are NA engines fun?
Discussion
popeyewhite said:
Centurion07 said:
rubez said:
it's hard to imagine something being as fun as shifting down a couple of gears, spooling your turbo and planting it...
Your experience will vary greatly depending on the size of the first number...
Although you have to work a bit harder for peak performance, a good NA engine feels like it's encouraging you to go for that performance through being so keen to respond to throttle inputs. Turbo's are still fun but I don't feel like they goad you into spirited driving as much and they're also harder to get in tune with during fast driving as the non-linear response is more unpredictable. They're still fun enough that I could live with those drawbacks but the fact that most turbos feel a bit breathless at the top end as well seals the deal for NA as the winner for me. The extra reliability is then just a bonus.
Good chance I'll be laughed out of this thread but I've never owned a performance vehicle. Today I'll be picking up my new car which although isn't fast, is the more performance-oriented model in the range. I chose this NA car because, despite having pretty much half the power of the turbo car which I was also considering, I just wanted the revvy-ness and delivery style. among other reasons, of course.
More of the engines that people hold in high regard seem to be NA too, it seems to me anyway.
That being said I would one day like to own a fast, punchy turbo. Some of the cars in my dream car list are turbos.
More of the engines that people hold in high regard seem to be NA too, it seems to me anyway.
That being said I would one day like to own a fast, punchy turbo. Some of the cars in my dream car list are turbos.
e21Mark said:
s m said:
curlie467 said:
It's a bit of a "how long is a piece of string?"question
I've had fun with all types of engine, n/a, Turbo and superchargedHow are people measuring the fun? With what device or scale?
Surely depends on the car/road etc just as much
rubez said:
no. thinking of going from a 370bhp 2.0L turbo to a 270bhp 3.5L NA. i know it will be a big performance drop, but then the car costs half the price.
worried it won't have much overtaking grunt for one.
worried about overtaking with 270hp?! worried it won't have much overtaking grunt for one.
what is it a lorry? If you have to use the hp to overtake then you don't know how to overtake!I have a range of cars - the c. 150hp diesel skoda estate presents no issues overtaking anything I come across - if I can't overtake it is because it is not safe / legal - nothing to do with the lack of power in the car...
the classic RR can overtake, but though it has a 4.2 v8 with 200hp (33% more than the skoda, albeit a heavier car) the power presents differently and I would be less likely to overtake in it, but mainly due to how it handles!
the 3.0 z3 - lots of fun and a revvy straight 6 which comes alive at 3,000rpm and hangs on to the red line - instant power at any speed in the right gear yet it only has 231hp - not much it couldn't get past, and it would be easy to drive it like a lunatic and lose your licence
the M5 - 5.0 v8 with 400hp - waves of v8 growly torque and power - any gear, any speed, plant the foot and vanish into the horizon - no turbos needed...
as a comparison, take a car like the Audi S3 when overtaking - no power, no power, no power, here comes the turbo - bam, far too much power... no thanks - fun for the first 5 minutes and then really tedious and digital - give me an analogue experience any day - however as others have said, you have to actually drive them, rather than getting in and without skill going fast... If you can't overtake with 270hp then lessons on planning, anticipation, overtaking will be of far more use than worrying about reduced horsepower... In the last month I have driven an E63AMG and a Suzuki Swift Sport - in some ways two very opposite cars - both a lot of fun, both equally progressive on a country road...
horsemeatscandal said:
Good chance I'll be laughed out of this thread but I've never owned a performance vehicle. Today I'll be picking up my new car which although isn't fast, is the more performance-oriented model in the range. I chose this NA car because, despite having pretty much half the power of the turbo car which I was also considering, I just wanted the revvy-ness and delivery style. among other reasons, of course.
More of the engines that people hold in high regard seem to be NA too, it seems to me anyway.
That being said I would one day like to own a fast, punchy turbo. Some of the cars in my dream car list are turbos.
good for you. experience high revving na while you can because it wont last. stir the 'box manually too.More of the engines that people hold in high regard seem to be NA too, it seems to me anyway.
That being said I would one day like to own a fast, punchy turbo. Some of the cars in my dream car list are turbos.
current turbos leave me cold for enthusiastic driving, but the future is bright as new hybrids will negate lag and bring mclaren P1 style engines to us all. they'll be good, but different.
TheAngryDog said:
I find my E39 M5 slow, even with 400bhp.
Turbo cars also have gear boxes. The nothing, nothing, nothing, boost statement is a bit tired and old hat, especially in modern turbo charged cars. Just be in the correct gear for the overtake.
Fully agree.Turbo cars also have gear boxes. The nothing, nothing, nothing, boost statement is a bit tired and old hat, especially in modern turbo charged cars. Just be in the correct gear for the overtake.
My car's on boost very very quickly, even with the bigger turbo fitted.
I'm thinking of adding an NA car to the fleet just for the days when I fancy a B road blast. Both bases are covered then.
Steve93 said:
TheAngryDog said:
I find my E39 M5 slow, even with 400bhp.
Turbo cars also have gear boxes. The nothing, nothing, nothing, boost statement is a bit tired and old hat, especially in modern turbo charged cars. Just be in the correct gear for the overtake.
Fully agree.Turbo cars also have gear boxes. The nothing, nothing, nothing, boost statement is a bit tired and old hat, especially in modern turbo charged cars. Just be in the correct gear for the overtake.
My car's on boost very very quickly, even with the bigger turbo fitted.
I'm thinking of adding an NA car to the fleet just for the days when I fancy a B road blast. Both bases are covered then.
TheAngryDog said:
Turbo cars also have gear boxes. The nothing, nothing, nothing, boost statement is a bit tired and old hat, especially in modern turbo charged cars. Just be in the correct gear for the overtake.
agree. the nothing nothing is forum exaggeration. we've moved on from early Renaults! But for brisk driving you're often still off boost and it's still occasionally frustrating. For planned o/taking and track driving i agree that lag is of little issue.
NA still offers the rise in power through the revs though, whereas many small engined turbos offer such huge mid-range torque that the reward to high rev is negated. Put a couple of turbos on a 4.0 V8 and the engineers can tune a monster that certainly rewards full revs. Depends on the installation and turbos are certainly getting better.
TheAngryDog said:
I find my E39 M5 slow, even with 400bhp.
Just speculation on my part but you haven't spent too much time driving a 2CV or a NA diesel have you ?
Just out of interest, do you have an adjective to describe cars which are even..ahem..slower than an M5 , you know . the sort of thing most of us actually drive ? And is 'fast' synonymous with 'good '?
hmm... if you have to wait nervously for your turbo to "drop", you are in the wrong gear or something, i don't know.
but in my scooby, it redlined @ 8000rpm. if i wanted to overtake someone who was already going at a fair clip, i'd shift down a couple of gears, fully spool the turbo past the point where it *would* engage - but keep the gas pedal *just* above the dipping point where it needs to be before it will actually engage... then, the second you plant the gas pedal (when you have an opening) you have instant massive power to overtake the other person like they were standing still. i always cringe when i see people slowly overtaking someone else. if the other driver can look over and see the whites of your eyes when your overtaking, you have no business overtaking
with a small amount of experience, you know the exact nanosecond that the power will drop on your turbo. hardly the nervous "wait and see" experience people are claiming. you just need to manage your gears and accelerator... it's called driving
as such, i always thought turbocharged cars were they ones that made you work for it, now people are saying it's NA engines? i assumed a decent-sized NA was big power always on tap, despite the gear.
but in my scooby, it redlined @ 8000rpm. if i wanted to overtake someone who was already going at a fair clip, i'd shift down a couple of gears, fully spool the turbo past the point where it *would* engage - but keep the gas pedal *just* above the dipping point where it needs to be before it will actually engage... then, the second you plant the gas pedal (when you have an opening) you have instant massive power to overtake the other person like they were standing still. i always cringe when i see people slowly overtaking someone else. if the other driver can look over and see the whites of your eyes when your overtaking, you have no business overtaking
with a small amount of experience, you know the exact nanosecond that the power will drop on your turbo. hardly the nervous "wait and see" experience people are claiming. you just need to manage your gears and accelerator... it's called driving
as such, i always thought turbocharged cars were they ones that made you work for it, now people are saying it's NA engines? i assumed a decent-sized NA was big power always on tap, despite the gear.
Edited by rubez on Friday 14th April 10:20
TheAngryDog said:
I find my E39 M5 slow, even with 400bhp.
Turbo cars also have gear boxes. The nothing, nothing, nothing, boost statement is a bit tired and old hat, especially in modern turbo charged cars. Just be in the correct gear for the overtake.
well, Turbo cars also have gear boxes. The nothing, nothing, nothing, boost statement is a bit tired and old hat, especially in modern turbo charged cars. Just be in the correct gear for the overtake.
I must have more modest ambitions - I have driven much faster cars, but on the basis that even my 150bph diesel octavia is fast enough for modern driving / overtaking etc. I find it difficult to think of a situation where my e39 M5 has / would run out of power. Driving a modern fast saloon like an e63amg, or a 'supercar' like a lamborghini - has oodles more power, but in reality you either use it all for a shorter time (measured in seconds or parts of a second), or don't use it to capacity - or you simply lose your licence and kill all the unicorns by ending up going everywhere at ridiculous speeds... I can't really think of a time when the z3 has run out of power (and that is c. 1/2 the M5) - I like the power delivery of the M5 and the difference between its v8 and the z3 straight 6 - but I don't think that either has a lack of power...as for turbos - of course you can drop a gear and spool up the turbo - the point though is that they can be pretty digital - drop a gear and the turbo comes in and you have too much power initially - don't and you wait with less power and then it hits you with a jump in power - maybe the S3 I was driving had something wrong - but a distinctly on off feel to the power delivery v. a n/a engine where you have a smoother analogue curve to how power comes in...
ultimately it is preference - I have nothing against turbos, but would always prefer n/a because I like the feel of a wafty power delivery in a smooth analogue fashion - each to their own...
but back to the OP - 270 hp in a 3.5l engine will be fine
coppice said:
TheAngryDog said:
I find my E39 M5 slow, even with 400bhp.
Just speculation on my part but you haven't spent too much time driving a 2CV or a NA diesel have you ?
Just out of interest, do you have an adjective to describe cars which are even..ahem..slower than an M5 , you know . the sort of thing most of us actually drive ? And is 'fast' synonymous with 'good '?
Cars slower than an M5? Slow as f
k 
akirk said:
TheAngryDog said:
I find my E39 M5 slow, even with 400bhp.
Turbo cars also have gear boxes. The nothing, nothing, nothing, boost statement is a bit tired and old hat, especially in modern turbo charged cars. Just be in the correct gear for the overtake.
well, Turbo cars also have gear boxes. The nothing, nothing, nothing, boost statement is a bit tired and old hat, especially in modern turbo charged cars. Just be in the correct gear for the overtake.
I must have more modest ambitions - I have driven much faster cars, but on the basis that even my 150bph diesel octavia is fast enough for modern driving / overtaking etc. I find it difficult to think of a situation where my e39 M5 has / would run out of power. Driving a modern fast saloon like an e63amg, or a 'supercar' like a lamborghini - has oodles more power, but in reality you either use it all for a shorter time (measured in seconds or parts of a second), or don't use it to capacity - or you simply lose your licence and kill all the unicorns by ending up going everywhere at ridiculous speeds... I can't really think of a time when the z3 has run out of power (and that is c. 1/2 the M5) - I like the power delivery of the M5 and the difference between its v8 and the z3 straight 6 - but I don't think that either has a lack of power...as for turbos - of course you can drop a gear and spool up the turbo - the point though is that they can be pretty digital - drop a gear and the turbo comes in and you have too much power initially - don't and you wait with less power and then it hits you with a jump in power - maybe the S3 I was driving had something wrong - but a distinctly on off feel to the power delivery v. a n/a engine where you have a smoother analogue curve to how power comes in...
ultimately it is preference - I have nothing against turbos, but would always prefer n/a because I like the feel of a wafty power delivery in a smooth analogue fashion - each to their own...
but back to the OP - 270 hp in a 3.5l engine will be fine
popeyewhite said:
Alex said:
The question should be "Are turbo engines fun?"
A fun car should have an NA engine because throttle response.
The bi-turbo I currently drive has a throttle response just as quick as any NA engine I've driven.A fun car should have an NA engine because throttle response.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff