Turbo or NA, which do you prefer and why?
Poll: Turbo or NA, which do you prefer and why?
Total Members Polled: 487
Discussion
Following the thread about daily driver turbo cars, and noticing that some people say they prefer the way they drive compared to N/A cars got me thinking about this thread.
I normally seem to see people preferring the drive of N/A cars, stating better sounding, often revvier, better throttle response, no lag, less potential for reliability issues, easier to maintain etc.
Obviously turbo cars offer more shove so feel quicker, are easier and better tune and potentially offer better fuel economy for a given power level.
So which do you prefer and why? I must admit I generally prefer an N/A car, speed isn't everything and I feel more involved in the act of driving, as you have to work harder to go fast (more gear changes etc) and I like the noise they make (although the whoosh of a turbo is quite nice to listen to as well).
I normally seem to see people preferring the drive of N/A cars, stating better sounding, often revvier, better throttle response, no lag, less potential for reliability issues, easier to maintain etc.
Obviously turbo cars offer more shove so feel quicker, are easier and better tune and potentially offer better fuel economy for a given power level.
So which do you prefer and why? I must admit I generally prefer an N/A car, speed isn't everything and I feel more involved in the act of driving, as you have to work harder to go fast (more gear changes etc) and I like the noise they make (although the whoosh of a turbo is quite nice to listen to as well).
N/A every time though I can see why people like a 2lr Turbo compared to a 2lr N/A as they aren't really comparing two equals. If they were to compare a 2lr Turbo to the real N/A equivalent (a 3.5lr petrol N/A or larger depending on how high the boost was turned up) the N/A would win for most other than the potential for larger fuel bills.
Crusoe said:
N/A every time though I can see why people like a 2lr Turbo compared to a 2lr N/A as they aren't really comparing two equals. If they were to compare a 2lr Turbo to the real N/A equivalent (a 3.5lr petrol N/A or larger depending on how high the boost was turned up) the N/A would win for most other than the potential for larger fuel bills.
Probably this.A N/A engine would have to be much larger in terms of equal power to a turbocharged unit.
I loved my Mondeo ST220 and the 7k RPM redline, but I also enjoy the boosty effortless torque that comes with my Focus ST.
Turbo for me. There is lag, but I enjoy the challenge of timing the throttle input out of a corner such that it comes on boost right when it needs to :-)
I saw a sig on a forum somewhere that said: "Turbo lag is like foreplay. You know what's coming next, and you know it's going to be good!"
My old 9-3 Aero was hilarious. 10mph, 2nd gear, foot down. Nothing would happen for a good few seconds, and people in 1.0 Daewoo Matiz's could outrun it. Then the turbo came on song, the wheels would start spinning, torque steering wildly, and the noise in the cabin was immense. Quite the sensory experience...
I saw a sig on a forum somewhere that said: "Turbo lag is like foreplay. You know what's coming next, and you know it's going to be good!"
My old 9-3 Aero was hilarious. 10mph, 2nd gear, foot down. Nothing would happen for a good few seconds, and people in 1.0 Daewoo Matiz's could outrun it. Then the turbo came on song, the wheels would start spinning, torque steering wildly, and the noise in the cabin was immense. Quite the sensory experience...
Why do people still believe modern cars and infact older ones too are "lag monsters"
Turbo for me with boost made from 2.5k all the way until 8.5k rev limit
Always take a turbo over n/a as you get the best of both worlds n/a engine when tootling round off boost then boost and power when you need it
Turbo for me with boost made from 2.5k all the way until 8.5k rev limit
Always take a turbo over n/a as you get the best of both worlds n/a engine when tootling round off boost then boost and power when you need it
t4andgreys said:
Why do people still believe modern cars and infact older ones too are "lag monsters"
Turbo for me with boost made from 2.5k all the way until 8.5k rev limit
It's not the boost threshold that bothers me about modern turbos, it's the poor throttle response caused by lag. Turbo for me with boost made from 2.5k all the way until 8.5k rev limit
t4andgreys said:
Why do people still believe modern cars and infact older ones too are "lag monsters"
Turbo for me with boost made from 2.5k all the way until 8.5k rev limit
Always take a turbo over n/a as you get the best of both worlds n/a engine when tootling round off boost then boost and power when you need it
I don't like my power delivery to work the same way a cistern delivers water to a toilet.Turbo for me with boost made from 2.5k all the way until 8.5k rev limit
Always take a turbo over n/a as you get the best of both worlds n/a engine when tootling round off boost then boost and power when you need it
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff