Can you go back to naturally aspirated from turbo ownership?
Discussion
KaraK said:
Baryonyx said:
KaraK said:
Out of curiousity have you ever driven a turbo Impreza?
Yes. Most recently a 2007 2.5 WRX, which I have to say was not the best turbo Impreza I've ever driven. Of the AWD rally reps though the best of the bunch I've found so far has been a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII GSR. but the Impreza was to hand and saved me from losing cash on cancelling the policy of insurance I had just bought for an Audi TT that turned out to be a bit of a flub. I was considering Lancer Evolutions and Imprezas at the time (RB5s/Series McRaes/any Lancer Evolution) but the GX was handy and I was doing my dad a favour by buying it off him (and I suppose I owe him a few). 
I've only driven one N/A Impreza and found that as you describe the power delivery was very linear if a little lacking - you certainly have to have a different to preservation of momentum. Once I got used to when to be in what gear I've always found it relatively effortless to keep the one's I've owned (all turbo) on boost and after that it all becomes about attacking your lines. I do worry that I've formed bad habits with the Imprezas (mid-corner downshifts
) and one of these days I'll be in something completely different and it'll bite me in the ass 
Would I buy a turbo powered Impreza in the future? Certainly, I was very close to buying a Series McRae earlier this year but just missed out on it. Now that I'm saving for a house I'll hang onto the GX and look to getting something faster after I've sorted that. I've set myself up well for that, as the MR2 had thrown me quite high up the bhp/weight stakes for a road car, and it could have taken some real cash to find something that topped it for speed and excitement. With the Impreza GX I'm enjoying some honest N/A AWD fun and it feels quite refreshing.
I went from 270bhp of turbo power to 200bhp of NA VTEC power. Was it the best motoring decision I've ever made? Absolutely!
The turbo power was fun, you tear around incredibly quickly, the huge 1980s style step in the power delivery pushed you back into your seat and you could overtake with easy in any gear. The Honda that replaced it is slower in a straight line, as you'd expect with a 70bhp deficit, With the Type R, the gears are shorter, and the redline is higher. To me, holding onto the gears, screaming towards the redline at 8000rpm - accompanied by the most fantastic soundtrack of exhaust and induction noise, is far, far more rewarding in my opinion, than flooring it, waiting for the turbo to spool then bolting off rather jaggedly down the road before swapping up at 6000rpm.
When first driving the Type R I was blown away by the rawness of it, the noise, the nimble, light-weight feel and the accuracy I could place the car with. At first, I was jerky with the throttle, which is razor sharp compared to the one in the Cupra R, but now I find after practice, I can drive it even quicker than I did in the turbocharged car. The confidence of knowing exactly how much power you've got and exactly how it will be delivered is far more inspiring than trying to guess ahead to see whether or not the turbo will spin the wheels, make the car understeer or frankly get you to the new corner just a little bit too quickly!
I wouldn't say I'd never own another turbo car - I'd like an Evo or Impreza later down the line, but for now I'm very, very happy with my VTEC.
The turbo power was fun, you tear around incredibly quickly, the huge 1980s style step in the power delivery pushed you back into your seat and you could overtake with easy in any gear. The Honda that replaced it is slower in a straight line, as you'd expect with a 70bhp deficit, With the Type R, the gears are shorter, and the redline is higher. To me, holding onto the gears, screaming towards the redline at 8000rpm - accompanied by the most fantastic soundtrack of exhaust and induction noise, is far, far more rewarding in my opinion, than flooring it, waiting for the turbo to spool then bolting off rather jaggedly down the road before swapping up at 6000rpm.
When first driving the Type R I was blown away by the rawness of it, the noise, the nimble, light-weight feel and the accuracy I could place the car with. At first, I was jerky with the throttle, which is razor sharp compared to the one in the Cupra R, but now I find after practice, I can drive it even quicker than I did in the turbocharged car. The confidence of knowing exactly how much power you've got and exactly how it will be delivered is far more inspiring than trying to guess ahead to see whether or not the turbo will spin the wheels, make the car understeer or frankly get you to the new corner just a little bit too quickly!
I wouldn't say I'd never own another turbo car - I'd like an Evo or Impreza later down the line, but for now I'm very, very happy with my VTEC.
I'd go for n/a every time. Turbo cars are just a bit too easy to get on the power, when I want to drive the car, I want to have to drive it, not just sit in 3rd and go from 20-80 in the same gear. After my turbo'd Renaultsport Megane, I went to a Clio Trophy, and now a Clio 200 (love Renaultsports)and love the n/a so much I probably won't go back unless something great falls into my price range (like a 1M). Next car will be an Exige n/a probably, though I'll try an S too.
I've never driven a supercharged car properly (just a little blast in a cooper s), is the power more linear like a n/a or is it wham bam thank you ma'am torque like a turbo?
I've never driven a supercharged car properly (just a little blast in a cooper s), is the power more linear like a n/a or is it wham bam thank you ma'am torque like a turbo?
roystinho said:
I've never driven a supercharged car properly (just a little blast in a cooper s), is the power more linear like a n/a or is it wham bam thank you ma'am torque like a turbo?
In most supercharged cars I've driven or can think of, the supercharger tends to be belt driven and thus can bring the power on a little earlier. It certainly doesn't give the dramatic propulsion a turbo provides. You might compare it to a low pressure turbo, though I'm sure there are superchargers out there with a more dramatic impact too!My main concern about superchargers over turbos is the complexity of the item. A turbo that is wamred through and looked after can last for ages and ages, I never feel quite as confident of a supercharger...
Turbo for me any day of the week, having to constantly scream the arse off of the engine to make it go doesn't appeal at all.
Motorway overtakes are simple, a little squeeze of the pedal and it picks up and goes, with an N/A you either sit there waiting for the revs to come up or you need to drop a gear.
I see the good old "turbos are laggy and throttle control is too hard" stuff - yeah sure turbos were laggy 25 years ago, modern ones are not. Far as throttle control goes, just because an engine is turbocharged it doesn't mean that with a gentle push it'd suddenly take off in an uncontrollable manner, boost comes in progressively not 0psi, 0psi, s
t 25psi!
Large displacement engines have similar traits to turbo engines imho, lots of torque and don't need to have a high rev range to perform.
Motorway overtakes are simple, a little squeeze of the pedal and it picks up and goes, with an N/A you either sit there waiting for the revs to come up or you need to drop a gear.
I see the good old "turbos are laggy and throttle control is too hard" stuff - yeah sure turbos were laggy 25 years ago, modern ones are not. Far as throttle control goes, just because an engine is turbocharged it doesn't mean that with a gentle push it'd suddenly take off in an uncontrollable manner, boost comes in progressively not 0psi, 0psi, s
t 25psi! Large displacement engines have similar traits to turbo engines imho, lots of torque and don't need to have a high rev range to perform.
Crafty_ said:
Turbo for me any day of the week, having to constantly scream the arse off of the engine to make it go doesn't appeal at all.
Motorway overtakes are simple, a little squeeze of the pedal and it picks up and goes, with an N/A you either sit there waiting for the revs to come up or you need to drop a gear.
Whilst I am quite happy for people to enjoy what they want in terms of choosing forced induction or not, I always find the above argument ridiculous, though I am more used to seeing it in threads about diesel vs petrol.Motorway overtakes are simple, a little squeeze of the pedal and it picks up and goes, with an N/A you either sit there waiting for the revs to come up or you need to drop a gear.
Is it really that much effort to press the pedal down a little further, or to change down a gear? Especially in a car with a decent gearbox, double de-clutching a downshift should be a pleasure and nothing something moan about.
I thought I would have this problem, last time I tried to go back from a turbo to N/A it failed, a Clio 182 felt flat and a bit gutless after a Saab turbo so I bought another Saab Turbo, just replaced the Saab with a 944 S2 with similar power (standard vs standard) and the 044 has plenty of grunt, feels as quick and has better throttle response, it has a 3.0 engine, think the problems come when you go from a torquey turbo to a N/A which is low capacity, rev monster with decent power but relatively little torque.
It really isnt that simple as one being better than the other, its down to your prefernces, driving style, what you are coming from, power curve, torque curve, refinement, electronics, Dual Mass flywheels, boost, weight etc etc, best thing is to always drive a potential replacement for a decent distance to see if you will get on with it, and also to remember that your driving style will adapt, plus some cars are growers that don't lay all their cards on the table in a 5 minute drive, you miss the sublteties and conversely you may drive a turbo diesel and on initial acquaintance it feels great but after a while it just seems like a one trick pony whith little else to give other than a slug of torque at 3000 rpm which is all done by 4000.
It really isnt that simple as one being better than the other, its down to your prefernces, driving style, what you are coming from, power curve, torque curve, refinement, electronics, Dual Mass flywheels, boost, weight etc etc, best thing is to always drive a potential replacement for a decent distance to see if you will get on with it, and also to remember that your driving style will adapt, plus some cars are growers that don't lay all their cards on the table in a 5 minute drive, you miss the sublteties and conversely you may drive a turbo diesel and on initial acquaintance it feels great but after a while it just seems like a one trick pony whith little else to give other than a slug of torque at 3000 rpm which is all done by 4000.
I've not spent any great deal of time in a turbo petrol (a Cupra Ibiza 1.8T) but I did enjoy it. I've just come from a lot of years of driving turbo diesels (up to 204hp) now to a Puma 1.7 (NA) and although I miss the turbo punch, there is a strange satisfying feeling from the linear power delivery in it from around 3500 to 7000rpm which I thought I might hate after being used to turbo power for so long. I like "lazy" for pootling around locally, going to work and stuff - and it does that well too - but it's also very "ragable" when you want to hoon. Nearly got the best of both worlds. 
Baryonyx said:
Crafty_ said:
Turbo for me any day of the week, having to constantly scream the arse off of the engine to make it go doesn't appeal at all.
Motorway overtakes are simple, a little squeeze of the pedal and it picks up and goes, with an N/A you either sit there waiting for the revs to come up or you need to drop a gear.
Whilst I am quite happy for people to enjoy what they want in terms of choosing forced induction or not, I always find the above argument ridiculous, though I am more used to seeing it in threads about diesel vs petrol.Motorway overtakes are simple, a little squeeze of the pedal and it picks up and goes, with an N/A you either sit there waiting for the revs to come up or you need to drop a gear.
Is it really that much effort to press the pedal down a little further, or to change down a gear? Especially in a car with a decent gearbox, double de-clutching a downshift should be a pleasure and nothing something moan about.
I can't really think of a situation where 2 litre N/A wins out over 2.0 turbo.
Crafty_ said:
When out for a little ride, fine. When travelling for 3 hours yeah, its a pain in the arse.
I can't really think of a situation where 2 litre N/A wins out over 2.0 turbo.
When you want to drive for the sake of driving n/a wins for me.I can't really think of a situation where 2 litre N/A wins out over 2.0 turbo.
When you need to drive to do something else and just mile crunching, easy power is obviously the winner.
Baryonyx said:
Yeah, the power is a little lacking though the noise certainly isn't. That said, other than the effortless overtakes I enjoyed in the MR2 it's just as quick really, day to day. And that linear power delivery makes for a nimble, predictable ride. You can really power out of corners knowing that no surge of torque will come to throw you off course. I am relishing being able to get plenty of time with my foot flat to the floor again! It also has a custom made exhaust on it which really accentuates that beautiful boxer-engined burble the Impreza has, which means double de-clutched downshifts are a joy for the ears as well as the drive.
Umm, synchro box, no? Shirley pointless?
I think you need a fairly large capacity in an N/A engine. The V6 in my R32 Golf was a lovely unit even if the power (mine was mildly warmed up) was fairly modest for the 3.2. Same with the BMW 750i I tested - completely linear delivery, good throttle response,
However small capacity NAs really do need too much stoking to be useable - get caught at low revs and you could make a cup of tea before the power band it reached.
We now have two bi-turbo diesels. They extend the power band of a diesel considerably, rev pretty well, pull well. One sounds cr4p, the other sounds quite nice when pushed and both are a PH no no but we like them a lot and they work well for us.
However small capacity NAs really do need too much stoking to be useable - get caught at low revs and you could make a cup of tea before the power band it reached.
We now have two bi-turbo diesels. They extend the power band of a diesel considerably, rev pretty well, pull well. One sounds cr4p, the other sounds quite nice when pushed and both are a PH no no but we like them a lot and they work well for us.
That's the thing.
I like the delivery of the torque in a turbo engine, but they seem to get wheezy at 5k rpm, and from 6k-7k are just making noise with no extra acceleration. Even a new STi which is a great car, feels the same to me, it feels like you're changing gear 1k-2k rpm too early.
I think I need to go from a 2.0T to something NA but over 3.0 litres. Then I can get the power delivery I want and it shouldn't be too down on the 'pushing you back into the seat' feeling.
I like the delivery of the torque in a turbo engine, but they seem to get wheezy at 5k rpm, and from 6k-7k are just making noise with no extra acceleration. Even a new STi which is a great car, feels the same to me, it feels like you're changing gear 1k-2k rpm too early.
I think I need to go from a 2.0T to something NA but over 3.0 litres. Then I can get the power delivery I want and it shouldn't be too down on the 'pushing you back into the seat' feeling.
Moved from a 260bhp+ turbo 4wd Japanese boost junkie to a ~150bhp Elise powered by a ratty old K series.
The turbo car always felt effortless. The Elise you have to rev. They're about the same in a straight line, but do it in different ways.
The barge is now FI, and has that lovely wall of push when you squeeze the throttle.
The turbo car always felt effortless. The Elise you have to rev. They're about the same in a straight line, but do it in different ways.
The barge is now FI, and has that lovely wall of push when you squeeze the throttle.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff