Turbo or NA, which do you prefer and why?

[kambites]

xRIEx said:

That's not what he's saying at all. What he is saying (I believe) is that how those systems are set up to work are completely (sort of) different:

The suspension - ultimate grip as opposed to driver comfort
The composites
The oil - engine at limit, oil changed every race/practice as opposed to engine often at idle/part throttle/low to mid revs, oil changed 6000-20,000 miles
Chassis
Tyres - tailored to conditions, changed every race as opposed to working in wildly varying conditions and temperatures, to last maybe 30,000 miles
Engine - as much power as is possible within the rules as opposed to convenience, driveability and versatility
Safety features

I've driven racing cars on the road; it's generally an utterly horrible experience. The best road cars have very little in common with racing cars in terms of setup.

Edited by kambites on Saturday 10th August 19:04

[Evoluzione]

xRIEx said:

That's not what he's saying at all. What he is saying (I believe) is that how those systems are set up to work are completely (sort of) different:

The suspension - ultimate grip as opposed to driver comfort
The composites
The oil - engine at limit, oil changed every race/practice as opposed to engine often at idle/part throttle/low to mid revs, oil changed 6000-20,000 miles
Chassis
Tyres - tailored to conditions, changed every race as opposed to working in wildly varying conditions and temperatures, to last maybe 30,000 miles
Engine - as much power as is possible within the rules as opposed to convenience, driveability and versatility
Safety features

Then he's debating something I never put down, my quote was: "the tricks they know will be filtering down to us as end users eventually."
I'm unsure at the moment how that could be misconstrued. I clearly didn't say "We will all be driving round in F1 cars"

[kambites]

My point was that the "tricks" they develop in F1 will not necessarily give desirable traits in a road car. Possibly exactly the opposite, in fact.

[Pooh]

NA for me, I have a multiair 1.4 turbo petrol Giulietta and it is a very good car with a multi award winning engine but given the choice I would rather have the 2.5V6 that was in my old 155. Both engines have similar power outputs, the turbo has more torque and is more economical but the old V6 was smoother, had far better throttle response, was more free revving and sounded nicer so there is no contest for me.

[GetCarter]

NA.. But supercharged are a very close second. Tubos a distant third.

[Tonberry]

Question isn't specific enough so I'm struggling to answer.

Are we comparing 6.2 V8 AMGs with 1.0 eco boost Fiestas?

My 2.8 straight six will a 911 Turbo?

I need parameters goddamit.

[Brett748]

My comparison is a little unfair. I've come from a Clio 182 to a Ibiza FR TDI (Man maths didn't work, short term pain long term gain).

Now the tuebo diesel is great for what I use it for, cruising around doing 20k+ miles a year. However, I miss the throttle response of the NA petrol. I find the Ibiza has a good chassis actually, but its harder to control on the limit because it is really difficult to adjust on the throttle. You plant your foot at least a second earlier than you would in the Clio while it gathers its thoughts and spools the turbo.

I will definitely be going turbo petrol next though. I'm hoping the turbo petrol will be a lot sharper than the diesel.

[HaloGen8]

Turbo every time.

Midrange is king with the turbo.

[t4andgreys]

I'd like to see some rolling road graphs personally say between a 325 or 328 BMW compared to say your average 2.0 turbocharged lag monster for comparison purposes !!!!!!

Think that's fair being that the n/a has a bigger displacement to eeven things up a little !!!

Anyone got a BMW graph or n/a motor around 2.5ltr to post up please
My reasoning is that most decent n/a setups still need to come on cam before they sing such as vtec etc etc ,so why is that much different to lag ???
Admittedly its a lot less noticeable but still there nonetheless

Would much rather a turbo car with more torque than bhp over a vtec or n/a that is revvy but with not as much torque

[kambites]

Lag is completely independent of revs.

[HaloGen8]

t4andgreys said:

Would much rather a turbo car with more torque than bhp over a vtec or n/a that is revvy but with not as much torque

Agreed. Impreza or Mazda RX8? Similar BHP but to get the best from the RX8 you have to be singing in the 6k+rpm zone. In the Subaru 3k and it all becomes alive with a thump.

[anonymous-user]

The correct answer is large displacement engine with positive displacement supercharger. Immediate boost off idle and proper power. 2.0l N/A is is rubbish while 2.0 turbo is acceptable but not properly quick. 6.2L with one bar boost is something else!

Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 10th August 21:14

[kambites]

HaloGen8 said:

Agreed. Impreza or Mazda RX8? Similar BHP but to get the best from the RX8 you have to be singing in the 6k+rpm zone. In the Subaru 3k and it all becomes alive with a thump.

RX8 for me - about the perfect shaped torque curve and proper throttle reponse. Possibly my favourite engine.

[t4andgreys]

kambites said:

RX8 for me - about the perfect shaped torque curve and proper throttle reponse. Possibly my favourite engine.

But sadly one of the only cars ever produced were you are given a 4 ltr tub of engine oil with it from new hahaha
Friend of mine says his has been thirstier on oil than petrol since new .....
Prefer the ej20 even with its chocolate crank

[otolith]

You get 1 litre in the boot. The oil consumption is an irrelevance. It's cheap oil and there are piston engines which use more and more expensive at that.

Fuel consumption, hard to live with. Oil? Nah.

[All that jazz]

iacabu said:

A close decision but down to my ownership experience of a 330ci, I'm voting N/A.

Not actually owned one, but planned to buy one some years back. Took one for a test drive and it felt so slllllllllow and I concluded it was broken. Took another one for a test drive later in the day on the M25 and that also felt slow, despite showing 110 on the dial. There was zero sense of urgency or involvement from them and utterly boring to drive. Got back in my Ibiza Cupra (1.8T) that I had at the time and it felt about 10x quicker and more enjoyable to drive even though on paper it's got significantly less power than the 330. So no, N/A are not for me and VTEC even less. In fact I don't even see the point of VTECs at all. Always makes me chuckle when I see VTEC owners berating diesel engines for their small 2k power band when theirs have 7.5k of nothing then a tiny 1k of power.

[Scuffers]

I can only assume you have never driven a modern iVTec engine?

we seem to be getting a lot of polarised opinions on here that seem to be based on popular misconception rather then actual experience.

[turbolucie]

For me that feeling when the turbo kicks in is just the best feeling. Nothing compares.

[kambites]

t4andgreys said:

kambites said:

RX8 for me - about the perfect shaped torque curve and proper throttle reponse. Possibly my favourite engine.

But sadly one of the only cars ever produced were you are given a 4 ltr tub of engine oil with it from new hahaha
Friend of mine says his has been thirstier on oil than petrol since new .....
Prefer the ej20 even with its chocolate crank

To be honest our (2.0 TFSI) Octavia isn't much different, in terms of oil consumption. You're looking at no more than 1p/mile in oil.

[MarkRSi]

All that jazz said:

iacabu said:

A close decision but down to my ownership experience of a 330ci, I'm voting N/A.

Not actually owned one, but planned to buy one some years back. Took one for a test drive and it felt so slllllllllow and I concluded it was broken. Took another one for a test drive later in the day on the M25 and that also felt slow, despite showing 110 on the dial. There was zero sense of urgency or involvement from them and utterly boring to drive. Got back in my Ibiza Cupra (1.8T) that I had at the time and it felt about 10x quicker and more enjoyable to drive even though on paper it's got significantly less power than the 330. So no, N/A are not for me and VTEC even less. In fact I don't even see the point of VTECs at all. Always makes me chuckle when I see VTEC owners berating diesel engines for their small 2k power band when theirs have 7.5k of nothing then a tiny 1k of power.

Funnily enough I also had a test drive of a 330Ci which despite being as quick as my car also felt slow & dull despite picking up speed well...

My car at the time was a Civic Type-R