Turbo or NA?

30th December 2006, 07:20

Hi,
I am going to tune my car this summer and i am still wondering what to do. I will try to make the car about 160 hp. What will be batter turbo or na (cams, intake, manifold etc.). The price of turbo mod can be almost identical here with the NA mod. Wich one you think will be more relieable, will eat less fuel? The boost will be not more than 5 psi i want to keep the car reliable and not to eat alot of fuel.

30th December 2006, 08:00

it would help if we knew what car you had mate!! but for reliability and better fuel consumption take the NA option, Turbo'd cars get quite thirsty and if not ran properly will end up costing you big bucks if it all goes tits up. anyway 5 psi, imo isn't worth the money!

30th December 2006, 08:21

I drive Saxo Vts 16v. It's consuming a lot of fuel now. I am not shure it will suck more fuel with turbo. I think when you drive under 3000 rpm it's going to keep almost the same fuel consumation. The N/A modifications can give me this power but in the higher end of the rpm's. The engine will be more stressed at 8000 rpms than in 6000 with turbo charged. I will lower the comrpession ratio to 9,5.

30th December 2006, 08:26

yes but with cams, manifold, exhaust, etc your going to have to get it re-mapped to get the best performance from your car and the mods. if it is re-mapped properly you should get better fuel consumption!!

30th December 2006, 08:51

Reliability wise your going to be safer getting cams/manifold/remap etc, and im sure that's what you want with it being a daily drive i take it?

30th December 2006, 12:18

tubo will give you 160 at the wheels, cams etc will give you 160 at the fly.

Thats a world of difference

31st December 2006, 13:12

Also a turbo will put more stress on the engine than cams

31st December 2006, 13:19

speak to god106gti hes running throttlebodies and has 152 at the wheels

31st December 2006, 13:51

yes but with cams, manifold, exhaust, etc your going to have to get it re-mapped to get the best performance from your car and the mods. if it is re-mapped properly you should get better fuel consumption!!

with a turbo you'll need it mapped aswell.

31st December 2006, 13:53

Quote:

with a turbo you'll need it mapped aswell.

And alot more money

31st December 2006, 14:35

All depends on money mate. i'm running bodies, head work cams pistons etc an got 183@flywheel/152@wheels.

Thing is with turbo the power deliverly is all at once which if running alot of power is no good for the box an shafts etc. Supercharger is better as its a steady build up of power. But alot of boosted poeples cars seem to always break down an also things need rebuild an servicing more with boost. ie turbo an charger etc.
So like i said all down to money

31st December 2006, 16:14

like already stated, it depends how much you want to spend. but dont forget you need to spend money to maintain it after the uprade. good oils at regular intervals.

I would defo recommend you upgrade the clutch, suspension and get some bigger brakes first, ready for the upgrade.

As for N/A or boosted........... its your choice lol

i have had my vtr supercharged, was going to scrap the boosted idea and go mad with N/A but have been tempted to go back to boosted with the new vts engine.

you can get some good turbo / supercharger setups that can give you awesome power, but reliability becomes dented when you start driving the car hard. but if its all done properly with the right parts its shouldnt be a problem.

As mentioned, the main parts to suffer are the clutch, gearbox and drive shafts.

There are some great N/A tuned cars kicking about that are awesome too, but its all down to how much you want to spend (baring in mind that it may end up more than the cars worth and you will never get it back).

1st January 2007, 13:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by williamsvts

yes but with cams, manifold, exhaust, etc your going to have to get it re-mapped to get the best performance from your car and the mods. if it is re-mapped properly you should get better fuel consumption!!

with a turbo you'll need it mapped aswell.

i didn't say that you won't need it mapping, but i was making a pointthat when its mapped after cams etc he should get better fuel consumption

1st January 2007, 13:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott

tubo will give you 160 at the wheels, cams etc will give you 160 at the fly.

Thats a world of difference

Exactly what I was going to say, you will see 160 at the wheels, which is the important firgure, ALOT easier with the turbo.

1st January 2007, 18:34

I don't think there will be more stress on the engine, because you will drive your car at lower rpm's. When you make N/A tuning the only way to get power is with more rpm's. More rpm's=more air=more hp. More rpm's is more stress to the engine. You can make turbo convertion without remaping. You just need 5th injector + MF2 to controll it.

1st January 2007, 18:38

Fuel consumation with turbo should be batter if you are driving under 3k rpm's. The cam's wil make the car harder to drive in the city because of the bad idle and because your power is coming in 6k+ rpm's

1st January 2007, 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by nassso

Fuel consumation with turbo should be batter if you are driving under 3k rpm's. The cam's wil make the car harder to drive in the city because of the bad idle and because your power is coming in 6k+ rpm's

Thats where remap comes in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nassso

I don't think there will be more stress on the engine, because you will drive your car at lower rpm's. When you make N/A tuning the only way to get power is with more rpm's. More rpm's=more air=more hp. More rpm's is more stress to the engine.

Not strictly true. Where the engine produces Max torque (forced induction heavily increases torque produced) that is where the engine is under highest load. and so is most likely to fail.

1st January 2007, 20:26

What about 5 psi at 9,5 compresiion ratio? This should be good for the engine reability and the fuel consumation must be ok. At this configuration the engine will produce about 150-160hp but will be with very good torque. By the way the turbo conversion can cost me less than N/A tuning in my country. What do you prefer in this case? I am not going to boost more than 5 psi witch is not going to affect too much the engine reability and the fuel consumation.

1st January 2007, 20:35

provided you have a light foot, the engine with turbo should maintain fairly good MPG. floor it and it drink petrol like a ferrari.

1st January 2007, 20:51

That's what i meen. More boost = more fuel. I want very low boost 5 psi. When i drive my car normal in city under 3k rpms it will give me almost the same MPG. The stress will be not very big at this boost so the gearbox and the engine should be ok i guess. As i said in my case turbo convertion will cost less than N/A. I will tell you exactly what i am going to make:

1. Custom made manifold stainless for t25 or t3
2. Turbo T/3 or T/25 will decide later on this
3. Double metal gasket to decrease the compression ratio to 9,5
4. Pipes
5. Intercooler custom made
6. 5th injector
7. Mf2 to control the fuel (no need to remap)

All this will work on 5 psi to ensure engine reliability and normal fuel consumation.

1st January 2007, 21:17

The saxo VTS produce 120hp so around 100ish BHP.

You're wanting 160BHP (power at wheels). so you're going to make the engine produce 60% more power than it was designed to. To me, thats seems like a lot of extra stress on the components engine - but i could be wrong.

Now is 5psi enough boost to increase the power sufficiently?

1st January 2007, 21:21

I dont think it will produce 160 hp on the wheels with 5 psi and 9,5 compression. But i guess it will be around 160 on the flywheel witch is enough for me.

1st January 2007, 21:35

surely it would be a waste of time and money if ur not gonna go over 3000rpm, thats like buyin a ferrari to go to the supermarket.

1st January 2007, 21:36

wouldnt it be cheaper to just cam it and get about 160ish?

1st January 2007, 21:50

can easily see more than 160 at the wheels ona vts charged if its had the head modified ie. larger valves and ported etc, 6psi is a pressure rating, if the engine is consuming the air well then 6psi can be massive power, i think gmc were seeing around the 200 at the wheels mark with 8psi on a c2 vts engine.

1st January 2007, 21:53

I am not going to drive it under 3k all the time. I will drive it like that on my way to work in the streets are very busy.
It will cost me the same money to cam my saxo as turbo convetion thats why it's hard for me to decide.

1st January 2007, 22:06

cam it mate.

1st January 2007, 23:49

with a turbo on the vts, (depending on the style of turbo?) it will be on boost before 3k, so it will use alot more fuel than standard. im sure a t25/t28 will start boosting just before 2k?? dont quote me on that tho

1st January 2007, 23:53

if you floor it'll it'll be on 'boost' but under a light foot the turbo will merely be trickling air into the engine surely??

1st January 2007, 23:57

if you floor it'll it'll be on 'boost' but under a light foot the turbo will merely be trickling air into the engine surely

engien speed determines boost. you cant really go off a t2 , t25 etc as there are more than 1 t2 turbo and so on. you get different size wheels in the units. if you know what i mean?
and if anyone wants a T2 off a fiesta turbo i have 1 for sale.

2nd January 2007, 00:23

if you are planning on tuning an engine then of course it will be harder on fuel, you cant physically get more power from an engine and expect it to not use more fuel, if you want performance you'll pay for it!! even at low revs the turbo tuned engine would still be harder on fuel than it is now...

2nd January 2007, 10:29

What do you think on Newman cams 256/256? What gains do you expect from this cams? They said they are perfect for road use even whithout remaping.

2nd January 2007, 10:36

Road cams 256/256 - Power band 2000 - 7000
Fast road cams 264/264 - will not work on std injection Power band - 3000 - 7000

What to choose? Is this 256/256 enough or they are much like standart camshafts?

2nd January 2007, 10:40

go fast road and remap

so you actually get some noticable benefit and are closer to your power goal.

2nd January 2007, 10:44

I sow newman cams are much cheaper than piper and kent. Anyone using newman?

2nd January 2007, 10:54

how much are we talking to have a turbo fitted and everything done to make it work properly? im not very good with cars at all, but im keen to learn more! I have around £4k to throw around on improvements to my VTS, (see my post in newbies forum for list of current mods) i have thought about extra insurance costs and fuel consumption and its still something im serious about, i will be using it as a daly driver, but tbh im not that bothered about how much fuel im gonna burn, i can claim the money back through work!

2nd January 2007, 11:07

Just been flicking through your thread mate.

I think for a proper turbo kit fitted to a Saxo your looking at around £4000 yes
to see it done properly and gains of around 190bhp+

The only way you can put a price on it mate and also power figures (at the fly
and wheels) is by contacting the companies that will do the work.
They can offer you prices and also let you know what work will be done.

I got a few quotes for Throttle Bodies on my 106 a while back from a few places. The one place that caught my attention the most was Pug1off
They gave me lots of info inc prices, work and typical power outputs (for the
work carried out)

Get emailing and get calling!

2nd January 2007, 12:12

so i could get a Turbo fitted and working properly for around £4k you think?

2nd January 2007, 12:14

Well if your running 163bhp already then a lot of the work may already be done?

2nd January 2007, 12:18

this is the spec what i already have:

PiperX Viper Induction kit
GMC Throttle Bodies
708's Cams
supersprint 4-2-1
Powerflow Straight through 2" exhaust system
Decat
port & polished head

so how much do you think i would be looking to pay with this spec already installed on the car, please don't get technical with my im still learning!

2nd January 2007, 12:30

you will hvae to remove your cams for a start.
nasso - what lift have those cams got? 708s are only 258 degree duration and have 10mm lift

2nd January 2007, 15:28

Road Cams - Valve Lift - 0.380 0.380 - Cam Lift - 0.380 0.380
Fast Road - Valve Lift - 0.400 0.400 - Cam Lift - 0.400 0.400

2nd January 2007, 15:32

I think the road cams 9.64
Fast road 10.15

2nd January 2007, 16:05

Good point mad by Rushy - Start by doing your homework as Alot of people have mentioned in the past, there are now quite alot of Turbo kits on the market for the Saxo 8v/16v some better than others.

Personally Im a adive fan of if a car leaves the factory with a Blower fine, if it doesnt then it wasnt meant to have one. A mildly tuned NA engine will not only give you 85% of the trills of a Blown engine but will also give better fuel return and also the bonus of a reliable daily drive (or as reliable as a Saxo can be).

The extra wear on drive shafts, gearboxes, clutchs and brakes is another thing to take into acount. After £4000 could you afford to replace a clutch or have gearbox rebuilt?

Do your homework, talk to turbo owners and turbo fitters and then make your mind up.

2nd January 2007, 17:52

Hi is there someone tried this http://www.camshaftsport.com ?
Very cheap camshafts!