# turbo cars have no torque because of lag



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

> _Quote by Skylines lil brother_
> man you are NEW. if you take a car with 300 N/A power, and the same car with 300 forched induction power. the N/A car is going to blow the shit out or the other. THINK ABOUT IT.
> 
> any forced induction has some sort of lag or downside. see a turbo charged motor, may have 300 horsepower, but shit all for tourqe. thats because of the lag. N/A has no lag ya , so this means that its got more power at lower RPMs therefore better. man you gotta think before you write.
> ...





Now, who else here has the same problem, that since they have all sorts of crazy lag, they have no torque?

Skylines lil bro....here's a pic of my dyno. You tell me how little torque I had:


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

I'm sorry... turbos MAKE torque... that's essentially what they are... a replacement for displacement...


----------



## JAMESZ (Mar 12, 2004)

Wait a second. Do you understand that an NA build up means you make more hp but torque isn't increased much? The only way to keep making torque is to use forced induction (better to say turbos since superchargers dont create max boost until max rpm).


----------



## Harris (Nov 11, 2002)

This Skylines lil brother character is a joke. Skylines lil brother, get some actual schooling before making comments on motors and cars! And no, Super Street is not a good way to start!


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

JAMESZ said:


> Wait a second chimmike. Do you understand that an NA build up means you make more hp but torque isn't increased much? The only way to keep making torque is to use forced induction (better to say turbos since superchargers dont create max boost until max rpm).


I think you have it the other way around... Mike is arguing your point and SLB is arguing the other way around... 

But even with Superchargers your still creating more tq on a lower end than NA...


----------



## JAMESZ (Mar 12, 2004)

opps well sorry. Yeah I know superchargers still produce more torque then NA but not nearly as much as turbos.


----------



## NotAnotherHonda (Aug 7, 2003)

hey mike, dont forget about cullens sr20det, stock...at 12 psi, that put out 240 whp, but 270ft/lb of torque!!!


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

yep..you're not kiddin. This skylines lil bro doesn't know wtf he's talking about.

edit: cullen's G20 has an avenir SR20DET swap.


----------



## javierb14 (Jul 9, 2002)

*Horsepower=(rpm/5252)*torque*

from a friend of mines forum....www.boosted-hybrid.com



> For the last century, horsepower has been used to describe the power output of the internal combustion engine. The horsepower unit was created by James Watt in the 18th century. Its origin is based from how much power a horse could lift in foot pounds, 33,000 ft-lbs to be exact in one minute. The unit is derived from torque, which is the true measurement of the engine physical power production.
> 
> What is strange about the units of horsepower is that it has no physical meaning. Its an arbitrary unit that has no real signficance in describing the characterisitc of the engine. For those that are curious to calculate horsepower:
> 
> ...


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

I'll get some "wwIwmtctb" bracelets made for all of you...


----------



## javierb14 (Jul 9, 2002)

James said:


> "wwIwmtctb"


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

javierb14 said:


>


"what would I want my torque curve to be"? 

you know? ala WWJD...


----------



## ForsakenRX7 (Mar 14, 2003)

I think you guys are partially right. Look at it from this way. You have two motors: Since we are talkin Nissan lets use an sr20. Ones turbo, and ones not. Now to put a turbo on a car whats something that has to be done in some instances? Answer: lower compression. So Its safe to ssay that a lower compression motor will have less torque, right? Right. Now, where we lose in torque by lower compression, we can then slap on a turbo, make some torque back, and a lot more horsepower.
Basically, your comparing apples and oranges. While the NA will have more torque down low. WHo the FUCK races at 2000 RPM? this is the same arguement I get from ******** and their tree-fitees


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

yeah that's true about the compression ratio... but most everyone who turbos their motor doesn't drop the compression  well... unless their engine blows the first time around


----------



## Zac (Mar 10, 2004)

SkylinesLilBro is a rather angry guy. Sweet dyno Mike.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

thanks. yeah, he refuses to respond to this thread too. I guess some people never learn.

oh, and I think at the point I was on that dyno, the MAF was very close to maxing out, if not totally. I ran at 14psi for a while after that and it didn't seem much faster.........(that dyno was at 10psi with a spike to 11.2)


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

post his response to your PM...


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

> by skylines lil bro


ya sorry i wrote that a little wrong. but ya gotta know what i mean. NA produces a steady amout of power. while turbo doesnt. i already explained so if you dont want to listen try it out. i have to an extent, but they wernt exactly the same power but close enough. dont sweat it man if your not gonna listen your not gonna listen, just dont keep bothering


So I'm thinking to myself.....mmmkay......he thinks there are 2 different kinds of horsepower or something? whatever. When he spends outrageous money on an na setup and gets destroyed by a similarly powered turbo vehicle of the same make, he'll sure be scratching his head....lol


----------



## Chuck (Nov 19, 2003)

Turbo >> Na


----------



## Zac (Mar 10, 2004)

chimmike said:


> oh, and I think at the point I was on that dyno, the MAF was very close to maxing out, if not totally. I ran at 14psi for a while after that and it didn't seem much faster.........(that dyno was at 10psi with a spike to 11.2)


What turbo were you running Mike? T25/28 I'm guessing?

Their are turbos, superchargers, big displacement, both, or losing cars.


----------



## Asleep (Jan 19, 2003)

ForsakenRX7 said:


> I think you guys are partially right. Look at it from this way. You have two motors: Since we are talkin Nissan lets use an sr20. Ones turbo, and ones not. Now to put a turbo on a car whats something that has to be done in some instances? Answer: lower compression. So Its safe to ssay that a lower compression motor will have less torque, right? Right. Now, where we lose in torque by lower compression, we can then slap on a turbo, make some torque back, and a lot more horsepower.
> Basically, your comparing apples and oranges. While the NA will have more torque down low. WHo the FUCK races at 2000 RPM? this is the same arguement I get from ******** and their tree-fitees


well the reason you get that argument from the "********" is because they are talking about an engine that redlines at 5500 and if geared correctly, cruises in that range as well. so achieving lots of torque down low is a good thing, especially if youre geared for it. for this guy to say that f.i. produces less power because of lag though, makes him an idiot. nitrous and s/c'ing an engine is f.i. also and there is no lag there at all. hes just mixed up and has been reading too many magazines.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

NickZac said:


> What turbo were you running Mike? T25/28 I'm guessing?
> 
> Their are turbos, superchargers, big displacement, both, or losing cars.



t28.


----------



## Zac (Mar 10, 2004)

chimmike said:


> t28.


Sweeeet.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

new setup will put that dyno slip to shame.


----------



## Zac (Mar 10, 2004)

chimmike said:


> new setup will put that dyno slip to shame.


Now you have me curious. Please, go on.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

lets jus say, full build, big turbo, standalone ecu, 350+whp.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

ANOTHER response from him

stuff I typed to him:
thing is dude, you're wrong. Horsepower is horsepower. There is no different form of horsepower. However, an n/a car, for example, an N/A spec V, if it were to make 250whp (after spending at least $10k on it) the torque would be significantly less. However, spending $4k on a turbo kit to make 250whp, it would be nearly the same. And with that, there's little, to no lag. Besides the fact that turbos are the most efficient way to make power that there is...plain and simple. (aside from nitrous.)

[QUOTE by skylines lil bro]_
ok slap nuts. ur an idiot and no matter what it doesnt sound like ur gonna listen too me u gotta go back and read what i said to you before. then ur gonna have to sit down and think about it. NA power is better, now shut ur lips.

Ya hey go ask anyone else in the forum they will sit u straight_[/quote]


I just got straight fed up with that and told him to read this fucking thread, in no uncertain terms. I also told him to go read a book.


----------



## Skylines Little Bro (Apr 6, 2004)

chimmike said:


> Now, who else here has the same problem, that since they have all sorts of crazy lag, they have no torque?
> 
> Skylines lil bro....here's a pic of my dyno. You tell me how little torque I had:


i never said that turbos dont make more torque. i said that NA power is better than forced induction power. when did i ever say that turbo has no torque. man why do u change our convo around that make a room to try and make fun of me. man i cant belive that. your a LOSER


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

you STILL can't tell me why na power is better than forced induction...

WHY Then, are all the FASTEST import drag cars TURBOCHARGED and not all motor? Hmm????


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

FI, no matter what form, kicks NA ass... just have to size it right with the turbo... Maybe you're used to hanging around people who put giant turbos on tiny motors... maybe that is why you're wrong.


----------



## Zac (Mar 10, 2004)

chimmike said:


> lets jus say, full build, big turbo, standalone ecu, 350+whp.


!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If I had the cash I'de start modding the hell out of my car. Gimmie 6 months till when my company takes off. Then I shall be making something impressive...well as far as impressive goes for the QR25.


----------



## 3.5SE Auto (Oct 16, 2002)

you got to decide what you want out of your car.

skyline little man, there are so many ways to make power, you got to figure out what works best for each situation.

Did you know you can have a "no lag" turbo that makes gobs of torque below 3000 rpm?

about the only way NA is better than FI is in motor life expectancy. AND with proper tuning and monitoring (via compression tests, AF meters, EGT indication) you can get just as many mile out of a FI setup, unless you run more than a bar. Past ~1 bar you really are working then engine hard. 

Again this limit depends onthe specific engine. for example the WRX STI comes from the factory at >15 psi or so. Whereas people running 8-9 psi on a VQ35DE engine are snapping rods.


----------



## Skylines Little Bro (Apr 6, 2004)

chimmike said:


> you STILL can't tell me why na power is better than forced induction...
> 
> WHY Then, are all the FASTEST import drag cars TURBOCHARGED and not all motor? Hmm????


Na power is better because it is always there. with turbo its not there till high rpms. i dont know why u dont understand. and import drag cars are turbo because you cant make 1000 hp with a NA 4 banger. a turbo charged car may have 250 hp, but not till high rpms, at low rpms theres nothing. with NA theres gonna be more power lower in the rpms. and what rpms are you at off the line, hmmmm? maybe very low rpms. Your start is the most critical part of the race. But i think straight line racing is for pussys. Real racing is on a track or through town AROUND CORNERS. and on a track ur not always gonna be at high rpms (where turbo has no power) alot of the time ur wanting to use your tourque not your HP. with a turbo your max torque is raised up in your rpms, meaning less torque down low once again. im not saying that there is differnt kinds of horsepower, (go and find the thread when i said that) i didnt. all i said was if there is NA power is more constant through out the power band. also forced induction changes where ur power bands are.


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

Skylines Little Bro said:


> Na power is better because it is always there. with turbo its not there till high rpms. i dont know why u dont understand. and import drag cars are turbo because you cant make 1000 hp with a NA 4 banger. a turbo charged car may have 250 hp, but not till high rpms, at low rpms theres nothing. with NA theres gonna be more power lower in the rpms. and what rpms are you at off the line, hmmmm? maybe very low rpms. Your start is the most critical part of the race. But i think straight line racing is for pussys. Real racing is on a track or through town AROUND CORNERS. and on a track ur not always gonna be at high rpms (where turbo has no power) alot of the time ur wanting to use your tourque not your HP. with a turbo your max torque is raised up in your rpms, meaning less torque down low once again. im not saying that there is differnt kinds of horsepower, (go and find the thread when i said that) i didnt. all i said was if there is NA power is more constant through out the power band. also forced induction changes where ur power bands are.


Maybe in the old days but in the advances in turbo technology, and with the proper sizing of the turbo for the engine, you can make more power than NA MUCH sooner... its always on tap. You throw something in like a Greddy Profec in there and it feels the same as NA...

And don't start throwing around sentences like:




> and on a track ur not always gonna be at high rpms (where turbo has no power) alot of the time ur wanting to use your tourque not your HP


because one you make no sense and two you have no idea what you're talking about....


----------



## Chuck (Nov 19, 2003)

Skylines Little Bro said:


> Na power is better because it is always there. with turbo its not there till high rpms.



Umm ok mister smart guy skyline.. or lack thereof.. ... i dont understand your purpose... Turbo cars make power at 2500rpms.. if a good turbo is used.. those idiot honda **** who use t1000000 turbos give all turbo cars a bad name, because there cars dont spool the turbo until 7k rpms. a simple T25 spools at a meer like.. 2600rpms.. FULL.. that means at around 3000 rpms, were making maximum power.. a Na car doesnt have "instant" power as you say.. it still has to gain in rpms to make power... and it also has to depend on what kind of build the engine has.. whether its set for massive low end, or massive high end. and some engines are better NA, and some are better forced induction.. your making too bland of a statement here.. and shit.. most big V8's make a shitload more power with a blower, aka FORCED induction..

blah, think what you want.. but when you get repeditivly spanked by a turbo car.. and you think yor Na car is all hardcore.. dont come crying to us.


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

Chuck said:


> those idiot honda **** who use t1000000 turbos give all turbo cars a bad name, because there cars dont spool the turbo until 7k rpms.



While I agree with you on all you said Chuck that statement I don't agree with... Those Honda guys put ginormous turbos on because at 7K rpm they usually have 1500rpm more!  YOu have to give it to the Honda engine when it comes to that... everyone says they have no torque but come on! When you're making 500 hp at 8500rpm!!!!


----------



## Cjburn (Jan 24, 2004)

Skylines Little Bro said:


> Na power is better because it is always there. with turbo its not there till high rpms. i dont know why u dont understand. and import drag cars are turbo because you cant make 1000 hp with a NA 4 banger. a turbo charged car may have 250 hp, but not till high rpms, at low rpms theres nothing. with NA theres gonna be more power lower in the rpms. and what rpms are you at off the line, hmmmm? maybe very low rpms. Your start is the most critical part of the race. But i think straight line racing is for pussys. Real racing is on a track or through town AROUND CORNERS. and on a track ur not always gonna be at high rpms (where turbo has no power) alot of the time ur wanting to use your tourque not your HP. with a turbo your max torque is raised up in your rpms, meaning less torque down low once again. im not saying that there is differnt kinds of horsepower, (go and find the thread when i said that) i didnt. all i said was if there is NA power is more constant through out the power band. also forced induction changes where ur power bands are.


Listen kid, you have very little understanding to what is coming out of your mouth. Horsepower is just a function of torque and rpm. If you really want to argue any of this, I would suggest you learn a little more. Any properly done T25 built SR20DE is going to DESTROY a fully built SR20DE NA car on a road coarse, on a dragstrip, or on the strip. Just run 15 psi and have that at 2800 rpm and you have twice the amount of torque than an NA car has at that point, more torque all the way to 6700 or so and then you can shift. It will always make more power, always be ready to go, and would not have a thing you think exists called "lag." Considering most built NA cars have their power all up top since they concentrate on stringing out the torque curve or pushing to the torque curve to the right, to the higher rpm's so they can make more power. You're really not going to make much of a difference of what an NA 2.0 motor can make at 3K rpm without forced induction. Go look up some dyno charts of fully built NA cars and you can see that they necessitate very large cams that have NOTHING on the low end, they're all about revving the piss out of their motor to make power. Done, no conversation left to argue, nothing. You're wrong, you're done, now stop arguing a topic you have really no fact to back your argument up. Look up some info on this topic and ask yourself why hmm... why does the ultimate NA cam made by JWT has over 280 degrees of duration and why doesn't that make any power during the 2-4.5K rpm range. When you can answer that you realized how little you really know.


----------



## Asleep (Jan 19, 2003)

Skylines Little Bro said:


> But i think straight line racing is for pussys. Real racing is on a track or through town AROUND CORNERS. and on a track ur not always gonna be at high rpms (where turbo has no power) alot of the time ur wanting to use your tourque not your HP.


lol, this is my favorite part. dude, you have no idea, really, now just shut up, please.


----------



## Skylines Little Bro (Apr 6, 2004)

Asleep_94_Altima said:


> lol, this is my favorite part. dude, you have no idea, really, now just shut up, please.


i know what i know because of time, trial and error. i am not a kid, but far from it. ive been into import tuning, since before it was even popular. ive done this before. i have had a car with 250 NA hp and the same car same motor with 250 Turbo HP. the na had more jam. i didnt join the forum too be told that i am wrong, when i have done this test. obviously no one hear has ever done that. so until one of you take the same too cars with the same hp and do tests, show me results, pictures or video, i know im right but since no one can change the ways they "THINK", i am gonna shut up because this is not why im hear. im hear too learn what i dont know and this i know. so keep on posting what u want im not even gonna look back. And sure go ahead and say that im wronge or that im not gonna come back hear becoause i know im wronge. im not and thats that, i dont care about your "OPINIONS"


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

Skylines Little Bro said:


> i know what i know because of time, trial and error. i am not a kid, but far from it. ive been into import tuning, since before it was even popular. ive done this before. i have had a car with 250 NA hp and the same car same motor with 250 Turbo HP. the na had more jam. i didnt join the forum too be told that i am wrong, when i have done this test. obviously no one hear has ever done that. so until one of you take the same too cars with the same hp and do tests, show me results, pictures or video, i know im right but since no one can change the ways they "THINK", i am gonna shut up because this is not why im hear. im hear too learn what i dont know and this i know. so keep on posting what u want im not even gonna look back. And sure go ahead and say that im wronge or that im not gonna come back hear becoause i know im wronge. im not and thats that, i dont care about your "OPINIONS"


That cracked me up... you're 19... you were into "import tuning" since you were 12 right?  

I think you need to suck up some pride and listen... You may have built a 250hp NA car... but I bet it started with 240hp to begin with! :loser: Then you threw a giant turbo on there that was way too big for the engine and it did exactly like you said and spools up at 7k... so now you're convinced that ALL turbos are like that... In this scenario, who is the one talking out their ass here? And who is giving "Opinion"...


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

fact of the matter is, you build a 250whp spec V, which that alone will cost you probably DOUBLE what it does to get that much power turbocharged, you won't be able to run the spec v on pump gas, and it JUST WON'T BE AS GOOD AS THE TURBOCHARGED SPEC V!

I'm sorry you can't get over this.......you're 19 years old, you don't know 1/4 of what you act like you do.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

Skylines Little Bro said:


> Na power is better because it is always there. with turbo its not there till high rpms. i dont know why u dont understand. and import drag cars are turbo because you cant make 1000 hp with a NA 4 banger. a turbo charged car may have 250 hp, but not till high rpms, at low rpms theres nothing. with NA theres gonna be more power lower in the rpms. and what rpms are you at off the line, hmmmm? maybe very low rpms. Your start is the most critical part of the race. But i think straight line racing is for pussys. Real racing is on a track or through town AROUND CORNERS. and on a track ur not always gonna be at high rpms (where turbo has no power) alot of the time ur wanting to use your tourque not your HP. with a turbo your max torque is raised up in your rpms, meaning less torque down low once again. im not saying that there is differnt kinds of horsepower, (go and find the thread when i said that) i didnt. all i said was if there is NA power is more constant through out the power band. also forced induction changes where ur power bands are.


this is what I got in a PM. OK.....so go look at my dyno.....i don't know about you but it's a pretty LINEAR powerband all the way from 2krpm......and WHO RACES AT 2krpm anyways? 

If you build a kit smart, instead of slapping a big turbo on any old engine, it will in fact be FAR better than an n/a version. Plain and simple. 

You need to get over yourself, you're WRONG. it doesn't sound like you have ANY technical knowledge to back yourself up.


----------



## javierb14 (Jul 9, 2002)

Chuck said:


> if a good turbo is used.. those idiot honda **** who use t1000000 turbos give all turbo cars a bad name, because there cars dont spool the turbo until 7k rpms.


if you have ever driven/rode in a scary fast turbo car, you would know why they use large turbos  

2000 SI street car, daily driven  
built 84mm B16a, our kit, T4/T67 (.63 AR, P-trim wheel), 616.7whp/374.3 ft-lb torque 27-28psi.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

fact is tho, you don't need to get into astronomical RPM to have good, STRONG useable power from a turbocharged car.


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

yes but when you're shifting out of gear in 1st that engine has barely begun to warm up! when you're half way through 2nd that thing is developing over 500hp in 1st still! that's going to be true in every gear, that's why that thing is going to whip someones ass...


----------



## vector03 (Nov 12, 2003)

After reading this ENTIRE thread I only have 2 things to add.

1. Thank god that kid lives in Canada
2. Someone find him and get him fixed. I don't want anymore assholes clogging up this great forum in the future.


----------



## Zac (Mar 10, 2004)

Correct me if I am wrong but the T25/28 design turbo has little to no lag and isn't the idea of track racing to be at high RPMs? Say downshifting and powering out of a twistie?


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

Well the new GT28RS (DP turbo) and all ball bearing relatives have even less lag than the old T25's and T28's (which only had VERY little lag because they're tiny!  )

Doesn't Javier's dyno answer your other question!?  Yea of course you want extra revs in any high speed hobby! Well maybe not Auto-x where the corners are tight...


----------



## Zac (Mar 10, 2004)

James said:


> Well the new GT28RS (DP turbo) and all ball bearing relatives have even less lag than the old T25's and T28's (which only had VERY little lag because they're tiny!  )
> 
> Doesn't Javier's dyno answer your other question!?  Yea of course you want extra revs in any high speed hobby! Well maybe not Auto-x where the corners are tight...


I'm just asking checking because their is a mild split of views in this thread (understantment) lol. And sorry James, I read Javier's post but only half got it...I never paid attention in physics...:asleep:...or anything else is grade skool come to think of it...:asleep:


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

Ok, well basically what wins races is torque... and if you can make torque as long and as high as possible! Doesn't matter what kind of torque ( hehehe j/k...)


----------



## Zac (Mar 10, 2004)

James said:


> Ok, well basically what wins races is torque... and if you can make torque as long and as high as possible! Doesn't matter what kind of torque ( hehehe j/k...)


Don't confuse an ADD child more than they already are. lol. I understand that torque is the race winner and that turbos make more torque (and of course hp), some at higher rpms than others. According to that post, a raise in hp, increases torque, right?


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

Yeah turbos/superchargers/NO2 make tq... hp is just a mathematical function of tq.


----------



## Zac (Mar 10, 2004)

James said:


> Yeah turbos/superchargers/NO2 make tq... hp is just a mathematical function of tq.


Well NOS stickers give you about 5-10 hp but if you two of them its 30.


----------



## WhiteFox (Sep 4, 2002)

*"Eight year olds, dude."*





'nuff said. :loser:


----------



## Jasper (Apr 2, 2004)

lol. classic
another wrench in his gears, not ALL turbo's lag
most people DO have manual tranny's, but those with a stock auto, and a ton of extra cash, a level10 auto blows everything out of the water. i got a chance to drive a friend of mine's b13 sentra, turbo'd bluebird sr20 with a level 10 auto. turbo spools at ~2800 rpm, the power is amazing  :fluffy:


----------



## nafreak (May 2, 2004)

man, even tho i really luv na, i have to completely disagree with wot skyline sed...

Although, if the 2 cars were at the same hp, say 250. id say that the na car would be much more fun to drive due to the response and it would probably easier to drive. a turbo car will almost never feel as good as a na car in terms of response. maybe i drive 2 many na cars but the way it feels to me even with small turbos and anti lag systems and bypass valves, wen u put your foot down there always is a nothing sorta feeling... like the power isnt there, even if it is for only a fraction of a second. its prolly jus me but i never get that wit a na car...

newayz mi point is on the drag strip da na car would be crushed. no doubt there. but on a track, if it was extremely technical with short straights there would be a possibility of the na having a decent chance...

well yea thats mi point of view. lol im prolly wrong tho so yea. :fluffy:


----------



## lshadoff (Nov 26, 2002)

03SentraXE said:


> lol. classic
> another wrench in his gears, not ALL turbo's lag
> most people DO have manual tranny's, but those with a stock auto, and a ton of extra cash, a level10 auto blows everything out of the water. i got a chance to drive a friend of mine's b13 sentra, turbo'd bluebird sr20 with a level 10 auto. turbo spools at ~2800 rpm, the power is amazing  :fluffy:


LOL Tell me about it!

Lew


----------



## spdracerUT (Jun 11, 2002)

i think i feel dumber for having read this.... i don't even know where to begin how to explain everything, eh..


----------



## morepower2 (Apr 19, 2002)

Skylines Little Bro said:


> i know what i know because of time, trial and error. i am not a kid, but far from it. ive been into import tuning, since before it was even popular. ive done this before. i have had a car with 250 NA hp and the same car same motor with 250 Turbo HP. the na had more jam. i didnt join the forum too be told that i am wrong, when i have done this test. obviously no one hear has ever done that. so until one of you take the same too cars with the same hp and do tests, show me results, pictures or video, i know im right but since no one can change the ways they "THINK", i am gonna shut up because this is not why im hear. im hear too learn what i dont know and this i know. so keep on posting what u want im not even gonna look back. And sure go ahead and say that im wronge or that im not gonna come back hear becoause i know im wronge. im not and thats that, i dont care about your "OPINIONS"


How about facts that you are completly wrong. At 250 hp a properly sized and wastegated turbo small displacment (under 2000cc) will have much more area under the torque curve than a NA motor. Obviosuly you have never built a 250 hp NA small displacment motor. One with 250 hp would have an exccedingly high and narrow powerband and be pretty unstreetable with a bad idle (unless its a hybrid hond vtec or a K20A). It would have very little torque and make all of its power though revs. It would totaly suck in a street car.

A turbo motor like the disco potato Sentra with the boost turned down will make 250 whp, be totlay lagless and be very pleasent to drive, with bottom end like a small V8. Its easy turbos build torque though increasing the BMEP. NA cars make hp through incresing VE and using rpm. You are wrong, wrong, wrong. A 250 hp turbo 4 if properly built will spank a 250 hp NA motor, for sure. It will be more relaible and tractable as well. The turbo system you used must have been horribly designed and sized.

Mike


----------



## Chillboy (Oct 8, 2003)

Lag? You mean that millisecond or two taking off in first, cuz I call it a godsent to grip. BTW well put Mike^^


----------



## Nico Flax (May 3, 2003)

This has kinda gotten out of hand, I don't know much about turbos, but I do know I rather have an NA car then a turbo car, just think about all the american muscle cars? or BMWs and Ferraris, I mean tubros are great way to get power, but I think what the kid is trying to say is an NA engine is just better then a tubro'd engine, not when it comes to size or same hp, but there really is no replacement for displacement, turboing is close... but I still don't think its a replacement


----------



## James (Apr 29, 2002)

You are correct sir, this has gotten out of hand and will be closed, I think everyone's said their peace and this thread is now closed.


----------

