n/a vs turbo for track use?
24-07-2009, 02:09 PM
#1
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
n/a vs turbo for track use?
I've noticed people tend to go for throttle bodies, lairy cams...etc for track use as opposed to turbo/supercharging the engine?
Is this just due to reliability/servicing or?
Is this just due to reliability/servicing or?
24-07-2009, 02:22 PM
#2
10K+ Poster!!
I think everyone has their own opinion of this.
Its mainly down to costs, chasing numbers from a NA engine is expensive where as 200hp from a turbo engine is a piece of cake.
Making it so you can use that power and torque everywhere though is the hard bit so you then have to work on a overall package which once again makes it expensive.
There is a Catherham for sale on Turbosport, 245hp zetec engine, does 1.13 round Donny, Do I think a turbo version would be quicker ? no, what you gain on the straights you lose cornering due to lag and little throttle response (compared to NA anyway) I don't think there would be much in it but I think some cars, mainly 2wd are better suited to NA engines than turbo ones in most cases anyway
Its mainly down to costs, chasing numbers from a NA engine is expensive where as 200hp from a turbo engine is a piece of cake.
Making it so you can use that power and torque everywhere though is the hard bit so you then have to work on a overall package which once again makes it expensive.
There is a Catherham for sale on Turbosport, 245hp zetec engine, does 1.13 round Donny, Do I think a turbo version would be quicker ? no, what you gain on the straights you lose cornering due to lag and little throttle response (compared to NA anyway) I don't think there would be much in it but I think some cars, mainly 2wd are better suited to NA engines than turbo ones in most cases anyway
24-07-2009, 02:29 PM
#4
I think everyone has their own opinion of this.
Its mainly down to costs, chasing numbers from a NA engine is expensive where as 200hp from a turbo engine is a piece of cake.
Making it so you can use that power and torque everywhere though is the hard bit so you then have to work on a overall package which once again makes it expensive.
There is a Catherham for sale on Turbosport, 245hp zetec engine, does 1.13 round Donny, Do I think a turbo version would be quicker ? no, what you gain on the straights you lose cornering due to lag and little throttle response (compared to NA anyway) I don't think there would be much in it but I think some cars, mainly 2wd are better suited to NA engines than turbo ones in most cases anyway
Its mainly down to costs, chasing numbers from a NA engine is expensive where as 200hp from a turbo engine is a piece of cake.
Making it so you can use that power and torque everywhere though is the hard bit so you then have to work on a overall package which once again makes it expensive.
There is a Catherham for sale on Turbosport, 245hp zetec engine, does 1.13 round Donny, Do I think a turbo version would be quicker ? no, what you gain on the straights you lose cornering due to lag and little throttle response (compared to NA anyway) I don't think there would be much in it but I think some cars, mainly 2wd are better suited to NA engines than turbo ones in most cases anyway
24-07-2009, 02:41 PM
#6
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And tune it for as little lag as possible at about 200-250 ft/lbs torque, maybe a 2.1 ZVH with a GT28RS?
24-07-2009, 02:44 PM
#7
You only have to look at motorsport, they give you a 1.4 - 1.8 mutliplier on engine size when you use a turbo, and then make you run a restrictor as well!
Without those rules EVERY race car would be turbo, all the things like formula one and touring cars and rally cars.
I genuinely cant think of a single N/A car in the world that im not confident I could make quicker if I was allowed to change the engine to a turbo one.
Trending Topics
24-07-2009, 02:44 PM
#8
It's a mk2 fiesta, I was thinking about a ZVH since I have a 1.8 16v zetec, I know of a 2.0 block, crank, rods & pistons and a stage 3 rs turbo head which are for sale?
And tune it for as little lag as possible at about 200-250 ft/lbs torque, maybe a 2.1 ZVH with a GT28RS?
And tune it for as little lag as possible at about 200-250 ft/lbs torque, maybe a 2.1 ZVH with a GT28RS?
24-07-2009, 02:45 PM
#9
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
24-07-2009, 02:49 PM
#10
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 2.0 zetec is also 4 kg lighter than a 1600 CVH I know that much, the feature which entices me about the ZVH is the low cost... but from my experience, it's set-up, not power, which makes a quick track/hillclimb.
24-07-2009, 05:36 PM
#12
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
25-07-2009, 01:06 PM
#14
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jonny do not say things like that, it's making more sense than it should!
I think an ST170 should be ok for what i'm going to use it for, bigger ports and valves as standard right, are they all the same or is there a particular model which is the better for what i'm going to do?
I think an ST170 should be ok for what i'm going to use it for, bigger ports and valves as standard right, are they all the same or is there a particular model which is the better for what i'm going to do?
Last edited by remus; 25-07-2009 at 01:09 PM.
25-07-2009, 02:23 PM
#15
10K+ Poster!!
I don't know much about the ST engine but they do like to rev which isn't a bad thing, steel rods of some description and forged pistons too I'm told so certainly a good standard engine.
GSXR 600 Throttle bodies joined to the first half of the plastic inlet manifold using Samco is something I've seen done, 200hp isn't that hard to get from one as I knew someone who played with them before the Duratec became so popular.
I've sold my Vauxhall engine for a S2000 engine for a Mk2 Escort, 270ish hp on tb's and stock engine means its cheap speed and IF it ever went wrong I won't need to re morgage the house to build another engine.
K20 Type R lump would be mental though, short of buying a engine and box and a ecu of some sort and a fair bit of cutting and shutting you would have a great package, I think the ST170 engine would be the better option though for cost though as it should still be very reliable at 200hp which is plenty in fwd for a lightweight track car.
GSXR 600 Throttle bodies joined to the first half of the plastic inlet manifold using Samco is something I've seen done, 200hp isn't that hard to get from one as I knew someone who played with them before the Duratec became so popular.
I've sold my Vauxhall engine for a S2000 engine for a Mk2 Escort, 270ish hp on tb's and stock engine means its cheap speed and IF it ever went wrong I won't need to re morgage the house to build another engine.
K20 Type R lump would be mental though, short of buying a engine and box and a ecu of some sort and a fair bit of cutting and shutting you would have a great package, I think the ST170 engine would be the better option though for cost though as it should still be very reliable at 200hp which is plenty in fwd for a lightweight track car.
25-07-2009, 03:05 PM
#16
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the gumpf from a fan-site:
A k20 would be lovely but I wouldn't consider it, unless I knew exactly what was involved or I had a 5 digit budget to learn the hardway... and since I don't have either the ST170 seems like the sensible choice!
The 170PS 2.0-litre Duratec ST engine has been developed from the standard 130PS 2.0-litre Ford Focus engine with several new features, including:
* New, high-flow aluminium cylinder head with larger inlet valves and higher lift intake and exhaust camshafts for higher peak rpm levels
* Continuously variable intake valve
timing
* High compression, cast-aluminium pistons and forged steel connecting rods
* Dual mass flywheel
* New dual state intake (DSI) manifold, using long runners for low-end torque and shorter runners for higher peak power outputs
* Larger bore free-flowing stainless steel exhaust system, tuned for enhanced performance sound.
* A new, high-flow aluminium cylinder head with enlarged inlet ports, larger inlet valves and higher lift intake and exhaust camshafts for higher peak rpm levels
* Continuously variable intake valve timing
* A new dual-stage intake (DSI) manifold that uses long runners for low-end torque and shorter runners at higher revs for better peak power output
* A 65 mm large-bore, stainless steel tubular exhaust system with less restrictive catalytic converters.
* New, high-flow aluminium cylinder head with larger inlet valves and higher lift intake and exhaust camshafts for higher peak rpm levels
* Continuously variable intake valve
timing
* High compression, cast-aluminium pistons and forged steel connecting rods
* Dual mass flywheel
* New dual state intake (DSI) manifold, using long runners for low-end torque and shorter runners for higher peak power outputs
* Larger bore free-flowing stainless steel exhaust system, tuned for enhanced performance sound.
* A new, high-flow aluminium cylinder head with enlarged inlet ports, larger inlet valves and higher lift intake and exhaust camshafts for higher peak rpm levels
* Continuously variable intake valve timing
* A new dual-stage intake (DSI) manifold that uses long runners for low-end torque and shorter runners at higher revs for better peak power output
* A 65 mm large-bore, stainless steel tubular exhaust system with less restrictive catalytic converters.
25-07-2009, 03:40 PM
#17
I vote NA engine in a track car as it is just that little bit easier to control the progression of the power. Less things to go wrong too and less heat to get rid of.
This isn't a view on ultimate lap time just fun and consistency at the wheel.
Cheers
RW
This isn't a view on ultimate lap time just fun and consistency at the wheel.
Cheers
RW
25-07-2009, 05:00 PM
#18
Advanced PassionFord User
I'd have thought a turbo would be a no brainer on the track. You always going to be using the revs so you should never be out of the turbos operating range. If you have lag on a track then you must be using a seriously mismatched turbo.
If you want power with reliability and control, then use a smaller turbo or your right foot better.
I'd have thought a tuned NA engine would have a much narrower power band than a turbo, therefore gear ratios would be more critical. Where as the turbo could have a powerband 3000rpm wide.
Admittedly I am thinking more with my 4wd head on and a 2wd on road tyres may have a problem with wheel spin/grip with too much power. If it's a dedicated track car tho, most things should have been optimised so it shouldn't be such big a problem.
If you want power with reliability and control, then use a smaller turbo or your right foot better.
I'd have thought a tuned NA engine would have a much narrower power band than a turbo, therefore gear ratios would be more critical. Where as the turbo could have a powerband 3000rpm wide.
Admittedly I am thinking more with my 4wd head on and a 2wd on road tyres may have a problem with wheel spin/grip with too much power. If it's a dedicated track car tho, most things should have been optimised so it shouldn't be such big a problem.
25-07-2009, 06:31 PM
#19
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: in the garage fixing yet another oil leak
Posts: 925
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd have thought a turbo would be a no brainer on the track. You always going to be using the revs so you should never be out of the turbos operating range. If you have lag on a track then you must be using a seriously mismatched turbo.
If you want power with reliability and control, then use a smaller turbo or your right foot better.
I'd have thought a tuned NA engine would have a much narrower power band than a turbo, therefore gear ratios would be more critical. Where as the turbo could have a powerband 3000rpm wide.
Admittedly I am thinking more with my 4wd head on and a 2wd on road tyres may have a problem with wheel spin/grip with too much power. If it's a dedicated track car tho, most things should have been optimised so it shouldn't be such big a problem.
If you want power with reliability and control, then use a smaller turbo or your right foot better.
I'd have thought a tuned NA engine would have a much narrower power band than a turbo, therefore gear ratios would be more critical. Where as the turbo could have a powerband 3000rpm wide.
Admittedly I am thinking more with my 4wd head on and a 2wd on road tyres may have a problem with wheel spin/grip with too much power. If it's a dedicated track car tho, most things should have been optimised so it shouldn't be such big a problem.
imho, you're right, if you're on the track and 'geared up' for full on, then the lag etc is irrelevant. duncan cowper is on totb tomoz with a hayabuse dax rush and it will kill most of the competition. st. quarter in 11. something, but still wheel spinning at 90-100. try going in a 5-600kg car with 300bhp (maybe an atom) with someone who can drive and it will open anyones eyes. can see off big bikes on the twisties and easily on a track.
26-07-2009, 07:16 PM
#21
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd have thought a turbo would be a no brainer on the track. You always going to be using the revs so you should never be out of the turbos operating range. If you have lag on a track then you must be using a seriously mismatched turbo.
If you want power with reliability and control, then use a smaller turbo or your right foot better.
I'd have thought a tuned NA engine would have a much narrower power band than a turbo, therefore gear ratios would be more critical. Where as the turbo could have a powerband 3000rpm wide.
Admittedly I am thinking more with my 4wd head on and a 2wd on road tyres may have a problem with wheel spin/grip with too much power. If it's a dedicated track car tho, most things should have been optimised so it shouldn't be such big a problem.
If you want power with reliability and control, then use a smaller turbo or your right foot better.
I'd have thought a tuned NA engine would have a much narrower power band than a turbo, therefore gear ratios would be more critical. Where as the turbo could have a powerband 3000rpm wide.
Admittedly I am thinking more with my 4wd head on and a 2wd on road tyres may have a problem with wheel spin/grip with too much power. If it's a dedicated track car tho, most things should have been optimised so it shouldn't be such big a problem.
2) a turbo starts to lose boost at certain rpm depending on several factors in the engine setup if it's too small
3) there will be lag on any turbo, most spool from 1.5k-2.5k stock and circa 2k+ with aftermarket stuff, again depending on engine setup.
4) the powerband of a n/a engine is subject to capacity/setup, a 1.3 with a 285 degree grind will feel alot 'cammier' than a 2.0 with the same profile which will have usable power from 3k-7k, a 300+ cam will be around 4.5k-9k. Gear ratios are of less consequence and are more relevant to the drivers preference and style.
5) FWD struggles for grip on launch, once it's rolling it isn't an issue apart from torque steer.
This imho, on what i've read and experienced with my impreza.
26-07-2009, 07:23 PM
#22
20K+ Super Poster.
one thing that i will say is that it takes a driver more skilled at throttle control to drive a turbo car round corners than an NA one.
i used to have an M3 and that was lovely to drive round track and cornering was a doddle you could balance the car just how you wanted it. i now have an MR2 turbo and corners SCARE me as i cannot control the throttle well enough to get the ammount of power i want
i either give it too little and go slow, or too much and the turbo spools too much. just 1mm movement in the pedal can be the difference between 150bhp adn 250bhp... lol
i used to have an M3 and that was lovely to drive round track and cornering was a doddle you could balance the car just how you wanted it. i now have an MR2 turbo and corners SCARE me as i cannot control the throttle well enough to get the ammount of power i want
i either give it too little and go slow, or too much and the turbo spools too much. just 1mm movement in the pedal can be the difference between 150bhp adn 250bhp... lol
26-07-2009, 10:05 PM
#24
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
one thing that i will say is that it takes a driver more skilled at throttle control to drive a turbo car round corners than an NA one.
i used to have an M3 and that was lovely to drive round track and cornering was a doddle you could balance the car just how you wanted it. i now have an MR2 turbo and corners SCARE me as i cannot control the throttle well enough to get the ammount of power i want i either give it too little and go slow, or too much and the turbo spools too much. just 1mm movement in the pedal can be the difference between 150bhp adn 250bhp... lol
i used to have an M3 and that was lovely to drive round track and cornering was a doddle you could balance the car just how you wanted it. i now have an MR2 turbo and corners SCARE me as i cannot control the throttle well enough to get the ammount of power i want
i either give it too little and go slow, or too much and the turbo spools too much. just 1mm movement in the pedal can be the difference between 150bhp adn 250bhp... lol
26-07-2009, 10:22 PM
#25
20K+ Super Poster.
its not the handling im refering to tho its just the fact that with a turbo car it can be difficuly to control power delivery if you're not mega-experienced. ive driven fairly fast cars since i passed my test and am probably above average when it comes to track stuff and i really struggle!
26-07-2009, 11:38 PM
#26
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its not the handling im refering to tho its just the fact that with a turbo car it can be difficuly to control power delivery if you're not mega-experienced. ive driven fairly fast cars since i passed my test and am probably above average when it comes to track stuff and i really struggle!
But right now I just want something I can just throw about, cheap, reliable and fun
27-07-2009, 08:28 AM
#28
20K+ Super Poster.
good point on the mapping!
i had to adjust my boost controller to induce MORE lag (or whatever the correct term is) to make the car more driveable with it as it was before it was a nightmare to drive on the road yo'd want to accelerate form 30mph to 31mph and end up at 50
i had to adjust my boost controller to induce MORE lag (or whatever the correct term is) to make the car more driveable with it as it was before it was a nightmare to drive on the road yo'd want to accelerate form 30mph to 31mph and end up at 50
27-07-2009, 08:34 AM
#29
On Rob's astra, the throttle is the boost controller, so if he wants less boost he just applies less throttle and the ECU alters the boost target to suit, where as on my YB without this for example if I hold half throttle I still get almost the same boost as at full throttle.
27-07-2009, 11:18 AM
#30
10K+ Poster!!
I spoke with someone who races several race cars yesterday and he actually mentioned this to me, as a rough example it takes a 500hp turbo race car to match a 300hp NA equivalent. he is speaking from experience too as they run some seriously well prepped cars in race championships.
27-07-2009, 11:25 AM
#31
I spoke with someone who races several race cars yesterday and he actually mentioned this to me, as a rough example it takes a 500hp turbo race car to match a 300hp NA equivalent. he is speaking from experience too as they run some seriously well prepped cars in race championships.
If you have less power though, ie you are on a more moderate budget, I suspect that rather than needing 60% more power, it would be a lower ratio, as inherently the turbo car will be more driveable at a lower power level, so for example if it was 200 for the N/A the turbo might not even need to be as much as 300 IME, certainly there was no way robs car was as quick with 180bhp TB'd as it was with 270bhp turbo'd for example.
27-07-2009, 11:32 AM
#32
10K+ Poster!!
Well actually in my case its cheaper to get 300hp than it is to get 500hp out of a let or yb but as most people use xe's or duratecs you are right its damn expensive.
Gearing as mentioned plays a massive part in it too as 2 different cars will be running totally different gearing
Gearing as mentioned plays a massive part in it too as 2 different cars will be running totally different gearing
27-07-2009, 11:36 AM
#33
Well actually in my case its cheaper to get 300hp than it is to get 500hp out of a let or yb but as most people use xe's or duratecs you are right its damn expensive.
Gearing as mentioned plays a massive part in it too as 2 different cars will be running totally different gearing
Gearing as mentioned plays a massive part in it too as 2 different cars will be running totally different gearing
I supect the gearing on your car would be better suited to a 500bhp turbo engine than a 300bhp N/A one as it happens though mate, as your intended use is track and I suspect you wont ever get into 5th gear, unless you are running a massively different rear diff ratio than the original honda one now?
27-07-2009, 11:40 AM
#34
10K+ Poster!!
Totally different gearing Chip, I expect about 140mph on the limiter in 6th @ 9k
The car won't be quick with tall gearing so I wouldn't waste my time using what the stock Honda does.
The car won't be quick with tall gearing so I wouldn't waste my time using what the stock Honda does.
27-07-2009, 11:41 AM
#35
Cool, that sounds more like it then.
One thing not mentioned in this thread is grip, I reckon a 300bhp N/A 4wd car, would lose out to a 400bhp turbo car, what is your opinion of that and how it contradicts what your friend reckoned?
EVO as the test case, take a well specced 400bhp car (ie not an FQ400 but a converted one) and do a few laps of the ring, swap it for a 300bhp N/A engine, and do it again. Which would be quicker?
Last edited by Chip; 27-07-2009 at 11:58 AM.
27-07-2009, 11:45 AM
#36
Do Want
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Mid-Wales, Powys
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spoke with someone who races several race cars yesterday and he actually mentioned this to me, as a rough example it takes a 500hp turbo race car to match a 300hp NA equivalent. he is speaking from experience too as they run some seriously well prepped cars in race championships.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Matt Baxter
Ford RS Cosworth Parts for Sale
6
16-09-2015 08:30 PM
