Turbo, Carbs, Throttle Bodies, Boost??? - Page 14 - Saxperience

dannygti · 14th September 2011, 23:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by hard_corejoeboy

TFSI are the Super and turbo'd engines i think?

True the record is turbo car but what if that car was 265bhp N/A?
The second fastest FWD car round the ring is the same engine as the first most powerful car

I think its sad the turbo trend is all due to emmissions regs blah blah bullshit CTR has been killed but then again even the turbo focus RS which IS turbo has been killed.

If it was n/a it wouldn't have anywhere near the torque.. On race engines I've seen (2.0) the torque on n/a was around 180-210 depending on spec, I bet the megane has prettying the same torque as it does power?? And it will produce that torque from around 3ish k all way too redline.

Haha technicality but it's still true

It's not though is it, there has always been a turbo trend from 80's onwards.. R5gtt, escort rst, escort cosworth, evos, impreza's, skylines... Notice they are all high performing models of their n/a counterparts

hard_corejoeboy · 14th September 2011, 23:20

I just don't really like them as i find them to be a little dull sure they are best for performance in terms of speed etc but there's nothing like thrashing an engine to the very last rev imo. Twingo and Clio are more fun for me than the Megane.

dannygti · 14th September 2011, 23:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by hard_corejoeboy

I just don't really like them as i find them to be a little dull sure they are best for performance in terms of speed etc but there's nothing like thrashing an engine to the very last rev imo. Twingo and Clio are more fun for me than the Megane.

Not going to disagree with you but have you driven a megane 265 trophy or megane r26r??

Whatever floats your boat at the end of the day, I k ow for surey gti isn't dull, it makes all the right noises.. Just anyone who's been out in it

KamRacing · 14th September 2011, 23:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannygti

I remember watching a vid on YouTube of chris in his 106 turbo and george in his (more powerful) s/c car and not being as fast especially on the exit if the corners.... Wander if the turbo car was worried about perfect throttle response OR the s/c was wishing he had that kind of mid range torque to pull him out of the corners.

same suspension and tyres? Ultimately a poor chassis setup will let you down.

dannygti · 14th September 2011, 23:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by KamRacing

same suspension and tyres? Ultimately a poor chassis setup will let you down.

I believe they were actually, I did check the specs of the cars and they were very similar. The turbo car you could visibly see it pulling a few feet on the exit of the corners.. If you got them both on the same rolling road on the same day I'm sure the graphs would suggest this would be the case too.
Low to mid range torque will be superior on the turbo car due to the nature of the way it works.

adzvtr · 15th September 2011, 00:11

ye but aint the fastest production car round the ring n/a.
the radical sr8, surely that means n/a is the way to go

e8_pqck · 15th September 2011, 02:02

Take the best n/a car - improve it with a turbo.

dannygti · 15th September 2011, 05:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by adzvtr

ye but aint the fastest production car round the ring n/a.
the radical sr8, surely that means n/a is the way to go

steffan bellof in his turbocharged group c Porsche

raunchz · 15th September 2011, 10:45

It's all well comparing fast lap times of equivalent na and turbo cars, but I bet if you put Joe bloggs in both he'd do a much quicker lap in the turbo car.

But then again, which would be a more rewarding drive? (opens another can of worms)

Jungle · 15th September 2011, 10:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by e8_pqck

Take the best n/a car - improve it with a turbo.

this

adamskiTNR · 15th September 2011, 11:10

application
weight
driver
chassis
track
altitude
endurance
regulations
homologation
cost
packaging
heat
reliability
response

These can be the points of interest for the meeting; Discuss

Jay_ · 15th September 2011, 11:24

this will eventually end in tears.

But so far its an interesting read

Saxologist · 15th September 2011, 11:59

This thread made my head hurt

mangojace · 15th September 2011, 13:55

I think my boss should just get his sr8 lm out and ferrari f430 gt3 race car out and piss over all you lot

NA powerz yooo

axsaxoman · 15th September 2011, 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannygti

John you quoted me and I was expecting some kind of answer from it. As usual you go on about how great the s/c is than the turbo, And not actually answering the question. If you don't want to because of losing face that's cool.

all the answers are there
I remember watching a vid on YouTube of chris in his 106 turbo and george in his (more powerful) s/c car and not being as fast especially on the exit if the corners.... Wander if the turbo car was worried about perfect throttle response OR the s/c was wishing he had that kind of mid range torque to pull him out of the corners.
drivers --simple as that -you not watched TAM,s ax vids nailing all the big evo,s skylines etc and with a mere 240@wheels ,if that

I stand by my statement that the only real lag you experience is the start of 1st gear and the rest of the time it can be Driven around on a well thought out setup.
I said that as well -but its how you get it with old syle turbo,s and simple controls +of ocurse your "reasonable budget"

What is the fastest production fwd car around the ring?? Oh, it's a hatch with turbocharger. and the second fastest etc
I wander if Renault thought about using a rotrex for ultimate throttle control or linear power delivery?
thats been coverd as well ,with the reaons why the makers use turbo,s for std road cars

One of the main reasons I believe a turbo motor to be a big advantage is it will make superb power-torque the second the turbo spools, not like with rotrex as you have to wait for revs to rise and come on 'cam' so to speak.

if i could be bothered i would post up the cumbria 106 which has boost from 2500-6500 where it makes over 300 bhp 270@6400 and 200@4900 @wheels --and no lag ever and you can back right off the throttle and come back on to instant wheelspin if you wish

everything you are complaing about has been covered -except for me giving you a shopping list+ telling you how to do it exactly

axsaxoman · 15th September 2011, 14:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by KamRacing

same suspension and tyres? Ultimately a poor chassis setup will let you down.

and if you watch another vid of the s/c man driving you can see at least 2-3secs to had in lap --but maybe he,s learning eveyone can,t be a "vettel"
but that the drivers choice if he is happy with his lap thats all that matters it will never prove which is quickerunless same man drives both ,having learnt how to drive them differently and then do a hot lap, my brother was nearly always 1/2 to 3/4 of sec a lap quicker than me --maybe he has leess self preservation instincts or maybe i,m a pussy or just plain not as good ,only time i was consistantly quicker was in the wet

dannygti · 15th September 2011, 16:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by axsaxoman

if i could be bothered i would post up the cumbria 106 which has boost from 2500-6500 where it makes over 300 bhp 270@6400 and 200@4900 @wheels --and no lag ever and you can back right off the throttle and come back on to instant wheelspin if you wish

everything you are complaing about has been covered -except for me giving you a shopping list+ telling you how to do it exactly

Is this Cumbria 106 turbo charged?

John you wouldn't be telling me how 'to do it' would you? Who's to say you know 'how to do it'. I just asked for an opinion, the fact you are relunctant to give us it shows you are not happy with the question, It seems to you there is no spec turbocharged TU that would make a great track car... As in your opinion s/c is ALWAYS better ????

I didn't think as a tuner you could be so narrow minded

scot-ish · 15th September 2011, 17:53

this is deffo getting interesting now.

only thing i picked up earlier, john you said a lightened flywheel was not a good idea in a small cc engine running a turbo charger? - apologies if you didnt, sure i read that back a few pages.

I ran a 3.9kg(i think it was) Cusco fly in my starlet, sure it was around 1kg less than standard, been a while since i messed with cars like that, but considering another for next year.
main reason i run this flywheel was, reduced lag, there was less RPM drop during gear changes, which kept me higher up the rpm, and in the peak boost for a longer time.

this is genuine question, do you think i would have been better running the standard fly?

KamRacing · 15th September 2011, 18:18

i'd be guessing but with a light flywheel revs can drop off faster. Not desirable if you go off boost.

blackie_2k5 · 15th September 2011, 18:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by KamRacing

i'd be guessing but with a light flywheel revs can drop off faster. Not desirable if you go off boost.

this^^ its just spools up a little quicker as in theory there's less rotational mass, but that could also go the other way aswell<< id imgine it depends on the overall engine tbh

but would also affect overall torque id have thought?