dropped away as the intercooler heated up --that si the usual reason why turbo,s are just given a very short dyno run --to show a flash bhp reading not a steady one .
if an old designsmall capcacity engine could make 500bhp I would why the WRC makers cars can get nowhere near that figure ??
they spend millions and only get just over 300 on WRC cars.
I leave it to common sense of readers to decide which is most probable .
car makers of the world have got it wrong or maybe the 500 bhp is not a REAL sustainble figure + just a flash reading.
If you look in the seat couprs R handbook where it quotes toruq it has a note beside it whichindicates the torque figure is after 1minute --how much proof do you want that flash figures are not real --if they could have just taken a reading and printed it they would ,but they know no one would get the much higher figure that is shown doing that way

I full well know the glanza is very tuneable...loads of 250-300 bhp glanza's going about in the uk running td05's! So why did you say no way in hell will a 1.3 engine make 300 bhp to that bloke on here?

You think they spend millions getting there engines too 300 bhp? LOL no they have a 34 mm restrictor to keep the power down.

[axsaxoman]

I cansay for sure i never said that -but you must allow for the vein in which these "slagging posting " are made --does not make a good read unless they change things.
i can quote you an AX sport 194cc 8v built in spain with s/c + turbo in 1991 which made a "sort of relable" 470 bhp --used with 4wd as a rally car ,so there is no way i would say its impoosible ,same as the wheel nuts werre loose after 10mins --would you not have come back and insisted the rest of the car was checked over+ --of course you would

[dannygti]

John, wrc cars are restricted to 300hp. I thought you would know this??
They also make around 480lbs ft torque as a result of using lots of boost and restrictor.

[scot-ish]

If i took my foot off at6400 how come there is a line showing to over 7k .
its along time ago ,but i can say for sure i would ask customer what rpm he wanted go to and unless there was a over heating problem or something i would have gone to that --.
I don,t go in for flash bhp readings and a powr run will take at least 17secs --so maybe the power jsut dropped away as the intercooler heated up --that si the usual reason why turbo,s are just given a very short dyno run --to show a flash bhp reading not a steady one .
if an old designsmall capcacity engine could make 500bhp I would why the WRC makers cars can get nowhere near that figure ??
they spend millions and only get just over 300 on WRC cars.
I leave it to common sense of readers to decide which is most probable .
car makers of the world have got it wrong or maybe the 500 bhp is not a REAL sustainble figure + just a flash reading.
If you look in the seat coupra R handbook where it quotes torque it has a note beside it whic hindicates the torque figure is after 1minute --how much proof do you want that flash figures are not real --if they could have just taken a reading and printed it they would as it would be a higher figure ,but they know no one would get the much higher figure consistantly. and would have customer complaing it was down on power

i would say its a pretty sustainable figure, the car 500bhp one runs 10 sec 1/4's. so its not a false reading.

as has been said, i thought wrc cars were restricted???


with regards to the wheel nuts being loose, that came from the horses mouth, i believe he called you when he left. i only know this, as i was interested in malcolms old charged saxo, the one you built a while back, and wondered why it was sitting with the passenger side suspension hanging out of it after it came off on track. i was informed of the wheel nuts, after he left yours. and then was also informed of a possible problem with the ball joint, but the bolt just snapped after a lap???

[axsaxoman]

yes wrc are restricted with a 34mm restrictor .-no argument there .
the man phoned me the next day regarding wheel nuts loose not straight away as i would have told him to return .cetainly there were no marks on wheel or studs to suggest that they had been loose at any time,when next we saw the car + other whel bolts were well over the correct torque-- as far as suspension on race track --its a race track+ he wasn,t diving it round lke a granny was he + these things happen - no one can say for sure what happend other than when we checked other side pinch bolt it was stretched and thinner in the middle ,so it had been ovetightend some time in its life --what we supposed to do replace every bolt with a new one every time they are removed --could have been malcom or the previous owner that "checked " them and overtightened them --race track driving is very hard on everything -- the new strut was totally bent forward --due to the way the car was pulled out of the gravel trap -- i gave him a new one + straightend as much as pssible the wing --which i had no real need to do
I can say for sure if the pich bolt was loose ,and just not something you do and especially with a nyloc-put it through and not tighten at same time nut it would have made a noise or fallen out in the time between it being here and knockhill 10days later?.
If it wasn,t there at all the bottom arm would have fallen out within 1/2 a mile if not sooner

If the man was so unhappy how i treated him why did he come back and spend more money on swirl pot system and a new dif other things ??

its like this posting its a no win situation --no matter what isay -but i only reply to show we do not walk away from any rpoblems if we are made aware of them and will always do ur best to find a solution to them
-

[kristel10589]

John, when are you going to tell f1 and the fia there wrong and to use a supercharger instead of a turbo lmfao. As for you saying all turbos do is shatter gearboxes and driveshafts, i have never heard so much b/s.

Let me think of all them car companies that use turbos and have no problem. Now lets think how many companies supply their cars supercharged, hmmmmmmmmmm mercedes and errrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. F1 going turbo, wrc already turbo, btcc turbo, majority of cars on the road are turbo'd (out of boosted cars not inc n/a).
Both have there pros and cons, id rather turbo but thats personal preference.

[quikydan]

this is getting a bit bitchy!

[axsaxoman]

John, when are you going to tell f1 and the fia there wrong and to use a supercharger instead of a turbo lmfao. As for you saying all turbos do is shatter gearboxes and driveshafts, i have never heard so much b/s.

Let me think of all them car companies that use turbos and have no problem. Now lets think how many companies supply their cars supercharged, hmmmmmmmmmm mercedes and errrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. F1 going turbo, wrc already turbo, btcc turbo, majority of cars on the road are turbo'd (out of boosted cars not inc n/a).
Both have there pros and cons, id rather turbo but thats personal preference.
yet another typical post trying to compare apples +oranges. and of course you can have your own preference but allow me the same -the main difference is i explain both and why i think for road use why the s/c is better for most users
wrc turbo,s cost over 2k and last maybe 500miles + many thousands of pounds of antilag and ecu control + water injection etc etc --not really a budget saxo ??
broken drive shafts??
if you haven,t seen any or heard of many i would why temple motorsport do such a roaring trade in making uprated ones + why there are are lots of posts on here from people breaking them on std cars.
I have always said that a turbo can give more ultimate power and i have always said that most of the big turbo saxo,s are using an incorrectly specced unit by the way that they spool up and full boost startshalf way up the rpm range and if a big powered one it will be very sudden--just because its the cheap way to get a big "bragging number" which is very hard to drive enthusastically on twsity roads or tracks.
car makers spend alot of money matching the turbines to give the best all round power curve fro a given car + what they are trying to achieve,which is why all modern turbo,s have lots of electronic control on them .
and to obtain the same smooth type of control will cost more than fitting an s/c --thats it in a nutshell --nothing more .
when graphs are posted they come with "thats not the real one ,just a run up" or it only made such much on yours then made over 300 next day on another set of rollers --but strangly the only graph posted is my one --and the big number graph ,is not posted.
best of it is al i was doing was a power run --not any sort of tuning,there worst you could hold against me is my rollers read low,or should that be accurate --you decide.
why would i want to fudge a power run --makes no sense what so ever
come on boys give the readers some credit for sniffing out BS

[raunchz]

I'm not a big fan of this 'bitching against gmc' - johns posted some great information on here in the past and has certainly helped me out when I was looking to build up a sc car.

If people are old enough to spend £5k on their car, then they're old enough to read parts of this forum and decide on whether to go turbo/Sc/na - people don't need to gang up on people who push Sc, or push na - different people have different preferences!

The constant ganging up will drive away people (gmc) with years experience and create some great parts at good prices. Yes some prices are expensive but everyone needs to earn a living.

It's people with experience and knowledge that make these forums, it's this knowledge which helps people do DIY builds which don't cost the earth. Without this knowledge people would have to drop their cars into the likes of Atspeed and gmc to do big bhp builds which would cost mega ££££ in labour.

I think John deserves a chance, I for one listen to what he says but I'd like to think I had some common sense to make up my final mind on things.

Come on guys

[axsaxoman]

so john...while we're on the subject, the graphs i posted previousley, would you say they look "ok" other then the apparant richness up top?

ive not really had any feadback on them at all, the car certainley drives well, has god spread of useable power through the box, and tails off about where it should for the turbo im using, looking at graphs i can see from mapped s13's running the same turbo, it seems to follow pretty much the same lines as those.....

http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss328/blackie_2k5/06082011443.jpg
http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss328/blackie_2k5/06082011442.jpg

can,t imagine why you would want my opinion of this graph if have been following htis thread ..
there goes anyway--a sucker for punishment .
presuming the wastegate is shutting properly and the acutator is not floating ,no loss of boost through leaks + a non restrcitve intercooler.
I would guess that this turbo is from a much larger engined car with a low actuator setting . or it could be leaks that are loosing the boost orif its a home made manifold maybe the inlet to the turbo is too small --lots of possibilites
thats why it takes time to get to the boost,as your engine does not make enough hot gas to whizz it up and then after that there isn,t enough back pressure to keep the boost up ,so you are not getting the ideal turbo torque shape and it will be very civilised to drive because of that
thats what i see from looking at the graph and power numbers.
having a turbo running rich usually makes it spool up earlier ,sounds silly and no doubt i will be accused of bullshit AGAIN,but the extra carbon adds weight to the gas and so makes it spool up quicker and can make more boost in some cases
. better to have it rich than lean anyway

[adzvtr]

I'm not a big fan of this 'bitching against gmc' - johns posted some great information on here in the past and has certainly helped me out when I was looking to build up a sc car.

If people are old enough to spend £5k on their car, then they're old enough to read parts of this forum and decide on whether to go turbo/Sc/na - people don't need to gang up on people who push Sc, or push na - different people have different preferences!

The constant ganging up will drive away people (gmc) with years experience and create some great parts at good prices. Yes some prices are expensive but everyone needs to earn a living.

It's people with experience and knowledge that make these forums, it's this knowledge which helps people do DIY builds which don't cost the earth. Without this knowledge people would have to drop their cars into the likes of Atspeed and gmc to do big bhp builds which would cost mega ££££ in labour.

I think John deserves a chance, I for one listen to what he says but I'd like to think I had some common sense to make up my final mind on things.

Come on guys

basically covers what i was gunna say.
if it wasnt for the knolledge supplyed by these guys i would never have got my car where it is now.

[luthor1]

It's a T25 John I think on Blackie_2k5 as far as I know, and it'll be from a 200sx which has I think a 5/6psi wastegate actuator on it? I think he's got a manual bleed valve on it to bring it up to the bar. Better in my opinion would be a 12psi waste gate, then use the ECU (he's got one of mine) to control a solenoid and bring in the last 3psi nicely, or a 10psi actuator and control 5psi.

Doesn't a rich mixture slow the burn rate down too which 'simulates' retarding the ignition, which means the pressure from the charge comes out the exhaust valve later which helps turbo spool???

It's a REALLY good 8v that one, makes stupid power really, and it has a conservative ignition map, I know - I wrote it! :)

I worry a little about bore-wash though, and would like to see the fuelling at least stay within the reasonably measurable window and be in the 11.5-12.2 range to be ideal, then have a fiddle with ignition timing to keep it nicely out of detonation without being too retarded

Andy

[-shuggles-]

It's a T25 John I think on Blackie_2k5 as far as I know, and it'll be from a 200sx which has I think a 5/6psi wastegate actuator on it? I think he's got a manual bleed valve on it to bring it up to the bar. Better in my opinion would be a 12psi waste gate, then use the ECU (he's got one of mine) to control a solenoid and bring in the last 3psi nicely, or a 1-psi actuator and control 5psi.

Doesn't a rich mixture slow the burn rate down too which 'simulates' retarding the ignition, which means the pressure from the charge comes out the exhaust valve later which helps turbo spool???

It's a REALLY good 8v that one, makes stupid power really, and it has a conservative ignition map, I know - I wrote it! :)

I worry a little about bore-wash though, and would like to see the fuelling at least stay within the reasonably measurable window and be in the 11.5-12.2 range to be ideal, then have a fiddle with ignition timing to keep it nicely out of detonation without being too retarded

Andy

t25 from a s13 I think he said a couple of pages back :y:

[axsaxoman]

11,5 -12.2 on 6psi --yes it should stand that -- sniff the oil cap thats always a good indication -if it reeks of petrol --then be worried

[blackie_2k5]

cheers for the input :y:

at present(and when the car was dyno'd above) i had a boost leak, its coming from the idle valve, and since fixing a pretty big hole in a boost pipe, this has worsened. the car doesn get much use ATM as i now have a daily, so all niggles are in process of being sorted

the turbo is a t25 from an s13 as said, they come with a 10psi actuator as standard, and has a spring pre-load type boost controller/bleed valve to make ~15psi

the car has issues with fueling to sort, something im pretty sure is down to a dodgey pump or FPR, these are going to be replaced before it gets another tweak to sort out the fueling

the car does surge if running under half a tank..

the car does smell quite rich up top and apparantly throws some flames out on hard gear changes at times :p along with the expected occasional small amounts of black smoke on boost and dirty tail pipe

the turbo kit itself is very well made made and has no restrictions at all, the flow design must have had some serious thought! neither the system or the intercooler set up has restriction, however the boost pipe routing is quite long due to space issues, i am considering having a re think of routing, and reducing the pipe size to 2" as its currently 2.25, this should dramatically help my spool up

and since talking to andy, im now aware he can use electronic boost control on his ecu, so this is defintatly something i want to get fitted, once all other issues have been cured and im happy its ready, andy ill be coming to set me up and do a final map :)

EDIT ALSO JOHN- incase you werent aware, this is not a 16v, its a 90bhp VTR engine

[axsaxoman]

no I wssn,t aware what type of engine it was, until andy posted --but same would hold true for any make ,its the shape thats is funny for a turbo,but I am not suprise it cannot hold 15psi knowing what turbo it is + power its making

[Gareth_R]

I am not suprise it cannot hold 15psi knowing what turbo it is + power its making

And the dirty great boost leak??!!

[dannygti]

John, please could you give me your input on what sort of spec you would use if YOU were building a turbo 16v with reasonable budget as a track car?

[quikydan]

John, please could you give me your input on what sort of spec you would use if YOU were building a turbo 16v with reasonable budget as a track car?

good question :y:

[blackie_2k5]

no I wssn,t aware what type of engine it was, until andy posted --but same would hold true for any make ,its the shape thats is funny for a turbo,but I am not suprise it cannot hold 15psi knowing what turbo it is + power its making

the turbo has play so im basically helping it on its way out(then its getting hybi rebuild, from all counts and alot of reading that turbo is capable of running 18psi safely IF its fitted with a 360 degree thrust bearing, many run it on 15 psi without for a very long time with no issues

its very odd, as the gauge is T'd off the inlet manifold to give true manifold pressure... but it shows is holding full boost via gauge... however it also did this when i had the BIG hole...but didnt make as good power, once fixed it was a totally different animal

this is what i was wondering about the graph, as the s13's i managed to find graphs for running same pressure had similar lines.....

this is the old graph, on 10psi with small leak i didnt know about then, and fuel and exhaust isues, this was after first map, just to give me an idea of what i was working with, the lines are alot better...

http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss328/blackie_2k5/25062011413.jpg

[axsaxoman]

without showing boost pressure at same time on the graph it always going to be guessing games -
I could be wrong but if you look at the swift graph on page 10 you will see the boost line how it climbed then is a straight line when it was fully spooled,which shows the wastegate is working correctly ,if the engine eats all the boost ,ie turbo too small or not well matched,overspeeding you will see the boost drop .
it would also show how what ever boost control system you are running is working .
surely this and AFR are as important as bhp + torque on a turbo power run ,then you have some info to decide your next move and can see problems without stressing the engine too much with repeated runs. If you can add inlet temp + ambient as well then you have all you ever need

[blackie_2k5]

ai, well cheers for your input john, ill just have to tie up the bits and pieces and get a tweak to sort the richness out, and see where that lands me untill it gets a decent map with the turbo cam & electronic controller etc :y:

edit- so your saying that more info is needed for the actual dyno data?

i think the first plan of action is to sort the issues i do know about, this alone will probs have a massive affect of the graph alone, the leak is causing a pretty irratic idle. so its going to be quite bad on positive pressure :y:

[axsaxoman]

John, please could you give me your input on what sort of spec you would use if YOU were building a turbo 16v with reasonable budget as a track car?

not that I am going to tell you alot ,bearing mind the postings you have been making ,
I,ll do what you suggested and shut up
but how could i answer such a vague question anyway
whats a reasonable budget?,,,what bhp and at what rpm do you want this target bhp , what will be the internal spec of engine
all those things will effect how you should approach the whole build and must be set in stone before starting to do anything

[axsaxoman]

you cannot have too much data ==
dyno run should take no less than 15secs.(longer is better if your cooling can stand it) to allow things to stabalise and give best chance of accurate data

[dannygti]

not that I am going to tell you alot ,bearing mind the postings you have been making ,
I,ll do what you suggested and shut up
but how could i answer such a vague question anyway
whats a reasonable budget?,,,what bhp and at what rpm do you want this target bhp , what will be the internal spec of engine
all those things will effect how you should approach the whole build and must be set in stone before starting to do anything

John theres a lot of "you" in your statement.. Im not telling you what I want I'm asking what YOU would want

What do YOU think is a reasonable budget
What bhp would YOU want
What rpm YOU would want it at
How YOU would approach the build

Don't think I'm going to jump down your throat at this, I'm genuinely interested and would appreciate it.

[dannygti]

And John I stand by all my comments, sometimes its comical how you try and make turbocharging look so inefficient and insignificant. I don't think you have said one positive thing about this method of tuning.

Not to say I'm against other methods. Quite the opposite. I just think even with your own opinion it doesnt take much effort to praise/recognise advantages other ways of doing things even if you wouldn't do them yourself.

I LOVE Alex's engine
I LOVE adz engine
And would recommend these ways to other people. But I always ask what people want from their car first.

[Gareth_R]

Someone hurry up and drop a flag

[Sophia_Bush]

Lets say for argument sake 200bhp atw on either 8v or 16v how would you do it so it's going to be reliable usable daily and have scope for upgrade in future. I think thats a reasonable figure that a majority of people want from the off