[old greg]

Originally Posted by RegisBou

Showing them that NA in the long run is safer and cheaper.

That really depends on your goals and what you're working with. If you just want an extra 20hp from a 2L four, n/a will be cheaper and more reliable. If you want an extra 150 hp from that same engine, n/a will be jaw droppingly expensive and require daily rebuilds.

Originally Posted by RegisBou

What i dont understand is how you guys dont get the whole turbo lag dilemma?

If you are at the limit of your tires (or close to it) in a turn and you have a lower torque NA platform with the same HP as a turbo variant, you will be able to go WOT (Wide Open Throttle) sooner than the turbo because of excess torque making the driver have to wait longer before he can go WOT in a turbo vehicle. So essentially the NA car will clim the rev range faster than the turbo car and hit peak HP faster in turn making the car itself faster if both cars have the same HP output.

...
If that doesn't make sense, then I have no clue what else to say..this is what the article was trying to conjure.

Ok, so here's why that makes no sense.

Throttle position %age is irrelevant, if you have enough excess traction to support, say, 40 ft*lbs of torque your tires don't know or care whether that's you at WOT or just 5% TPS. 40 ft*lbs is 40 ft*lbs. So in your example you have two otherwise identical cars in identical situations, both applying identical amounts of torque to the tires. Neither has an advantage.

At the corner exit, though, when traction is less limited, between two engines of equal displacement and equal peak power the turbo engine will have much more midrange torque. That means that (since both cars have identical gearing and corner exit speed) the turbo car will have much better drive out of those not quite 3rd gear corners you mention.

Originally Posted by RegisBou

Another aspect of the turbo lag is if the driver enters to fast and has to let off to rotate the car by the time the car is back on rails, the gas needs to be pushed and boost needs to build while the NA car has all available HP and torque in the rev range once the throttle is pushed down.

Um... Have you ever driven a turbocharged car? Even my car, which with its idiotic pre-turbo cat is actually fairly laggy, lag at ~4500 rpm is less than half a second.

Originally Posted by RegisBou

Most turbo's in high revving cars tend to go full boost mid rpm (3500-5000) depending on the build/turbo/tune....
This is comparing cars with the same WHP levels.

And here's where you jump the tracks completely.
Lets say this N/A 2L has a few mods and is making ~220 horsepower. A turbo sized to make 220 hp on a 2L engine would be a absolute spool-monster with peak boost at 2500 rpm at most. The kind of turbo that needs 5000 rpm to hit peak boost on a 2L is capable of making ~600+ hp. No one in their right mind would use such a huge turbo to make 220 hp.

And it amuses me how you keep referring to 2005 as if it were some sort of automotive dark age where turbos were made from rocks or something. I mean, hell, the GT30 has been around since 2002/2003. It's not as if we're talking about the 1970's here.