Civic Supercharger???
Discussion
Unfortunatley I havent got it yet this is just the picture ive been given that shows it. Just wanted a rough idea of how old it is and what car its for. Youve been very helpful so far so thanks.
Edit: So how much should I be paying for one of these?
Edit: So how much should I be paying for one of these?
Edited by MR2L33 on Thursday 3rd November 16:39
rb5er said:
the best way to get decent power and torque from the unflexible engine. How can more of both spoil anything?
If I wanted to drive a supercharged car, I'd buy a Cooper S. There are any number of forced induction options in the hot hatch market, but the EP3 was the last great NA hatch - a supercharger might be more linear in it's power delivery than a turbo, but it still makes the car that little bit less special.One of the top posters on the Type R Owners forum spent thousands supercharging his Civic, thinking indeed, like you, that it would just increase everything that was good about the car. After having it on for a while he ended up stripping it off and selling it, putting it back to (fairly) standard. His reason? It's not as simple as sticking on a supercharger and having a Civic is instantly better - if that was the case, Honda would have supercharged it from the factory. It corrupted the purity that makes the car so brilliant, and dumps it squarely into the homogenity of the forced induction crowd.
Mastodon2 said:
but the EP3 was the last great NA hatch -
The Clio 200 is still NA, 200bhp with a cracking chassis 
Mastodon2 said:
One of the top posters on the Type R Owners forum spent thousands supercharging his Civic, thinking indeed, like you, that it would just increase everything that was good about the car. After having it on for a while he ended up stripping it off and selling it, putting it back to (fairly) standard.
Is that Loxy (or what his username may be on your forum? Silver FN2?rb5er said:
the best way to get decent power and torque from the unflexible engine. How can more of both spoil anything?
How is it unflexible numnuts?What other 2.0 Litre N/A mass produced engines out there gain a good 50 brake with simple bolt ons and a remap. You can get 270 with cams, new Inlet, and usual bolt ons and KPro.
Clio's 172/182 don't mod anywhere near as well.
rb5er said:
In your and his opinion perhaps. Have you driven a supercharged one or is it really only his opinion? The poster above seems to disagree as i would expect most people with real experience of them would.
If you want a revvy n/a engine an m3 is more like it.
Yeah great example, an expensive to run BMW, that was a 50k car when new. If you want a revvy n/a engine an m3 is more like it.
Jog on fool.
@ numnuts. Back to school, have you not yet been taught to spell?Mastodon2 said:
Seriously RB5er, stop trolling the thread man.
Trolling the thread? I was just pointing out the benefits that the supercharger in question could provide. Only to get abuse for suggesting that it is better than a just a n/a 2.0 engine. How is that trolling? Trolling is more like saying stuff like "jog on fool" or "numnuts" etc.
Perhaps you are just accusing me of trolling rather than accusing the "childish name caller" as I suggested earlier that you may never have tried a supercharged civic when you said it would make the car worse. Is this the case?
Edited by rb5er on Monday 7th November 18:20
Gassing Station | Honda | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff