The Turbo Conundrum

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by nrclptcnsmniak

I thought that the BRZ was being released with an FA engine...

Yes. This thread about turbos has to do with the real (WRX/STI and whatever they call their motor) and speculative (maybe BRZ a few years down the road, but currently only a confirmed NA FA20). So forgive the mixed up nature of engine-talk in this thread. (But it is still better than most on here... heh...)

[Alfie]

I bet STS is gonna jump on both the FR-S & BRZ with their system:

http://www.ststurbo.com/

[MrVito]

A rear mount setup could be interesting, but it tends to be better for higher displacement engines (the smallest engine they make a bolt on kit for is a 3.5 liter v6). Heat and exhaust volume are what spin that turbo, and exhaust gasses have cooled significantly by the time they get to the back of the car. Still, until we actually get to REALLY see how much room is available and where within the engine bay, it's anybodies guess.

I'd like to see somebody make a low pressure small turbo setup for this car with an air to water intercooler. One which places the water reservoir in the trunk, to help offset the added weight up front from the turbo.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by Alfie

I bet STS is gonna jump on both the FR-S & BRZ with their system:

http://www.ststurbo.com/

These systems are horrible for low displacement engines. I've been in a few stealth turbo setups on Hondas based on this idea.. it's not all that great. I've also been in a Z28 with a setup like that and it worked fine.

[Levi]

I do not think the BRZ STI will need a turbo. It will need more power that can be achieved by more expensive technologies, ITB, larger displacement,... and lower weight than can be achieved by more exotic materials, CF roof, trunk, hood, roof, doors,....

Who wants a turbo can get a WRX or WRX STI, or swap the WRX/STI turbo/engine on the BRZ/STI.
I see it rather this way:

BRZ: NA 2.0l, 200 PS, RWD
BRZ STI: NA 2.5l, 250 PS, RWD
WRX: FI 1.6l, 250 PS, AWD
WRX: 2.0l, 300 PS, AWD

[MrVito]

Originally Posted by Levi

I do not think the BRZ STI will need a turbo. It will need more power that can be achieved by more expensive technologies, ITB, larger displacement,... and lower weight than can be achieved by more exotic materials, CF roof, trunk, hood, roof, doors,....

Who wants a turbo can get a WRX or WRX STI, or swap the WRX/STI turbo/engine on the BRZ/STI.
I see it rather this way:

BRZ: NA 2.0l, 200 PS, RWD
BRZ STI: NA 2.5l, 250 PS, RWD
WRX: FI 1.6l, 250 PS, AWD
WRX: 2.0l, 300 PS, AWD

You would rather get lesser gains, AND spend MORE money to get less?

We're not discussing whether or not there will be factory turbo option on the FA20, and the whole "if you want a turbo get a wrx", they're completely different kinds of cars, your statement there is lacking logic.

The BRZ STI concept is shown to be powered by a NA 2.0l, where you're getting the 2.5l idea from, I have no idea. Beyond that, we don't know if Subaru will even make the STI variant or not.

[bFreed]

Come on guys.

Turbo til it blows up then build low CR + E85 + turbo = perrfect.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by Levi

I do not think the BRZ STI will need a turbo. It will need more power that can be achieved by more expensive technologies, ITB, larger displacement,... and lower weight than can be achieved by more exotic materials, CF roof, trunk, hood, roof, doors,....

Who wants a turbo can get a WRX or WRX STI, or swap the WRX/STI turbo/engine on the BRZ/STI.
I see it rather this way:

BRZ: NA 2.0l, 200 PS, RWD
BRZ STI: NA 2.5l, 250 PS, RWD
WRX: FI 1.6l, 250 PS, AWD
WRX: 2.0l, 300 PS, AWD

I'd rather have the STI be NA 2.0L, bigger cams, more compression, higher redline (8500 ) and 240-250hp.

[WingsofWar]

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

I'd rather have the STI be NA 2.0L, bigger cams, more compression, higher redline (8500 ) and 240-250hp.

that sounds like so much win

[ForReal-Someday]

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

I'd rather have the STI be NA 2.0L, bigger cams, more compression, higher redline (8500 ) and 240-250hp.

[serialk11r]

As much as higher rev NA sounds cool, the rod/stroke ratio is 1.54ish on the FA if they indeed kept the same dimensions as the FB, and that's likely not very safe for 8000rpm. If they shorten the stroke to like, 80mm, it could probably be done, but a lot of stuff would need to change to make that happen.

[Syldrin]

N/A 4 cylinders are just so obnoxiously loud plus power for dollar is never the same.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

As much as higher rev NA sounds cool, the rod/stroke ratio is 1.54ish on the FA if they indeed kept the same dimensions as the FB, and that's likely not very safe for 8000rpm. If they shorten the stroke to like, 80mm, it could probably be done, but a lot of stuff would need to change to make that happen.

Or they could put forged vanadium steel rods in it, like they did with the 2ZZGE.

I predict that the STI version engine will be very close to the GT5 specs. (off the top of my head, so the rpms for hp and tq may be a bit off: 220 bhp @ 8000, 170 lb-ft @ 6500, Redline 8500.)