Poll Results

[Jeff240sx]

Hey guys.  I was looking at the poll, and it amazed me that only 10 fewer people voted for turbo rather than NA.
Why would you rather have turbo power that was the same as NA power?
I voted for NA, because whatever the HP and Torque were rated at, a turbo kit would have turbo lag.
So.  Why did whoever vote for turbo power over NA power vote that way?  (I will disregard the people who voted on NOS as a misclick, or really, really rich. )
-Jeff

I voted for turbo simply becuase I love every aspect of it. I used to drive an eclipse GSX (my first turbo car). And after the rush of driving it, I don't feel right in my N/A 240sx (exactly the reason why it's going turbo). You're right about the turbo lag, but I love the feeling of being pinned to my seat as soon as that turbo spools up, or the scream of an open wastegate, or the PSHH of my B.O.V.  IMO the ride is alot more fun and so is tuning it.

[drifterx]

but if you get the same HP then why not NA?
NA will be smoother as a drive, no turbo lag, and it is all motor... turbo is more unpredictable with the lag... so when u do drifts, it is better to have a NA with same HP and torque than a turbo....
but it is hard to get  a NA engine the same specs as a turbo... it is easier getting more HP out of turbo therefor, that is why i would put a turbo in my car

ALSO WHY DID PPL VOTE FOR NOS?
GOD!
i rather have supercharged with same specs as a turbo...
but again in reality, turbo does have more protential....
so my vote would be from
NA
supercharged
turbo
NOS (only as last resort)

[Jeff240sx]

Ok... Drifter, you're on the right track... but...
You still mentioned the "it's hard to get a na engine the same specs as a turbo." The question isn't anything along those lines. The poll was "IF".
Bomex... I truley believe that if I have an all motor 500hp and you have a turbo 500hp, I will win in any event. Drifting, Auto-x, as I would have more control over the throttle. Steering with the accelerator, and no lag. I will also win the drag, because you would have a huge turbo and a huge turbo lag.
Now seriously, I want to know. Did you (all) vote for the turbo purely for the sound of the BOV and the power comming in after 3500RPM to pin you to the seat?
I have a NA 515hp Corvette. Believe me, you were pinned in your seat from 1500RPM on to the redline. I also beat a 550+hp supra in a drag.
Keep the discussion going! I don't wanna offend, I just wanna know your reasons.
-Jeff

Edit: Spelled "drag" wrong.

(Edited by Jeff240sx at 1:15 pm on Aug. 22, 2001)

[drifterx]

i rather have a NA KA24 with 220 HP than a 220 HP turbo KA24
so i am agreeing with u jeff, why do ppl vote turbo?

That's cool, no offense taken. It's just my personal preference, I know many who like N/A better. I've been in an SS Camaro and felt the "all motor" power. And then I've been in a civic hatch with almost 400hp to the wheels beating motorcycles. Trust me, after that experience, you would be inclined to vote turbo too.

[drifterx]

no offense.... but if u had a all motor 400HP civic then u would be able to pass motorcycles too?

True, but try and get 400 hp out of an N/A civic. I understand that t's an "IF" question, but since I can't even concieve the thought of getting 400+HP out of an all motor civic, I can't compare.

either way u can f*ck up ur engine so ha! lol j/k i would go turbo because it is more effective if u don't waste gas 24/7..... i mean an all motor car pushing 500 hp is gonna get like 10 miles per gallon...... a turbo car if u keep it under ~3000 rpms will still get u decent gas mileage.... thats my practical point of view but all out power.... i WANT TURBO!  turbo would seem to be the choice for top end racing..... for high speed...... and all motor would be better for all out strength in the entire power band..... thats my 2 pennies

[West]

drifterx is right...

My poll question is kind of a trick question.

The question is...

"What type of engine aspiration would you rather have if they were rated with the same Horsepower and Torque Output?"

notice the If they were rated with the same HP and TQ output, well IMHO, youd be stupid not to choose NA if it had the same HP output.

NA has more torque, and is better for track and driving conditions.

If you want to get even more power out of your system then I guess turbo would be the correct answer but I'm not sure if most of us think of the question like that.

Maybe next time I will ask a normal question <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'> Any new suggestions?

[98SilviaS14]

i would want the NA, cuz then i could add a turbo to that and get even MORE power!! muahahahaha....

[LanceS13]

Well, NA usually involves running high compression. &nbsp;Turbo+high compression=something breaking:)

[Jeff240sx]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from LanceS13 on 6:39 pm on Aug. 22, 2001
Well, NA usually involves running high compression. Turbo+high compression=something breaking:)</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

LOL!! LMFAO!! yes, your right.
Bomex... it's you and me again. You said &quot;try and get 400 horsepower out of an NA civic.&quot; 2 months ago, in Sport Compact Car, there was an all motor article. MANY civics running 11's all motor, and a couple broke the 10's, and one, the main section of the article was an astounding 10.3 (i think, mabey 10.5... either way, FAST) so there!
Nismo- Sure, if you kept it below 3k, you would get good gas mileage. And a whopping NO hp. That's not on MY agenda... or anyone else's on this board. :biggrin:
-Jeff

[lunatik]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from 98SilviaS14 on 7:29 pm on Aug. 22, 2001
i would want the NA, cuz then i could add a turbo to that and get even MORE power!! muahahahaha....
</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

That's what I was thinking when I voted N/A. &nbsp;You figure if you have a high power all N/A motor, and then you drop a turbo, supercharger, or nos you'd end up with even more power! &nbsp;Unfortunately it would be a #### of a task to get 400 hp from an n/a KA!

[96SEChick]

But, if you had an NA setup, wouldn't it weigh a helluva lot more than a turbo setup, screwing with the concept of trying to get 50/50 weight distribution?

[LanceS13]

How do you figure?

[Jeff240sx]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from 96SEChick on 9:11 pm on Aug. 22, 2001
But, if you had an NA setup, wouldn't it weigh a helluva lot more than a turbo setup, screwing with the concept of trying to get 50/50 weight distribution?
</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

Usually, good NA setups consist of lightened rods, custom aluminum manifolds, lighter pistons, lightened flywheel... light stuff. &nbsp;I don't see the weight thing... mabey it's me.
And lunatik.. did you not read the 2 posts before you. &nbsp;You just CAN'T do that.
-Jeff

thats what i used to think @ lauren..... but then i thought about it n/a setups usually require alot of boring out and replacing parts with new ones.... of which most are lighter i believe... so i guess its about the same w/ the weight

[LanceS13]

NA should be lighter than turbo. &nbsp;The only added mass in a NA setup I can think of is using domed pistons in place of flat tops. &nbsp;Everything else is lightened, milled, shaved, etc. &nbsp;In a turbo setup, you have the added weight of the turbo, tubing, intercooler, etc.

[konkman]

I think your confussing the kids.

Why would you install Turbo/NOS/Superchargers? &nbsp;More power.

If you can have that power without all that other crap, why bother???

NA all the way

[misnomer]

Is it &nbsp;feasable to get 200 crank hp out of an NA KA engine (whoah, not doin' that again) for a reasonable price?

Jeff, I didn't say that it isn't possible to get an N/A car to 400hp, it's just extremely hard. And if were going to tak about N/A civics running 10's then lets talk about turbo civics running 9's. Again we go back to the &quot;if they had the same hp&quot; but realistically you will always pull more HP out of a 4 cylinder w/ forced induction. On that note, I give more props to the N/A racers because it's a heck of alot tougher to extract large amounts of HP that way.

[LanceS13]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from misnomer on 4:49 am on Aug. 23, 2001
Is it feasable to get 200 crank hp out of an NA KA engine (whoah, not doin' that again) for a reasonable price?
</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
I don't know what you consider a reasonable price...horsepower ain't cheap. &nbsp;But I would say you would get 200+fwhp with i/h/e, honed intake manifold, milled head, hi-comp pistons, ecu, and a good set of cams. &nbsp;That'll probably run $3-4K I would think. &nbsp;Of course for that, you could just about run ~230hp with a turbo...but NA is good if you're running a class that doesn't allow FI. &nbsp;

[gt7152b]

Whoa, man. There is no fwhp going on over here. Try rwhp.

[LanceS13]

Oops...I meant FlyWheel HorsePower.

[gt7152b]

OK, I thought you meant front wheel HP, because I think you would have more than 200 HP at the crank with that list of mods. I haven't done any of these mods on a 240 but I think you could get to 200HP (just estimating) by doing all that minus the pistons, cams, or ECU. You only need 45 more HP.

[LanceS13]

Well...it would depend on how much you upped the compression, how wild the cam is, how well-tuned it is, etc. &nbsp;That's why I said 200+hp. &nbsp;I've yet to do any of this also (except my exhaust), but I do have plans for some of it in the near and distant future.

And someone said earlier that NA produced power throughout the power band. &nbsp;I don't think that's completely true. &nbsp;A wild cam might help push out 300hp at 7K RPM, but make nill below 3K...similar to a turbo.