Turbo or NA, which do you prefer and why?
Poll: Turbo or NA, which do you prefer and why?
Total Members Polled: 487
Discussion
TheAngryDog said:
Wormus, still talking a lot of money to get to those power levels? £15k gets you an LS2 6.0. Then what, £6500 on the TVS2300 to get 580bhp at the fly according to monkfish. To go for more power will need what? Genuinely interested! Cheers.
You will need a new cam, fuel system and exhaust to get over 650hp. And of course a remap. It's not cheap!For £13k Monkfish do a drive in / drive out LSA engine swap for the VXR8. Add a grand for them to fit a new cam to it and you'll end up with 700hp.
wormus said:
TheAngryDog said:
Wormus, still talking a lot of money to get to those power levels? £15k gets you an LS2 6.0. Then what, £6500 on the TVS2300 to get 580bhp at the fly according to monkfish. To go for more power will need what? Genuinely interested! Cheers.
You will need a new cam, fuel system and exhaust to get over 650hp. And of course a remap. It's not cheap!For £13k Monkfish do a drive in / drive out LSA engine swap for the VXR8. Add a grand for them to fit a new cam to it and you'll end up with 700hp.
It's interesting to know what is involved. I cannot bring myself to spend that kind of money though but hats off to those who do. Is that 700bhp n/a or with a charger? At which point does the £13k engine become £20k?
TheAngryDog said:
No one ever said Horsepower was cheap lol.
It's interesting to know what is involved. I cannot bring myself to spend that kind of money though but hats off to those who do. Is that 700bhp n/a or with a charger? At which point does the £13k engine become £20k?
You can almost get 600hp from one NA but you need to go with the LS7 or 454cid LSX. Much easier to extract power with a supercharger. Over 670hp you need new Pistons then you are talking a lot of labour. My engine was built from component parts, it has an LSA block, crank and heads but was blueprinted and built by hand, it's the labour that costs. It's interesting to know what is involved. I cannot bring myself to spend that kind of money though but hats off to those who do. Is that 700bhp n/a or with a charger? At which point does the £13k engine become £20k?
If I was faced with the same choice again, I'd use an LSX 376 B15 crate engine and add a pair of turbos. That's built by GMPP to take 1000hp out of the box.
PH XKR said:
at the point it needs a rebuild, which they do. There has been more failures than those that haven't, engines ran without oil, pistons dropped etc, you simply roll the dice if you plug a charger on to a N/A base
Tbf, you did say that there was a supercharger option available for the M5, which has been done successfully many times without causing failures. I voted turbo but their is a little more to it than that.
On a trackday: N/A
On the road: Turbo
Simply due to the nature of the different driving, on the track it is easy and you are expected to thrash the balls off of your car the whole time, this plays into high revving N/A units very well and makes for a very enjoyable experience, wheras on the road I want to be able to accelerate from ~40 to ~80 as quickly as possible well putting as little thought as possible into the maneuver, then I want to sit at ~80 using as little fuel as possible, this plays right into the turbos advantages of low end torque and lower overall fuel being pissed into the cylinders.
On a trackday: N/A
On the road: Turbo
Simply due to the nature of the different driving, on the track it is easy and you are expected to thrash the balls off of your car the whole time, this plays into high revving N/A units very well and makes for a very enjoyable experience, wheras on the road I want to be able to accelerate from ~40 to ~80 as quickly as possible well putting as little thought as possible into the maneuver, then I want to sit at ~80 using as little fuel as possible, this plays right into the turbos advantages of low end torque and lower overall fuel being pissed into the cylinders.
PH XKR said:
The vortech/centrifugal type of blower places a lot less strain on the engine, also its a really well engineered engine not a progression of a truck engine. The LS engines are very cheap not just because they are so mass produced (that helps) but because they are cheaply made.
There has never been a supercharged e39 m5 with over 600bhp iirc (at least not UK dyno tested, as we all know USA bhp is different)PH XKR said:
The vortech/centrifugal type of blower places a lot less strain on the engine, also its a really well engineered engine not a progression of a truck engine. The LS engines are very cheap not just because they are so mass produced (that helps) but because they are cheaply made.
Yes, LS engines are cheap, reliable, powerful, economical, very strong and tunable. Economies come from the fact they make millions of them and fit them to pretty much everything. You can buy a 430hp LS3 crate engine for just over 4 grand and comes without the inherent design faults (Vanos) of the "superior", less powerful, thirstier M5 engine.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 2nd May 10:35
wormus said:
PH XKR said:
The vortech/centrifugal type of blower places a lot less strain on the engine, also its a really well engineered engine not a progression of a truck engine. The LS engines are very cheap not just because they are so mass produced (that helps) but because they are cheaply made.
Yes, LS engines are cheap, reliable, powerful, economical, very strong and tunable. Economies come from the fact they make millions of them and fit them to pretty much everything. You can buy a 430hp LS3 crate engine for just over 4 grand and comes without the inherent design faults (Vanos) of the "superior", less powerful, thirstier M5 engine.
Edited by wormus on Monday 2nd May 10:35
Vanos issues is a fallacy with the s62. I've had two M5's and neither have given any issues with the vanos
HappyMidget said:
PH XKR said:
Would you want to chase bar bragging 600bhp or a reliable 500?
I have a reliable 600+ sitting on my drive right now and that is just a new intake and a small tweak to the tune.I am pretty certain ph XKR was referring to the s62 in the M5.
I still think it's mad to drop over £30k, including purchase price on a second hand vxr8 to make it faster, when there are cars out there that are newer and already running that kind of power, or are capable of doing so for not a lot of money.
I can take my M5 to 550bhp plus, including upgrading the clutch, brakes etc for £10k. That makes my car an £18k car.
Maybe I need a go in a vxr8
Although I voted for N/A I think it's impossible to answer the question without having the context of the vehicle in question.
2.0 N/A petrol engine in a mid-sized SUV thingy? Much rather have the 1.6 turbo.
Sledgehammer turbo nutter engine in a lightweight sports car on a smallish footprint with a delicate handling balance that you only can make work to your benefit when you have the ability to call on every hp one by one with no throttle lag at all? I'll forego the extra one hundred fifty horsepower in favour of naturally aspirated response, thanksverymuch
2.0 N/A petrol engine in a mid-sized SUV thingy? Much rather have the 1.6 turbo.
Sledgehammer turbo nutter engine in a lightweight sports car on a smallish footprint with a delicate handling balance that you only can make work to your benefit when you have the ability to call on every hp one by one with no throttle lag at all? I'll forego the extra one hundred fifty horsepower in favour of naturally aspirated response, thanksverymuch
Having owned at the same time a supercharged E46 M3, an Evo IX FQ-360, a carbon air-boxed E46 M3 and a 3.0 Tdi A4 the keys most likely to be used were the carbon-airboxed E46 M3. I now drive a 4.2 N/A V8.
I like.....the noise, chasing the red-line, the constant building of power to the red-line, being a bit of a heathen in this world of turbo'd everything and the noise, again.
I don't like....tuning the buggers is ridiculously expensive for any sort of decent gain.
The best option if you really wanted the best of both is either supercharging an N/A engine (such as an M3), or twin turbo engines. I was out for a blast in my mates 450bhp B5 RS4 on friday and was genuinely impressed with how un-turbo it felt. Tiny bit of torque tail-off right at the top but nowhere near as bad as any previous turbo engines, she just pulls and pulls.
I'll be going twin turbo with my next car as I'm fed up of spending so much money for such little gain from N/A engines. A simple remap will give bigger gains on a turbo than spending thousands on an N/A.
I like.....the noise, chasing the red-line, the constant building of power to the red-line, being a bit of a heathen in this world of turbo'd everything and the noise, again.
I don't like....tuning the buggers is ridiculously expensive for any sort of decent gain.
The best option if you really wanted the best of both is either supercharging an N/A engine (such as an M3), or twin turbo engines. I was out for a blast in my mates 450bhp B5 RS4 on friday and was genuinely impressed with how un-turbo it felt. Tiny bit of torque tail-off right at the top but nowhere near as bad as any previous turbo engines, she just pulls and pulls.
I'll be going twin turbo with my next car as I'm fed up of spending so much money for such little gain from N/A engines. A simple remap will give bigger gains on a turbo than spending thousands on an N/A.
Turbo's suit cars where power and fun is everything. e.g 488GTB and F40.
Turbo's also suit fun and scary cars with massive turbo lag. e.g 1986 Lotus Renault Turbo ( the lag! Put your foot down, nothing happens, then all of a sudden the car is screaming, boosting and wheelspinning like crazy with no traction control to harness it!!!)
Turbo's suit everyday cars with the exception of:
famed n/a's, such as the 3.8 flat six and VTEC
purist cars bar the turbo legends.
Hot hatches.
Fun oriented cars. MX5
N/A's suit cars where the ultimate driving experience is key. An example could be the E46 M3 CSL, or the Honda Integra Type R.
Thereafter N/A should be reserved for cars that are destined to make us smile and not all about power. Same applies for RWD, and FWD in the case of the hot hatch.
However turbocharging is the way forward and should be put to use in everyday cars and supercars, to lower emissions and further power.
Turbo's also suit fun and scary cars with massive turbo lag. e.g 1986 Lotus Renault Turbo ( the lag! Put your foot down, nothing happens, then all of a sudden the car is screaming, boosting and wheelspinning like crazy with no traction control to harness it!!!)
Turbo's suit everyday cars with the exception of:
famed n/a's, such as the 3.8 flat six and VTEC
purist cars bar the turbo legends.
Hot hatches.
Fun oriented cars. MX5
N/A's suit cars where the ultimate driving experience is key. An example could be the E46 M3 CSL, or the Honda Integra Type R.
Thereafter N/A should be reserved for cars that are destined to make us smile and not all about power. Same applies for RWD, and FWD in the case of the hot hatch.
However turbocharging is the way forward and should be put to use in everyday cars and supercars, to lower emissions and further power.
It’s been a while since there was a post in here. Given the characterful 3 pot turbos ford has been making and BMW going 4 pot turbo on most... have views changed with times?
My first car was N/A. It was a BM Trouble You 330i and it was a silky smooth creamy inline 6. I didn’t miss my Audi S3 at all. It’s 2019 and if I’m still searching for a powerful yet tiny bit economical N/A. Turbos are fun. N/A can be just as enjoyable.
My first car was N/A. It was a BM Trouble You 330i and it was a silky smooth creamy inline 6. I didn’t miss my Audi S3 at all. It’s 2019 and if I’m still searching for a powerful yet tiny bit economical N/A. Turbos are fun. N/A can be just as enjoyable.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff