Jager

iTrader: (10)

The jab was that you dyno at 180HP (Kahren does that with stock ports and thats what 95% of streetported NA's with intake/exhaust work do). And you run a 14.9, here some cars here have ran 14.9's on stock ports in NA trim.

I'm making a point . Go do your upgrade, how much money have you sank for that 14.9 ? Is a turbo worth it to run 14's? NO! Do you need a turbo to snag 180HP? I hope to god not .

Go spend the money on your upgrade and go to the track, I can go ahead and get a streetport and still run as good or better times then you.

I never said that turbo's were bad for making power, (I hope you can read, can you?). I was just trying to prove to look at your goals. If you want faster then 13's don't want nitrous and be streetable, you can run a NA motor and not do all the swapping ****. But if you want better then 13's you need a turbo.

I agree that turbos are better for aHP goal. When did I say otherwise?
Turbo's are easily modified yes. But if I had the money in the engine that YOU do and ran a high 14, I'de kill myself.

PS: By the way, I wasn't post whoring either .

Digi7ech

iTrader: (1)

This is going downhill. I'm stopping because arguing over the net is stupid. Do what you want think what you want. I'll do the same.

NZConvertible

Typical turbo ignorance...

180rwhp from a 13BT requires minimal mods and minimal investment. It's easily within the capacities of the stock turbo and fuel system. Hell, S5's nearly make that much stock. A 180rwhp 13BT will also have considerably more torque than a 180rwhp NA, and that torque will be spead across a far wider rev range. That means it'll be quicker. And to rub salt in the would it'll be quieter, use less gas and attract less attention from the authorities.

If you want to aim for that power from an NA that's cool, but don't make as *** of yourself by laughing at Turbo owners making the same peak power. Don't make digs at people when you don't understand what you're talking about.

ddub

This is the only thing I disagree with

Are you saying a 180rwhp TII will use less gas than a 180rwhp n/a? Both can do that on the stock fuel setup they come with, so the n/a will be using less gas, wont it? Especially since they can run leaner afr's! Heh.

SuperRotorMan

im a huge fan of option 3... lol want more power? get more boost! lol

Digi7ech

iTrader: (1)

I don't know MPG for a 180hp NA but I get 18mpg city/highway and the best I've ever done was 26mpg on the way back from Sevenstock on the downhil parts of the mountains between CA and AZ.
My NA stock block did pretty much the same(best was 25mpg on the way back from the previous sevenstock).

Now having to use 91 instead of 87 can be used as a counterpoint for the MPG thing.

ddub

NA and TII get pretty similar gas mileage in stock form, with NA being a little better highway. Slightly modded TII wont really change, 180rwhp NA running ~12.5 to 13 afr's wont change much either, in fact it should be better since it will most likely be running lower afr's than it was before.

My only point was that gas usage wasn't a factor. Not really sure what he meant actually, maybe I was misinterpreting it?

On another note, my ported NA with stock ecu got 19mpg full city driving consistently.

Valkyrie

I beleive a 180 HP TII will have a more useable power band than a 180 HP NA, at least... so in that sense you'd be using less gas than a 180 HP NA in normal driving (little or no boost). On the other hand, the turbo under boost will have more torque and therefore won't have to rev as much as fast... which if I'm correct = less gas used.

Would a TII with only 180 HP even need to use premium?

ddub

Yes it would be a good idea to run 91 octane. The s4 TII manual said you could use regular, but s5 TII manual said premium. S5 TII was 200hp or ~170rwhp.

But this is all stupid and going off topic. The thread is not about TII versus n/a, it is about how to get n/a to 200rwhp.

NZConvertible

Why would the NA be using less gas?

A 180rwhp NA is going to need to decent porting, which will sacrifice low-rpm thermal effficiency and require more gas than stock at lower revs as a result. A 180rwhp Turbo doesn't need any port work, so no losses there. Turbos only run richer under full load, which is a very small percentage of time in normal street driving. Most time is spent at lower rpm. Plus as mentioned you need to rev the NA engine harder to achive the same performance. All things being equal (driver, useage, mechanical condition, etc), a 180rwhp NA will most likely have greater average fuel consumption than a 180rwhp Turbo. I would be very suprised if the reverse were true.

ramses666

iTrader: (1)

So... 200 RWHP on an NA = ? S5 rotors & internals, a good street port & something to tune with? (Megasquirt & Spark 0r Haltech,MicroTech or somesuch?) Decent header & exhaust. Some intake porting & matching. Pineapple sleeves? & What about the VDI? Lose it because there is no proof it works on a street port? Does the runner length/timing need to change with a change in porting vs. RPM? Does anyone actually know anything? What about 10-1 RX-8 rotors? Any benefit? I'm sorry... I just drive my 7 every day... maybe 30 miles a day. It is very reliable & fun to drive, but is getting tired. I want it to be a little more spunky!?! I know my compression is getting lower as the days go by & need to come up with a realistic plan for a rebuild. I don't race or drift or go to shows. If I need to get some jollies I'll play my buddies playstation. I need a vehicle that works somewhat reliably & is fun to drive. Whats the realistic build plan? & what's a waste of time? Thanks

Ramses666

Valkyrie

If you want spunk, get a turbo...

Seriously though, the increase in torque alone will make the car MUCH more fun to drive.

lost01388

ok if i go a cheap route and only bridgeport the auxilary and use like megasquirt wat do u think the expected gains would be im just tryin to see if its worth while for a lil extra fun or i should save up and eventually do a v8swap since finding a turbo rx7 would be out of the question *** i just bought this car with a perfect body so im looking to keep it for a while

Jager

iTrader: (10)

I know about the torque.

I was just making a point of where I see it as pointless to do the swap unless you're aiming for 200+ HP, we were NOT talking about the torque (which my TII had PLENTY of). Doing a swap and rebuild/streetporting the engine and all work totally upwards towards 5k or so for high 14's?

I don't think you get my point. I was referring to Digi7tech modified TII conversion, which made 182HP on the dyno after a turbo swap, streetport, exhaust, and intake (FCD is built into the Rtek 1.5 too I beleive).

Then again alot of streetported NA's hit the wall at 160-175HP.

But hands down I do agree that a Turbo Rotary is the best anything faster then 13's.

Digi7ech

iTrader: (1)

^I'm stock port not street port :P

Jager

iTrader: (10)

I'm sorry then for my mistake, I was under the impression you had a port job.

I'm sorry for seeming like bashing your car. I thought you did a clean car with nice parts.

It's still faster then mine though .

87rx7girl

ecu/fuel managment.
exhaust.
fuel pump and injectors off a tii.
remove arv
ummm

if you wanna go farther.... mild street port...

ya.
do some searches on what others have done
------------
wow. didnt realize this is a long thread haha

NZConvertible

Torque and power are directly related. You can't talk about one and ignore the other (as much as NA proponents may wish to). A 200hp Turbo is a totally different car than a 200hp NA.

Comparing a car's overall performance based solely on 1/4-mile time is just as misleading as using just peak power, since you pretty much only use WOT and after launching the engine never drops below 4000rpm. Again, on the street a 14sec Turbo is a very different car than a 14sec NA. Not to mention that fact that there are many other variables in drag racing besides engine power.

Also a big chunk of the $5K you just mentioned would be required to get the same peak power or 1/4-mile time out of an NA, since it would need a rebuild and porting. The difference is that to make any serious further gains the NA will need to be torn apart again for more extreme porting and have the intake system replaced, whereas the turbo'd engine can still be substantially improved with relatively cheap bolt-ons.

I get the point you think you're making, but you're not doing very well. You're comparing an extensively modified NA to a very mildly modified unported engine making a bit more power than it did stock, and with a shitload more potential than any NA making similar peak power.

Kahren

iTrader: (13)

a bone stock na fc with full racing beat streetable exhaust, an afc and some z rated tires would be in 14's. there is no porting needed to get into 14s on the NA.
mazda was very wrong to have put a 4.1 pinion in the NA fc. while on a turbo car its is berely ok, on a 13b NA it has no place. if you replace that with something that matches the engine tq it will be very close to running a t2 1/4 time in stock form.
if driver is a problem then it should be the driver that needs to get modified not the car. most of the people here woudlnt be able to drive a bone stock NA fc to its potential or even close to it.

Jager

iTrader: (10)

I thought I agreed it had more potential? Oops if I didn't make myself clear.

I guess our opinions differ. I just didn't think that spending/doing all the labor on a NA to make it a half-TII would be worth it to run a 14.9 when Kahren (whom of which I trust) says that a proper gear ratio and driver can do the 14's on a stock NA motor. But its his car and whatever he wants to do with it.

And I do know about powerband in drag racing and the 1308 different variables. I've done it with both NA and TII trim and I can feel the difference. Plus the track times don't lie .

What do you compare a car's performance to Jason?

Jager

iTrader: (10)

What would you suggest for a pinion ratio?

NZConvertible

You just said you agree the turbo has more potential, then you say this? If you want to go any faster than that then you'll need to spend a lot more time and money on the NA, making it less and less streetable. Making the turbo go faster is considerably easier and cheaper, and will not be nearly as compromised as a street cat. That alone makes it completely worth it. And like I've said before, 1/4-mile times

Karhen is entitled to believe a good driver and the right gear ratio can cut more than a second of the best times reported by a new stock NA FC. I'll wait until someone actually does it...

You're joking right? Two different drivers, two different tracks, two different dates; and you expect comparable results? Hell I've seen stock cars run two seconds slower than their tested times just from the driver alone. My last car ran a second faster between two meets with no mechanical changes, just because of weather conditions and a different launch technique. 1/4-mile times can be just as misleading as peak power figures. They can be a good guide, but to say they "don't lie" is way off reality.

Digi7ech

iTrader: (1)

elevation
ambient temps
driver
60 foot times
tire health
heat soak?
etc...

Jager

iTrader: (10)

Er, I meant the track times between MY NA and turbo, either I didn't make myself clear OR you didn't take the time to read it.

I thought you told me that 1/4 times don't mean everything on the overall performance of a car?

I know PLENTY about what 1308 variables in track times. I still think a TII with an exhaust and intake would be good for 13's (mine was ).

Getting a NA into the 13's IMHO isn't mind boggling, new gear ratio, engine build and streetport, SAFC, intake, exhaust, and that would do it. To me buying a new engine, rebuilding that engine, buying all the nesscessary stuff, and so on wouldn't be worth to run HIGH 14's on AND make 180HP with (which I personally thought was very low). Either he can't drive or his car isn't doing its job. A turbo car eventually will need upgrades concerning fuel, traction, intercooler, turbo, BOV, clutch, before an NA would. But in the long run I say that its better. If you want to run 13's I beleive an NA would do. Anything faster requires forced induction, spray, or a big port. I think that will make myself clear.

I have nothing against turbo cars and powerband, I'm just stating my opinion that NA's are fine for 13's. And I beleive its SILLY to swap for high 14's.

I beleive that makes myself clear, since you seem to be misinterpeting what I have to say, I attribute that to my poor grammar.