I was just wondering if it is a good trade off...


GXL: reliable, 40 less hp
Turbo II: not as reliable, 200 horsepower...

plus, what is an "n/a" engine? is that what the GXL has? like a "not availible for turbo?"

thx.

 

na is naturaly aspirated so yeah no turbo or supercharger or any forced induction of any kind

 

I've had both - the TII is a blast. There's something to be said for boost.

I've had the TII for 3.5 years and had an '91 N/A for 2.5. I've had fewer problems with the TII.

 

If you're talking for power potential, the turbo would easily outdo the GXL...



-Ted

 

What types of roblems are you having with your GXL?

 

Damn brake calipers.. but turbo use the same ones

 

what problem have you had with your calipers

 

im only looking for "engine" specific..peole say the turbo has a short life, but its more fun to drive..i dont think im going to find a "in shape" turbo anytime soon..so heh..goofball

 

It all depends on how you drive it, I know(well from reading their post) T2 owner that had their engines last longer than my NA! If both are driven equally th NA wil prolly last longer........but not that much!

 

Only if i get it frrom a guy who surfs this forum...only one i might find would be from a chick who but a flower on the hood...and it would be an auto....

 

Well, my N/A engine just went out at 67K miles.... im sure if i would have gotten that cheaper, not quite as nice TII i was looking at with 105K it would have been a better deal--kicks self--

 

SO your saying Turbo's are better than n/a's all around?