How much will it cost to turbo my car?

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

I'm scared to boost it. I was dead set on boosting it sometime next year after I propose to my gf (man of priorities and all that), but I read so many stories of blown engines that I'm scared. I don't know if this happens even with base power increases, or just to people going well over 300 whp but considering I have no skill or space to work on my own car and have to rely on shops and be willing to accept the inconvenience and financial impact that may bring, I think I'll stick with minor upgrades.

I spun a rod bearing stock, so you can either have some fun and maybe replace the engine, or stay stock and still maybe replace the engine.

Do it with reputable equipment and tunes and you should be fine if you don't try to go overboard on stock internals.

Jaden

[StraightOuttaCanadaEh]

Originally Posted by Jaden

I spun a rod bearing stock, so you can either have some fun and maybe replace the engine, or stay stock and still maybe replace the engine.

Do it with reputable equipment and tunes and you should be fine if you don't try to go overboard on stock internals.

Jaden

Thanks. What does "spun a rod" mean? How does one spin a rod? My driving is basically 6K rpm max, never redline, always 94 octane gas, never tracking, sufficient warming up of the engine in the morning, check oil level every week or two, get my oil changes every 7K (car is new so I'm still at 5K), and really only drive hard when the mood hits, but as you can tell from the above, it ain't that hard anyway. Some people say you could be the most careful driver and still have a major failure, it's just bad luck sometimes. But I mean, considering the MAJORITY of cases, not the 1% freak accidents, how likely am I to "spin a rod" for example? I keep getting totally conflicting information. Some people say go for it, I've never had any problems. Others say I was driving 25 mph and engine blew. Then I get the "you get small issues every now and then" - that's what I really don't like. Car can't be down. I need it to get to work and I need it to stay reliable.

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

Thanks. What does "spun a rod" mean? How does one spin a rod? My driving is basically 6K rpm max, never redline, always 94 octane gas, never tracking, sufficient warming up of the engine in the morning, check oil level every week or two, get my oil changes every 7K (car is new so I'm still at 5K), and really only drive hard when the mood hits, but as you can tell from the above, it ain't that hard anyway. Some people say you could be the most careful driver and still have a major failure, it's just bad luck sometimes. But I mean, MAJORITY of cases, not the 1% freak accidents, how likely am I to "spin a rod" for example?

The rod bearings are in a fixed position on the rod where the rod attaches to the crank. If they spin, it means they shifted from that fixed position from stress and heat. Indicators of spun rod bearings are metal shavings in oil and noise that shouldn't be there.

Jaden

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Scrappydoo

I suspect it'll be more reliable than your BMiniW


What a travesty.

So sorry Issigonis

With 136k miles and a turbo 99% sure that was a Renault engine using a bit of BMW tech.

A perfect storm.


Edit:
With respect to doing reliable forced induction, stay with something off the shelf that comes with everything in a kit, your best bet to minimize problems and maximize potential support is to build the car as standard as possible. Edelbrock or Jackson Racing units with their factory supplied tune imo.

It won't be the most powerful, or cheapest, but it'll have the highest chance of reliability.

[StraightOuttaCanadaEh]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

With 136k miles and a turbo 99% sure that was a Renault engine using a bit of BMW tech.

A perfect storm.


Edit:
With respect to doing reliable forced induction, stay with something off the shelf that comes with everything in a kit, your best bet to minimize problems and maximize potential support is to build the car as standard as possible. Edelbrock or Jackson Racing units with their factory supplied tune imo.

It won't be the most powerful, or cheapest, but it'll have the highest chance of reliability.

I think SC kits are more popular in the states due to emissions. Here I would rather get a turbo for the various intrinsic benefits.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

I think SC kits are more popular in the states due to emissions. Here I would rather get a turbo for the various intrinsic benefits.

There's one emissions legal turbo setup.
https://store.worksmotorsports.com/W...p/142.212c.htm
It's not very popular to my knowledge.

IMO supercharger kits are more common because of the nature of the car stock (naturally aspirated power delivery on demand, a supercharger maintains those characteristics) and reliability.

I'd wager most forced induction setups in the US are not emissions compliant given the prevalence of aftermarket tunes and headers.

If you've got a shop you trust, go for it. The turbo charged kits seemed much less developed imo while the supercharged kits are pretty close to plug and play, only a bit of cooling is needed if it will be driven hard. But per your assumption I'm much less knowledgeable on the available turbo kits since emissions compliance matters to me.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

I think SC kits are more popular in the states due to emissions. Here I would rather get a turbo for the various intrinsic benefits.

What do you consider the intrinsic benefits of turbo?

[StraightOuttaCanadaEh]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

What do you consider the intrinsic benefits of turbo?

Not parasitic, cheaper, doesn't really start boosting until a certain engine speed, so you could technically drive under that line, more power, torque available sooner, don't need separate oil and no belts to snap, as well as better fuel consumption I think. That's what my research and tips from some people that know this car like the back of their hand yielded so far.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

Not parasitic, cheaper, doesn't really start boosting until a certain engine speed, so you could technically drive under that line, more power, torque available sooner, don't need separate oil and no belts to snap, as well as better fuel consumption I think. That's what my research and tips from some people that know this car like the back of their hand yielded so far.

I give you a 75% for correct answers. Turbo is load dependant not speed and you wont have tq faster than a SC because physics.

[StraightOuttaCanadaEh]

Originally Posted by Yoda

I give you a 75% for correct answers. Turbo is load dependant not speed and you wont have tq faster than a SC because physics.

I meant sooner as in at a lower rpm. I think you get more torque sooner That's what I was told anyway. So for example if you're at 200 lb at 4000 rpm with an SC, you'd be at 250 with a turbo. Numbers are only for the sake of the example and not meant to represent actual figures.

[Somerandom18]

SC applies torque instantly... That's part of their appeal.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

I meant sooner as in at a lower rpm. I think you get more torque sooner That's what I was told anyway. So for example if you're at 200 lb at 4000 rpm with an SC, you'd be at 250 with a turbo. Numbers are only for the sake of the example and not meant to represent actual figures.

On a dyno sure, that's totally possible and a likely outcome, especially if you go big with the $10k budget you propose.

But, turbo lag is real even in the smallest most responsive turbos with years of OEM development behind them.

Academically, you're not wrong. You just have to weigh your priorities, pick what you want and give it a shot, you won't be able to know for sure until you experience it. Good luck.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

I meant sooner as in at a lower rpm. I think you get more torque sooner That's what I was told anyway. So for example if you're at 200 lb at 4000 rpm with an SC, you'd be at 250 with a turbo. Numbers are only for the sake of the example and not meant to represent actual figures.

Ahh ok I see what you are saying. Yea you will get more peak tq with the turbo but the SC will be instant but somewhat lower.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

Not parasitic, cheaper, doesn't really start boosting until a certain engine speed, so you could technically drive under that line, more power, torque available sooner, don't need separate oil and no belts to snap, as well as better fuel consumption I think. That's what my research and tips from some people that know this car like the back of their hand yielded so far.

Not bad. The other guys have already pointed out some items that are off a bit.
Now what are the intrinsic disadvantages of turbo?