I'm not sure about this entirely (people please correct me on this one), but the smoothness of the torque curve of the rotary will really shine when its in NA. I'm not sure how much a turbo affects the flatness of the curve, but the response and predictability you get out of an NA motor is without comparison.

 

That's what people would like to think, but with a decently sized turbo, it's pretty damn flat, here, just look at this, a GT35R vs Kahrens 'damn near 200rwhp' N/A (yes I know, cuz he ported it, it kills torque, but you can't have both 200rwhp and torque as well, so deal with it). You can guess which one I'd rather have.... (actually, I do have it, so nevermind, lol)

GT35R FD


Kahrens port

 

Is that a twin, or single? Speaking relative to the FC chassis, it seems most people'd be running a single setup. Would that affect anything?

 

Single GT35R

 

look at that powerband thats awsome! It just keeps going up, I like how on a na how tha power does not drop off suddenly at 7k or the fact that it does not jump from 50hp at 2k to 200hp at 3.5k its instead a steady increase from idle to redline.

 

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
do you even know how to read a dyno graph?
the power "dropped off suddenly at 7k" on the turbo cause he let off the gas....
and the power "shot up 50hp all of a sudden at 2k" because thats where the graph started........................................... .......dotdotdotdotdotdot

 

Hmm?... I was not refering to that graph specificaly maybe i should of clarified that! Sorry you misunderstood me.

 

Well, it doesn't matter what you were referring to, because it was pretty much wrong. A turbo car isn't going to drop off until you let off the gas, so what you said there doesn't make much sense. Also, the dynos usually don't start reading until about 2500rpm or so, so it's hard to see what happens down below there. But, that said... who honestly who really uses their powerband at 2500rpm during a race event of any kind? Never when I'm at the track or autocross or anything am I ever that low in the band.... Yes you'll feel the *Sudden* kick on of the turbo right around 2600-3000rpm, but after that it's just nice and flat, and saying that it's unpredictable because of that is just running off from unexperience. Once you've driven a car like that long enough, you know exactly what it does and how to predict it and how the powerband works, and it's always going to be better than the N/A.

 

Hopefully you have taken a look at my upgrades. Check out my garage. The only way you can keep up is by having a pretty built NA and maybe with some Nitrious. You willing to put some dough on the line? thats the only way I wil go to socal unless its for sevenstock. Unless, you wanna come to fresno, and my 7 aint even the fastest here.

And my point to NA vs Turbo is if you built them equally the Turbo will smash the NA. Of course a fully built NA will crush a stock TII. But will a fully built NA beat a fully built TII? Thats my point.

 

forgot who posted but sorry man isn't that like having a 6 banger and sayin you can have a v-8..just weld this onto the engine and there ..you have a v-8!!!.it's a horse of a different color and breed ..post is one engine vs another engine if i'm not mistaken ...not turnin' one engine into another.IMO one engine is simplistic and the other is a complicated version of a simple engine..oh what the hell anyone feel like investing in a jet engine? it should slip right in if you remove the glass from the hatch...a little weld here .eff it !! ..20 million we could send an RX7 to the space station ..(i gotta cut back on coffee!!!)

 

personally i'd get an NA, i myself had the nightmare of what a turbo can do which i got as my first fc and found out i had to replace all the hoses. so i'd pick up a good condition NA that i could beat around in

 

If two engines are the same displacement the one that uses forced induction will make more power and torque, period, end of story.

Yeah one thats not too well turbo'd and stock vs an all the way NA engine (with same displacement of course) the NA could beat it, but youre starting to throw in tons of variables.

Its kind of a fallacy to even start this arguement in the first place. N/A power is different than a turbo, but both are built to different ends with different means with different potentials in the end, with the turbo engine being higher.

Turbo has more power and torque, but a well done N/A might be better to control. At the same power level (unless youre underboosting a too-big turbo) the turbo will have more torque than the N/A engine.

Take your pick. I'd vote for a 3rd option, "mu" because the question itself is too vague.

 

the only way to learn IMO, is to start at the bottom and move up. I for instance started with an 88 GXL, then went to an 88 TII, and now have a 90 TII. I used this curve as a learning experience and now have decent knowledge of the car.

 

could have typed it better myself!Starting off on an n/a then graduating to a T2 is the way to go..at least you start to understand what the hell you are dealing with..once you grasp the in's and out's of the vehicle move on to bigger and better ...like you don't start in the NHL and then learn to skate!!

 

It's called general maintenance, all cars require some, even n/a!

 

Listen up man dont put words in my mouth.Did i ever say the turbo powerband was unpredictable ?..No What i did state was the fact that i liked the na powerband. Also telling me to not talk that way because it makes me sound unexperienced is just stupid! You didnt even read what i said. And yes we all know that after you drive ANY car for a extended period of time you can predict that car's caractoristics.

 

Just because you're quoted, doesn't mean I continue to reference you.

 

Ditto its been a long day at work.

 

LOL, that's a line straight out of Ted's book!

 

Im cranky im going to bed!








na rules!! hehe