TRD Parts for FR-S / 86 Revealed!

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by Neutral_Eyes

First off, didn't the "import" thing die off already? A 4 cylinder is a 4 cylinder, there's no need to specify. And since we're dealing with mostly low-powered 4 cylinders to start, yes, a lot of people prefer a turbo in that application rather than take the parasitic losses that come with a supercharger. And in your first example, I would certainly agree. Drag racing a FWD car, you're already at a disadvantage with traction and weight transfer, so you make it up in trap speed with a turbo suited towards top end power.

I know a lot of the Miata guys like the linear power delivery of a supercharger compared to a turbo, especially exiting turns. They might not be setting any records, but they're not running superchargers based on placebo, it's their preference. And again, you have to look at all the options there are to find a properly sized turbo for your application, then look at the superchargers. For the Miata? Well, there's a few kits with the MP62, and that's about it. No TVS, no intercoolers (yet), Rotrex is slowly taking form, but there's still a lot of work to have a polished kit.

I don't see any S/C'ed Miata's at the track. It's N/A or it's turboed.

Originally Posted by Neutral_Eyes

The advantages of a supercharger are real, they just haven't been fully embraced by the tuning community yet. That makes it an unpopular choice, but not an inferior (or superior) one.

How long have S/C'ed applications been around? It's not exactly new technology that still needs catching up or embracing.

Originally Posted by Neutral_Eyes

Top Fuel?

Is that it? Pretty sure none of us readily identify with Top Fuel dragsters.

Originally Posted by madfast

thank you for having a brain, and above all else, perspective. contrary to popular belief, there are people out there that dont care about numbers per se, and do care about how the power is delivered on their car...

Really, so you just spend $3-5k dollars on boosting your car without a care as to how the power is delivered? Come on dude....

[Dragonitti]

For the 4bangers, the S/C'ers are for those people looking to give a little more Umpf to their vehicle and have fun. Not exactly trying to be top of the leader boards in a motorsports series. If you are looking for power or trying to insure you have the best chance of securing the victory at the track, then the turbo is the application that does that.

Didn't think to bring it up before. But a 4banger that comes to mind is the Cobalt SS. First years of production it was S/C'ed and then they switched to a turbo for the newest Cobalt's , which outperform the older S/C'ed ones.

[Neutral_Eyes]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

I don't see any S/C'ed Miata's at the track. It's N/A or it's turboed.

I think we've established that they're rarer, but that doesn't mean they're not out there!

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

How long have S/C'ed applications been around? It's not exactly new technology that still needs catching up or embracing.

Because it wasn't embraced, development did fall behind, but they are catching up. That technology just needs to trickle down into kits for a variety of cars.

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

Is that it? Pretty sure none of us readily identify with Top Fuel dragsters.

Hey, you asked for it...

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

Didn't think to bring it up before. But a 4banger that comes to mind is the Cobalt SS. First years of production it was S/C'ed and then they switched to a turbo for the newest Cobalt's , which outperform the older S/C'ed ones.

Those are two entirely different engines.

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by Neutral_Eyes

I think we've established that they're rarer, but that doesn't mean they're not out there!

Rare for a reason. I bet you can find more All-Motor builds than S/C'ed ones.

Originally Posted by Neutral_Eyes

Because it wasn't embraced, development did fall behind, but they are catching up. That technology just needs to trickle down into kits for a variety of cars.

It don't take that long to catch up.

Originally Posted by Neutral_Eyes

Those are two entirely different engines.

I don't think that matters. Even in like engines, in the 4banger world, finding a S/C'ed anything, outperforming their turbo counter parts is like a needle in a haystack. I don't know of any 4banger where the S/C'er provides better performance that turbo. If there is one, please do tell. Then again, what would be the point...it would still just be "one" which would still not help the case.

You guys comments make it like the turbo doesn't out perform the S/C'er and the only reason why there are so many turbo's is just from popularity. Really? Why is it popular then? It aint because it makes cool noises.

[Neutral_Eyes]

I think there's been enough evidence shown here to prove that, at least to some people, a supercharger is preferred over a turbocharger. It's during those scenarios, with those drivers, where superchargers "outperform" turbochargers. It's obvious you're a numbers guy; numbers of turbocharged cars vs. supercharged cars, numbers of horsepower, numbers of efficiency ratings. I don't have the numbers to make my argument, but I don't feel it'd help if I did. I was never trying to put down turbochargers, or say that superchargers were objectively better, only that there are folks out there that might prefer using them, and they have legitimate reasoning behind those preferences.

[ashtray]

On the Miata issue, I'd rather go with a supercharger, and the aftermarket parts catalogs (Moss Motors, Flying Miata, etc) have S/C kits available, but no turbos.

The turbos on a Miata can make more power than the S/C kits, but if I were going FI on my Miata (97 NA), I'd do a cold side supercharger for it's instant power and smoother power delivery. (as the car is pretty light and fun to drive with the stock motor, it doesn't need crazy power to make it more fun).

Now my WRX is turbo from the factory - and that's been fun to build to 300 on/off hp. When the turbo spools and you hit 3,500 rpms, the thing turns into an animal. Below that, nothing special. When the factory turbo eats it, I'll do a build with a 16G I think. Maybe set a goal of 320-330hp. The awd plants it well.

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by Neutral_Eyes

I think there's been enough evidence shown here to prove that, at least to some people, a supercharger is preferred over a turbocharger. It's during those scenarios, with those drivers, where superchargers "outperform" turbochargers. It's obvious you're a numbers guy; numbers of turbocharged cars vs. supercharged cars, numbers of horsepower, numbers of efficiency ratings. I don't have the numbers to make my argument, but I don't feel it'd help if I did. I was never trying to put down turbochargers, or say that superchargers were objectively better, only that there are folks out there that might prefer using them, and they have legitimate reasoning behind those preferences.

I'm going to only repeat this one more time. I can care less about what numbers I make or another car makes. Once again, I have been at the race track and lapping guys in cars with double the HP I was currently running. I KNOW it takes more than power to run fast lap times, I do it on a regular basis. Out performing has little to do with numbers. If you think performance is all about Dyno Numbers, you are mistaken.

I will use the tC Here as an example

A S/C'ed tC 230whp vs a turbo tC at 230whp. The S/C'ed tC is going to make that 230whp at redline due to the design of the S/C'er for the tC, while the turbo tC is going to hit 230whp a thousand or so RPMs before redline. The tC with the turbo although putting down the same #'s, is going to be a 1-1 1/2 secs faster than the S/C'ed one down the 1/4 mile. That 1/4 mile time difference is the only number I would even care about. Or the 1:10sec lap time is the only "number" I would be caring about. How much I put down on a dyno, I can care less. But those "numbers" are results of performance, no just simply numbers like you find on a dyno. Those "numbers" let me know how well the car is behaving or how I'm driving.

My opinion has nothing to do with numbers, and I am not a numbers guy. Performance guy...yes. If I'm spending $5k on my motor, it isn't just to have fun. It's to go as fast as possible and put the competition in the rear.


The "number" of turbo cars to S/C was an example that people went that route for a reason. I don't go with the norm (not a follower). I didn't chose a turbo just because everyone else does it. I wanted the best application for what I wanted to do...and that was a turbo setup.

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

I'm going to only repeat this one more time.

I'm going to hold you to that promise.

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

I wanted the best application for what I wanted to do.

This is why my Exige is supercharged and my Golf TDI is turbo; customer-defined drivability goals for a given application.

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

I'm going to hold you to that promise.


This is why my Exige is supercharged and my Golf TDI is turbo; customer-defined drivability goals for a given application.

Noted...

Wonder what the turbo Exige's run like. Is the Exige the one with the 2zz in it, can't remember.

[Ryephile]

Yes, 2ZZ. There was only one model year where it was n/a from the factory; the rest are factory M62 blowers with a/a IC. There are a couple handfuls that have been converted to low-intake volume + w/a IC + TVS with excellent success, however TVS's aren't cheap. Turbo's really don't fit the character of the car [similar to how blowers are preferred with the Miata crowd]. There's one brand of defunct turbo kit out there, and another forthcoming; however supercharging and its n/a emulating throttle responsiveness is the preferred solution by the majority of owners.

In my TDI, however, I'm not interested in response, I'm interested in maximum efficiency and a gush of low RPM torque. Of course a turbo is the desired supercharging solution for that application.

I really wish people wouldn't get into pissing matches how they "know" turbos are better than superchargers or vice versa. It literally comes down to driver preference and/or whatever emotional rationalization they provide. If one were completely inferior, it would be phased out.

[Crashoverride]

I think turbo kits will pop up fast, and tuners will break 300- 350 with in months if not weeks, all it needs is fuel, boost, and correct AFR's, finding the weak links will take months too. Should be a sound platform, I know I'm looking forward to it.

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

Yes, 2ZZ. There was only one model year where it was n/a from the factory; the rest are factory M62 blowers with a/a IC. There are a couple handfuls that have been converted to low-intake volume + w/a IC + TVS with excellent success, however TVS's aren't cheap. Turbo's really don't fit the character of the car [similar to how blowers are preferred with the Miata crowd]. There's one brand of defunct turbo kit out there, and another forthcoming; however supercharging and its n/a emulating throttle responsiveness is the preferred solution by the majority of owners.

In my TDI, however, I'm not interested in response, I'm interested in maximum efficiency and a gush of low RPM torque. Of course a turbo is the desired supercharging solution for that application.

I really wish people wouldn't get into pissing matches how they "know" turbos are better than superchargers or vice versa. It literally comes down to driver preference and/or whatever emotional rationalization they provide. If one were completely inferior, it would be phased out.

Comes down to the application you are using it on. The one thing I pointed out though is that the large majority of people who F/I chose the turbo route due to it's characteristics over a S/C'er.

PS...excluding the general public here and specifically talking about motorsports enthusiast.

[meez]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

Comes down to the application you are using it on. The one thing I pointed out though is that the large majority of people who F/I chose the turbo route due to it's characteristics over a S/C'er.

PS...excluding the general public here and specifically talking about motorsports enthusiast.

who boosts a FWD car anyway? No traction + torque steer = epic fail. :happy0180::happy0180:
oh and, HELLO FELLOW BOOSTED FWD TORQUE STEER MONSTER!

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by meez

who boosts a FWD car anyway? No traction + torque steer = epic fail. :happy0180::happy0180:
oh and, HELLO FELLOW BOOSTED FWD TORQUE STEER MONSTER!

Spoken like a true noob...

Cool story bro. Now go tell that to the dude in the $160k Porsche Cayman S (with an additional $20k in upgrades) I've out ran on the race track. It's called "buy better tires and an LSD and learn to drive".