Who is happy the engine will be Naturally Aspirated?

[Homemade WRX]

Well I'm also a motorsports engineer but just play with Subaru's now when not consulting with OEMs. So yes, I am well aware of how important senses are to the driving experience.

I was actually our fastest driver for FSAE in college and usually one of the fastest lap times when I run at chump, lemons, go-karting, etc...so I do have some idea from the driver's seat and from the engineering side of things.

My point is more along your third point. 200bhp in a 2600lb car is going to feel rather anemically slow in this day and age. Yes, I find S2000's and Elises boring to drive unless I'm on a tight course. I really would see the car being at the enjoyable level at about 240whp. Then it would be somewhat close to one of my most enjoyable setups (though still slow) which was a wrx swapped, 2500lb, RWD Impreza with a 4.44 plated rear diff. OF course I had gone through and done suspension work too. It was my DD back in college...before I started playing with big power.

I'm expecting to see some headroom for making power however I don't see 240whp happening with pump gas and mild NA build. I'll be trying to prove myself wrong.

[Ryephile]

Your goals appear to be significantly different than the average street-driver enthusiast looking to extract maximum pleasure out of this car during their frustrating daily commute while cruising along at 45 MPH. Your comment saying that you find an Elise boring blows my mind because it's pretty much the most communicative and visceral car out there with license plates. You must be so desensitized that only a Saturn V launch will amuse you anymore, no?

Outright WOT acceleration is the least important facet for street driving. Most of the time, when stuck in traffic, the only saving grace is that crisp throttle response and just-audible-enough growl the engine gives at part throttle, forcing a little smirk of enjoyment.

[coyote]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

Linear pedal mapping gives [surprise!] a linear feel and confident control.

I disagree completely.

As a pair of MEs, you should also both understand that the way power changes with throttle plate opening is not linear either.

Linear mapping from pedal angle to requested output is just lazy tuning.

[Alfie]

I haven't read ANY entries- just replying to your initial question:
Yes I'm happy it's NA. I drive 52 miles per day and will keep this car 10 years.
I don't want to worry about any add ons breaking down.
I'm all for ECU, intake, header, cat-back exhaust (, suspension)- thats it!
...but then I've learned lately I'm a purist.

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by coyote

I disagree completely.

Yes I figured you would; you're also making a big assumption. My implication was user-centric load vs. pedal angle, not engine-centric butterfly angle vs. pedal angle. Most drivers use the pedal as a torque [i.e. load] request device.

[coyote]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

Yes I figured you would; you're also making a big assumption. My implication was user-centric load vs. pedal angle, not engine-centric butterfly angle vs. pedal angle. Most drivers use the pedal as a torque [i.e. load] request device.

And Subaru ecus map pedal angle to a value referred to as requested torque for this very reason.

As I said, making that a linear relationship is just lazy tuning.

[Ryephile]

...and why do you feel giving the driver the torque they request is "lazy tuning"?

[cassidy0998]

I'm happy that it will be N/A. Less maintenance 50k miles, 100k milkes, 200k miles later etc.

However, that doesn't make up for the fact that this car only has 200hp... I know... I had to say it. But it does just have 200hp. A turbo'd variant would put out a little more power.


I can deal with extra maintenance if I have more power All of this this throttle response etc. are good points - but power is power. Just be ready when the turbo kicks in and know when it kicks in. Turbo lag sucks, but when it spools up you're good to go! Whether it's n/a or turbo, you just have to know the car - it's just an engine. Learn how it works and drive it. I would be happy if this car came with a turbo and 50-100+ more hp. But maybe I'm crazy.

The 200hp will make a fun daily driver though - which is all I'm wanting anyway.

[Homemade WRX]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

Your goals appear to be significantly different than the average street-driver enthusiast looking to extract maximum pleasure out of this car during their frustrating daily commute while cruising along at 45 MPH. Your comment saying that you find an Elise boring blows my mind because it's pretty much the most communicative and visceral car out there with license plates. You must be so desensitized that only a Saturn V launch will amuse you anymore, no?

Outright WOT acceleration is the least important facet for street driving. Most of the time, when stuck in traffic, the only saving grace is that crisp throttle response and just-audible-enough growl the engine gives at part throttle, forcing a little smirk of enjoyment.

No, I'm not desensitized but I do get bored waiting for the corner to arrive or in the case of this car, having a chipped, 4 ton, turbo diesel truck being as fast in the passing lane

As for feedback, I didn't say it didn't have good feedback. Keep in mind that my racing 'pedigre' really started with Formula SAE where I had lots of go and even better feedback. However you seem to be so stuck on having this 'response' from throttle. Makes me wonder if you are just unable to adapt to an engine's behavior.

Put simply I like cars that turn but are fast too. I live for curves but like being to explode off the corner too so I can get to the next one quicker lol.

As for the normal driver's desires, I guess I am off base and so are my customers...they all come to me for more power

Originally Posted by coyote

I disagree completely.

true story. If you look at the actual throttle plate angle to throttle pedal movement, it does respond in a cam shape...non-linear. Not really sure what he meant from his original comment however. Seems he meant linear in relation to torque...which you can get with a turbo too. I had flat tq from 3-7k old the forementioned setup.

If he wants linear, then he should have zero problem with a supercharger but he still does.

[Homemade WRX]

If you can leave two black stripes from the exit of one corner to the braking zone of the next, you have enough horsepower. - Mark Donohue


Now in support of the NA approach,


Turbochargers are for people who cant build engines. – Keith Duckworth



BUT sadly, a 2.0L NA just doesn't have the ability to fullfill quote one on a 2600 lb car

What's funnier is Mr. Duckworth had to swallow his words when his 3.5L DFR (NA V8) engines couldn't keep up with turbocharged 1.5L engines.


...I actually just realized that you own an Exige and yes, I do miss owning a good and tight mid engine RWD anything, that's why I've been designing my own for about a year now.

[86'd]

My love with N/A engines started with Honda. I loved the fact that you could rev to 7.5, 8, 9k, and of course the kick from vtec. I still remember the sound of the ITR on my drive home that would pass me with a proper setup. It wasn't rattly or weak sounding like all of the other D16 Civics, but mean and substantial.

So far I love the sound of the FR-S, it sounds mean, but I'd love to safely rev it a bit more and hopefully make a bit more power. If I can get around 225 NA, that would be more than enough for me, though I wouldn't be against supercharging if the power delivery was the same.

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by Homemade WRX

...However you seem to be so stuck on having this 'response' from throttle. Makes me wonder if you are just unable to adapt to an engine's behavior.

I beg your pardon, but you've no basis to diss me like that.

Originally Posted by Homemade WRX

..... Not really sure what he meant from his original comment however. Seems he meant linear in relation to torque...which you can get with a turbo too. I had flat tq from 3-7k old the forementioned setup.

If he wants linear, then he should have zero problem with a supercharger but he still does.

It was an example to attempt to explain the facets that make up the engine's "soul", since you so adamantly refused to accept that man/machine interaction. I tried to clarify that my linear comment was a relative example relating to pedal angle or travel versus torque requested.

What that means is; if I depress the pedal 10% to the floor, I expect to get 10% torque from the engine at that RPM. If I depress the pedal 50% to the floor, I expect to get 50% torque available at that RPM. I'm not talking about a flat torque curve at WOT from 3k-7k, frankly the that is irrelevant. I'm not sure how you come to the ignorant conclusion that I have a "problem" with supercharging. Why can't you let us enjoy N/A being a desirable solution for everyday street driving?

Your original question when you came into this thread was "why not [boosted]?" The answer is, soul.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Homemade WRX

If you can leave two black stripes from the exit of one corner to the braking zone of the next, you have enough horsepower. - Mark Donohue


Now in support of the NA approach,


Turbochargers are for people who cant build engines. – Keith Duckworth



BUT sadly, a 2.0L NA just doesn't have the ability to fullfill quote one on a 2600 lb car

What's funnier is Mr. Duckworth had to swallow his words when his 3.5L DFR (NA V8) engines couldn't keep up with turbocharged 1.5L engines.


...I actually just realized that you own an Exige and yes, I do miss owning a good and tight mid engine RWD anything, that's why I've been designing my own for about a year now.

There was more going on there at the time. You know anyone that is running straight toluene in their turbo car so they don't blow up under ridiculous boost? Plus street cars don't have to fight the retarded amounts of drag that the high downforce cars were making back then.

When fuel and downforce were limited the DFV owned everything for years. Plus Cosworth didn't only make F1 engines.

[serialk11r]

If you're so convinced about the engineering superiority of turbocharged engines, how about the huge amount of wasted energy that goes out the exhaust? How about pumping loss, loss from intercooling, increased cooling loss (okay I suppose as a proportion of power it's slightly lower since pressure increases faster than temperature), loss due to backpressure? The more boost you run the lower efficiency goes, and a turbocompounding system (not implemented on any cars to date) can only recover <70% of what a piston can.