are NA engines fun?

[ChilliWhizz]

Naturally Aspirated motor going round the ring in the linked clip..... in recent years the 'ring' has become a yardstick for measuring performance... by manufacturers and those who want to quote such stuff...

How quick a car can the lap the ring, to me, means nothing when it comes to selecting a high performance car that you can enjoy on UK roads or do the occasional road trip to Europeland in....

Here however, despite being a race car, is proof that NA is fun.... and it's at the ring... and, yes, it's in the 1950's

Enjoy...... Oh, and God bless Aston Martin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDvybSyE4Sk

[Tigstar]

Im a big fan of N/A engines in the right car. If it's too heavy or geared long then they feel a bit limp but for me chasing the revs to the redline and feeling that rise in power is addictive. I love the sound of induction roar and have gone to great length (and expense) modifying engines to let that noise out!

[neil1jnr]

PH XKR said:

SuperchargedVR6 said:

Nigel Worc's said:

Depends on what you're driving.

I'd rather have a nice 4.0 litre V8 than some turbo piece of ste, I just prefer the drive.

Exactly.... you need 4 litres to get anywhere near the power potential of a decent 2.0 turbo. NA piece of ste.

Wrong. A 2.0 engine needs the fun killing turbos to get anywhere near a 4.0v8.

I guess as a generation have got used to Diesels being "sporty" that they now find the turbo's are fun. They aint. They are fast but they are just high revving diesels in reality. Ooooh look I make XXX bhp over a short rev range. Even if the range is long, the gearing is usually short so it becomes thrashy.

A 2.0 turbo is the Yorkshire terrier equivalent of a dog vs a Springer Spaniel as the 4.0v8. One you never tire of, the other is an irritating little st that was fun at the beginning but now its just a yappy little rat.

The only counter to that, is if the turbo has a lovely sounding dump valve, that's cool.

Just as a counter argument, the only big V8 I have driven was in the Audi S5, extremely boring, sounds great from the outside but felt slow if I am honest. In comparison my 2.3 litre Evo is turbocharged (obviously) and has over 500bhp at only 1.6bar is better for fun than the Audi in every way, and doesn't run out of puff noticeably at top end thanks to more aggressive cams. My last 2litre turbo Evo was pushing 400bhp and that engine was also better than the Audi's. I only use this comparison as you appear to be anti-turbo.

I drove a 911 (2011 model) Carrera 4S for the first time recently and that was absolutely brilliant, I think it depends more on application at times rather than the engine itself as the V8 from the Audi is probably great in the right application... remove the characterless VAG 2 litre turbo in the S3 and put their V8 in instead...?

[PH XKR]

Well the Audit was the issue, its duller than watching John Major paint a house grey.

[twizellb]

My favourite would be Speed Six 4.0, fantastic throttle responce.

[Gary C]

PH XKR said:

SuperchargedVR6 said:

Nigel Worc's said:

Depends on what you're driving.

I'd rather have a nice 4.0 litre V8 than some turbo piece of ste, I just prefer the drive.

Exactly.... you need 4 litres to get anywhere near the power potential of a decent 2.0 turbo. NA piece of ste.

Wrong. A 2.0 engine needs the fun killing turbos to get anywhere near a 4.0v8.

I guess as a generation have got used to Diesels being "sporty" that they now find the turbo's are fun. They aint. They are fast but they are just high revving diesels in reality. Ooooh look I make XXX bhp over a short rev range. Even if the range is long, the gearing is usually short so it becomes thrashy.

A 2.0 turbo is the Yorkshire terrier equivalent of a dog vs a Springer Spaniel as the 4.0v8. One you never tire of, the other is an irritating little st that was fun at the beginning but now its just a yappy little rat.

The only counter to that, is if the turbo has a lovely sounding dump valve, that's cool.

Lol, turbos don't nesessarily kill fun. Some turbo installations are ste, but one with a nice big "characterful" turbo which surges and bangs and kicks, while not 'nice' in a purist way, does make a suitable car excellent fun. I refer back to an Evo V, lots of drama. Coming from full boost to half throttle resulted in a surge/kick that was absolutely predictable and pure theatre. A 200sx was boost driven oversteery fun.

But yes, too many people think a fast car has to have that surge of boost and can't get revs.

And I hate whistling dump valves. Especially when people don't understand what they are designed to do (keeps the turbo spinning innit ?)

[PH XKR]

Two things to grant a car instant cool = dump valve or pop up headlights.

But you are right, it is down to the application. The current M3/4 are bloody good cars but I find the turbo nulls the fun that used to be an engaging drive (they sound awful too with that engineered loud exhaust that sounds like a diesel tractor when cold).

[jwilliamsm3]

driven a fair few powerful NA's and turbos, only 1 supercharged (s-type R jag)

for the normal day to day driving, turbo suits me just fine, low down power and torque makes driving much easier, and with the benefit of being a bit better on fuel. all of the 5 cars i have access to are turbo come to think about it, only 1 diesel aswell

my e46 m3 sounded unreal at 8000rpm with the eventuri intake, but the woeful manual gearbox ruined that car for me over the 4.5 years i had it, and it's low down power sucked. i really do miss the noise

[Huff]

PH XKR said:

A 2.0 turbo is the Yorkshire terrier equivalent of a dog vs a Springer Spaniel as the 4.0v8. One you never tire of, the other is an irritating little st that was fun at the beginning but now its just a yappy little rat.

+several

NASpringer: the horizon! my new favourite thing! <romp>
NASpringer: the midcorner correction! my new favourite thing! <romp>
NASpringer: woah, no, opposite corner! my new favourite thing! <romp>
NASpringer: Where next? Can we? yes yes yes!

Great analogy

Edited by Huff on Friday 21st April 22:28

[PH XKR]

Huff said:

PH XKR said:

A 2.0 turbo is the Yorkshire terrier equivalent of a dog vs a Springer Spaniel as the 4.0v8. One you never tire of, the other is an irritating little st that was fun at the beginning but now its just a yappy little rat.

+several

NASpringer: the horizon! my new favorourite thing! <romp>
NASpringer: the midcorner correction! my new favorourite thing! <romp>
NASpringer: woah, no, opposite corner! my new favorourite thing! <romp>
NASpringer: Where next? Can we? yes yes yes!

Great analogy

You've just descried by dog, as a car

[Huff]

Prob. because my Fury R1 is an an overachieving Springer pup

[coppice]

Weight is a far more important determinant of fun than the nature of the power unit . So there .

[Havoc856-S]

PH XKR said:

One thing that draws me to large CC engines is the relaxing way the power is made, even the z06 was a competent cruiser. I do long European trips, so out of interest, and knowing the Evora is not a true GT.... how is it on the long drives?

It's a 3.5 V6 so has enough in itself to be both manic (high revs) and relaxing (short shifts). It cruises rather well in 6th for the long distance drives.

[sammyboy77]

why are people talking about mpg figures on this forum? surely it is about ideal cars on ideal roads in ideal weather and to hell with how much PETROL you use.

[twoblacklines]

dannyDC2 said:

My Integra is powered by one of the best NA engines ever made - the K20a.

With basic breathing mods and a tune mine pulled 244bhp on the dyno. With weight at around 920kg, and wonderful, simple suspension, yeah it's fun.

It's rare that anything can keep close on a trackday, turbo or not. It's most fun clinging to the rear of an Evo or M3s rear bumper around a track, waiting for them to let me past. It's not a slouch in the straight, but quick modern VAG hatches can sometimes pull away. Straight line pace is about the same as a stock E92 M3. 265bhp/tonne but with short gearing, it'll do the 1/4 mile in under 13s, and that's setup for corners!

So yeah, NA is fun. More fun than turbo IMO. Both my "fun" cars are NA (the other being a 328i drift car), the daily driver is a turbo, but that's only because it's also a diesel.

I sorta get the appeal of boost, I previously owned a fettled Seat Cupra which was good fun, but NA is the way for me. Throttle response, the sound, the excitement...

NA FTW!!!

But if you supercharged your K20A with the correct supercharger, you would have all the positives of a low boost setup with none of the negatives. That is, a forced induction engine that behaves like the N/A does.

[e8_pack]

I have a GTR running 620hp and a 911 turbo. Both are slow compared to my all motor 2.0 Duratec Westfield running 270+hp.

550kg, revving to 9k. The induction noise and throttle response is addictive and the engine characteristics give it immense balance on track. In the right package they are far superior.

[irfan1712]

Bit of an open question, but for me its big capacity N/A's. I've only ever owned 3 cars, the first was a 1.4 mk4 Golf,

the second an R32



And currently a C63


Think i've started a trend - i don't see me ever owning a turbo car any time soon. Enjoy them while they are still here - Big N/A engined rammed into small cars designed to be diesel rep mobiles are oozing with character and soul regardless of how fast or thirsty they maybe. Fact is turbo power going forward will always be cleaner and more powerful - you must ask why so many manufacturers of performance turbo engines are trying to replicate linear power deliveries found in N/A cars.

[PH XKR]

because linear is what most drivers are used to

The opposite would be said of the older VAG diesel turbos, it was so bad that I had to return my company car back in 2006 as it was sea sick inducing.

[culpz]

If i keep my sensible head on, my next car will be a cheap, N/A hot-hatch. Something like an EP3 Type-R or a Clio 172/182. I've never experienced one but always yearned for something with similar ingredients. It could end up being a let down or even a revelation but, either way, it's a scratch that i've wanted to itch for a long time.

The turbo cars i've had/driven haven't really been high performance. So, ultimately, they have been a bit of a disappointment. Fair bit of lag, especially with the current car, but then not really much when the turbo does eventually wake up and the power just trails off after 6k. Saying that, the Fiesta ST that i test drove was fantastic. I honestly couldn't really fault it at all.

I could easily be tempted with a new Golf GTI or even the new Fiesta ST, which is due to be released early next year. Or, back on the used market, something like a BMW 330ci. There's that many cars out there that i like the idea of but haven't actually driven, it's hard to make a decision. Both FI and N/A both have their own interpretation of fun. It's really just whatever you prefer.

[JLC25]

Although only small, I love the 1.6 M16A in my Swift Sport. Urgent, responsive and the actual engine sounds great being taken to 7200 rpm (no need for piping in artificial engine noise from a dull engine that only revs to 5k or putting on an overbearing exhaust). Much more in tune with what hot hatches are supposed to be about (even if very warm is a better description).