Turbo/SC track car - advice sought
Discussion
Can of worms.
The man with the GT2860RS turbo strapped on says turbos
I bet the Chaps with MP62's strapped on will say Superchargers.
Supercharger the build of powers more progressive, turbo its more fierce.
I want a track car to be fun so fierce every time
p.s. those that talk about turbos and lag have not driven or been in a well setup turbo. One of the most common things I hear after giving passenger rides is "I thought that big turbo would be really laggy, but I didn't notice any lag at all".
The man with the GT2860RS turbo strapped on says turbos
I bet the Chaps with MP62's strapped on will say Superchargers.
Supercharger the build of powers more progressive, turbo its more fierce.
I want a track car to be fun so fierce every time
p.s. those that talk about turbos and lag have not driven or been in a well setup turbo. One of the most common things I hear after giving passenger rides is "I thought that big turbo would be really laggy, but I didn't notice any lag at all".
Herman Toothrot said:
p.s. those that talk about turbos and lag have not driven or been in a well setup turbo. One of the most common things I hear after giving passenger rides is "I thought that big turbo would be really laggy, but I didn't notice any lag at all".
I can vouch for that comment, as those exact words came from my mouth at the last trackday!smiles1 said:
Herman Toothrot said:
p.s. those that talk about turbos and lag have not driven or been in a well setup turbo. One of the most common things I hear after giving passenger rides is "I thought that big turbo would be really laggy, but I didn't notice any lag at all".
I can vouch for that comment, as those exact words came from my mouth at the last trackday!vid of Abingdon, you just go out of frame as you spin then I catch you making clouds of tyre smoke (about 3/4s of way through 12 min vid)
http://www.steve-bowen.com/Eunos/Abingdon270209.wm...
Edited by Herman Toothrot on Friday 6th March 21:02
My opinion is that it depends on your budget.
If you only have enough for a very basic setup then I'd say SC is better as it's a simple bolt-on that gives a good improvement in torque & power across the full rev range whereas a cheap turbo will have no more power but will suffer lag.
To improve the turbo you need to replace the exhaust system with free flowing items which help the turbo to spin up at lower revs.
In the middle budget it's pretty even. You'd get better throttle response from an SC but more torque from the turbo so it depends on your driving style as much as anything else.
At the top end the turbo probably has the advantage as lag can be all but eliminated and you will always have more torque than is available from SC.
Personally I prefer the feel of SC - I like the instant throttle response. Others prefer the rush of torque you get from a turbo. I also prefer the sound of an SC - I love the scream of a supercharger whereas I'd be embarrassed by a dump-valve going off all the time.
If you only have enough for a very basic setup then I'd say SC is better as it's a simple bolt-on that gives a good improvement in torque & power across the full rev range whereas a cheap turbo will have no more power but will suffer lag.
To improve the turbo you need to replace the exhaust system with free flowing items which help the turbo to spin up at lower revs.
In the middle budget it's pretty even. You'd get better throttle response from an SC but more torque from the turbo so it depends on your driving style as much as anything else.
At the top end the turbo probably has the advantage as lag can be all but eliminated and you will always have more torque than is available from SC.
Personally I prefer the feel of SC - I like the instant throttle response. Others prefer the rush of torque you get from a turbo. I also prefer the sound of an SC - I love the scream of a supercharger whereas I'd be embarrassed by a dump-valve going off all the time.
Herman Toothrot said:
smiles1 said:
Herman Toothrot said:
p.s. those that talk about turbos and lag have not driven or been in a well setup turbo. One of the most common things I hear after giving passenger rides is "I thought that big turbo would be really laggy, but I didn't notice any lag at all".
I can vouch for that comment, as those exact words came from my mouth at the last trackday!vid of Abingdon, you just go out of frame as you spin then I catch you making clouds of tyre smoke (about 3/4s of way through 12 min vid)
http://www.steve-bowen.com/Eunos/Abingdon270209.wm...
Edited by Herman Toothrot on Friday 6th March 21:02
My take is Mk1's are more fun, Mk2's are more refined.
I prefer SC's as they drive like its got a bigger engine but you can get more power, cheaper with a turbo.
I'm building a turbo'd track car at the minute but only because I got the turbo'd donor cheap.
I deal in them and my own car is an SC'd Mk1.
Really its simply a case of see what comes up and go and try them.
I'm soon selling a 250bhp FM2 but its too nice to be a track car IMO.
I prefer SC's as they drive like its got a bigger engine but you can get more power, cheaper with a turbo.
I'm building a turbo'd track car at the minute but only because I got the turbo'd donor cheap.
I deal in them and my own car is an SC'd Mk1.
Really its simply a case of see what comes up and go and try them.
I'm soon selling a 250bhp FM2 but its too nice to be a track car IMO.
Chris71 said:
OnlyMX5ives said:
I've been running it for 3 months and its the wrong side of exciting 
in the wet / snow.
How much power has it got and what do you reckon is about the right level for a road car? in the wet / snow. I no longer really use mine on the road in winter as WOT above 4000rpm on damp roads the wheels spin in basically every gear, I think i'm running about 260bhp (dyno'd 250bhp/220lbs a couple of years ago and has since had more modification). Chatting to a guy who runs 350bhp we both thought the "useable" limits about 270/280bhp unless your after a 1/4 mile car and do the relevant mods. Thats really running the edge of what the engine can cope with before going pop though, got to remember 270bhp's 140bhp more than stock, over 100% more power
Chris71 said:
OnlyMX5ives said:
I've been running it for 3 months and its the wrong side of exciting in the wet / snow.
How much power has it got and what do you reckon is about the right level for a road car? in the wet / snow. A 250bhp SC'd car due to the linear power is much easier to drive in dodgy conditions, although the turbo guys would counter that they could just turn down the boost.
Personally I find my 200ish bhp SC car to have the 'right' amount but it depends on your levels of restraint but I see no point in having cars that when using only a fraction of their performance could lead to a jail cell - hence I deal in MX5's not M3's etc
Also its the torque that sends you sideways and I think I'm around 220 compared to around 170 in my SC.
200bhp and 200lbs would be perfect for me.
My 240 BHP FM2 does need delicate use of the throttle in wet conditions
I wouldn't say it's too fast for the road though...
It can be driven normally...but it's nice to have the power there when needed
I had a SC mk2 before this, and IMO, the supercharger suited the character of the car better.
It was probably about 60 BHP down on the FM2...but i'd say, on the road...was not much slower, as it could just be floored coming out of corners etc, whereas with the turbo...a bit of caution is needed.
The FM2 would be in a different league on a track though
I wouldn't say it's too fast for the road though...
It can be driven normally...but it's nice to have the power there when needed
I had a SC mk2 before this, and IMO, the supercharger suited the character of the car better.
It was probably about 60 BHP down on the FM2...but i'd say, on the road...was not much slower, as it could just be floored coming out of corners etc, whereas with the turbo...a bit of caution is needed.
The FM2 would be in a different league on a track though
OnlyMX5ives said:
Personally I find my 200ish bhp SC car to have the 'right' amount but it depends on your levels of restraint but I see no point in having cars that when using only a fraction of their performance could lead to a jail cell - hence I deal in MX5's not M3's etc.
That's the thing. My current car has about 170hp (on a good day) and about the same weight as a Mk1 MX5 I'd immagine and it feels about as fast as I could really thrash on a clear B-road. I'd be quite tempted by going back to a '5 but with mild forced indution - something a bit cheaper to run with a surfeit of replacement and tuning parts available but the same sort of power (and torque) to weight ratio as the TVR if not a bit more. I'd just feel much happier doing track days etc in something I could afford to fix without thinking about it!
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff