turbo NA? why is it so looked down upon? anyone with a dyno?
04-24-10, 01:33 AM
#1
TBROC
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tampa Florida
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
turbo NA? why is it so looked down upon? anyone with a dyno?
6 port s5 turbo.. PArts list? anyone with experience? and why does everyone say it's so bad? is it really that unreliable?
04-24-10, 03:21 AM
#4
Turbo on the brain...
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People that haven't done it or don't understand don't like it.
People that have done it or are in the process like it.
I haven't seen a dyno yet of anyone thats done it save aaron cake's latest dyno.
Estimates for a stock turbo high compression engine are 220-230rwhp with a safe rich tune
People that have done it or are in the process like it.
I haven't seen a dyno yet of anyone thats done it save aaron cake's latest dyno.
Estimates for a stock turbo high compression engine are 220-230rwhp with a safe rich tune
04-24-10, 11:15 AM
#5
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMO, I think a turbo II swap is more practical, logical, cheaper, and a whole lot easier to drop in a get going perfectly. With that being said and getting ready to start on my 3rd 6 port turbo, this one S5. I believe the NA motor have a much higher potential in power with the higher compression rotors. Sure you will need a stand alone to get the most reliability and to bring out the most of the car. On my old s4 I was on 5 - 6 psi with a boost leak and I believe it made a good bit of power over a stock TII. In short, as long as the tuning is done right, and you are very careful setting it up, the 6port turbo will be very rewarding.
04-24-10, 11:30 AM
#7
boosted fc
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: texas
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if you are dead set on turboing your na, yous the turbo intake maifolds and throttle body you need to port the lower intake manifld just alittle, use the turbo manifold. ts not that hard, which high compression it will make more power at lower boost and it will spoil up quicker. it just because of the high compression you have a smaller safty margin to plan with
Trending Topics
04-24-10, 12:16 PM
#8
IMO, I think a turbo II swap is more practical, logical, cheaper, and a whole lot easier to drop in a get going perfectly. With that being said and getting ready to start on my 3rd 6 port turbo, this one S5. I believe the NA motor have a much higher potential in power with the higher compression rotors. Sure you will need a stand alone to get the most reliability and to bring out the most of the car. On my old s4 I was on 5 - 6 psi with a boost leak and I believe it made a good bit of power over a stock TII. In short, as long as the tuning is done right, and you are very careful setting it up, the 6port turbo will be very rewarding.
04-24-10, 02:33 PM
#10
Lazy RX-7 Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It depends, though, doesn't it? I have a very low-mileage (66k) car, it would seem like such a waste to just toss a great motor in lieu of a turbo one with low miles, especially considering I have a full service history.
04-24-10, 02:35 PM
#11
I think its looked down upon because of Aaron Cake's popular write-up on doing it the most difficult way possible. People look at that write-up and **** their pants. Even more when they see his recent stuff. Another reason is all the different ways to do it, turbo selection, manifold, oil/coolant supply, intercooler setup/piping, ECU, etc.
One of our normal average-joe members needs to make a write up using the TII intakes. People get discouraged by Aaron's write-ups because he seems more mechanically inclined than the average person. As long as you are educated on turbos (read a book) it is easy as crap. If you don't read up on turbos you will blow your engine.
As for dyno I did mine yesterday, mods are in the sig. 173whp/150tq, 7psi @ 5000rpm and 2-3psi from 7-8000rpm. AFRs are in the mid 10s after 5000. Its a safe setup but the boost drop shows the turbo is too small for the engine. The stock ECU runs it rich/safe enough for you to be able to beat the crap out of the car so its a cheap temporary setup until you can save for an upgrade but you are ultimately losing money. You should consider a different turbo and ECU.
One of our normal average-joe members needs to make a write up using the TII intakes. People get discouraged by Aaron's write-ups because he seems more mechanically inclined than the average person. As long as you are educated on turbos (read a book) it is easy as crap. If you don't read up on turbos you will blow your engine.
As for dyno I did mine yesterday, mods are in the sig. 173whp/150tq, 7psi @ 5000rpm and 2-3psi from 7-8000rpm. AFRs are in the mid 10s after 5000. Its a safe setup but the boost drop shows the turbo is too small for the engine. The stock ECU runs it rich/safe enough for you to be able to beat the crap out of the car so its a cheap temporary setup until you can save for an upgrade but you are ultimately losing money. You should consider a different turbo and ECU.
04-24-10, 03:00 PM
#12
run from thee sandvich!!!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think it all depends on your power goals. if you wanna run some crazy psi i would go with a t ii motor. if your lookin for maybe 6 psi or whatever a higher compression motor would work fine. and as KhanArtisT said do it right. research what your gonna do. to build a turbo setup on a car you cant just slap a turbo and some piping. get what you need for your goals/budget. otherwise you might end up with ....well idk these are rotary engines so you wont have a rod through your block hahaha.
04-24-10, 03:04 PM
#13
Lazy RX-7 Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When it comes time for my buildup, I'll be sure to post a lot of pictures of the process...my car is very clean and original (not for long muahahahahaa) so it will be a good resource, assuming I don't eff everything up.
04-24-10, 11:43 PM
#14
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 1st one I was fairly new to turbos to begin with. I set it up with all turbo parts except the front cover, I drilled the oil pan for the turbo drain. I think I had 460 primaries, 550cc secondaries, stock n/a fuel pump & e-manage. Bonez 2.5 downpipe to mid pipe and custom 3 inch exhaust. This was on the stock S4 turbo with no wastegate porting. The only thing I needed to drive the car was a tII throttle cable. Being impatient and already setup with the setup for failure, I decided to try to see what the bov sounded like. So short i kept revving the motor until it detonated and lost compression on one rotor. After I took everything back out, I realized I had seal the bov shut with gasket maker.... So, I traded the car for a 240sx which I gave away for free. All that time and money 
The 2nd one, after an insane amount of research and rotorology 101 lol. I ran it for a couple of months til I blew it being careless. S4 block, TII Intake, Turbo, front cover, ecu and sensors. 550cc pri, 720cc sec, apexi afc, and bonez downpipe no exhaust, and a wastegate port by bdc. The car ran decently but wouldn't idle for anything, and could never get the timing straight on it. One weekend I decided to borrow a manual boost controller to turn up the boost. The more I tried to up the boost it would never go past 5 - 6 psi. I found a hole on the intercooler that was not plugged. So after taking care of that, I went to band practice and never got on it. After practice I dropped it in third on the highway *forgetting I had fixed the boost leak*, and it pulled like a bat out off hell. So shifted from 3rd to 4th, a loud back fire and no more power. I pretty much limped home one rotor, and come to find out blown apex seal.
Sorry for the long story, but in short both instances were because of my carelessness or forgetfulness.
The 2nd one, after an insane amount of research and rotorology 101 lol. I ran it for a couple of months til I blew it being careless. S4 block, TII Intake, Turbo, front cover, ecu and sensors. 550cc pri, 720cc sec, apexi afc, and bonez downpipe no exhaust, and a wastegate port by bdc. The car ran decently but wouldn't idle for anything, and could never get the timing straight on it. One weekend I decided to borrow a manual boost controller to turn up the boost. The more I tried to up the boost it would never go past 5 - 6 psi. I found a hole on the intercooler that was not plugged. So after taking care of that, I went to band practice and never got on it. After practice I dropped it in third on the highway *forgetting I had fixed the boost leak*, and it pulled like a bat out off hell. So shifted from 3rd to 4th, a loud back fire and no more power. I pretty much limped home one rotor, and come to find out blown apex seal.
Sorry for the long story, but in short both instances were because of my carelessness or forgetfulness.
04-25-10, 10:33 AM
#15
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
For as long as I can remember, the whole turbo-NA thing has been controversial. It has been almost 10 years since I started posting turbo-NA stuff and much of the attitude has not changed. When I did my original exhaust-spacer prototype install, there were actually polls posted to the 2nd gen forum asking "Will Aaron Cake's Butchered NA every run again?". Sadly that poll was lost when all polls were given a time out to automatically delete. But that's incidental; you still see posts all the time saying that it can't be done, you can't run much boost, etc.
So why?
Ignorance is the easy explanation, and in many cases I think it's the correct explanation. People hear one thing or another, so they parrot it around without any real experience.
The "ghetto" factor is another good reason. There is a certain type of person that forgets that hot-rodding began not by purchasing parts out of a catalog, but by fabricating components and modifying what came with the vehicle. For some odd reason this has turned into something to look down upon, and I don't know why. What exactly is wrong with fabricating up components to extend the capabilities of what is stock? Maybe it is a defense mechanism for those who are catalog modders. They can't build stuff, so they just write cheques to someone else and make themselves feel better by saying those who fabricate their own stuff and don't just replace anything are being cheap or ghetto.
Or, there could be backlash from the load of people taking on such a project, blowing their engine, and then automatically all such setups are unreliable, ghetto, time wasters, etc. Ask many of the people who have done turbo-NA setups and then blown up the engine. They went that route because they thought it was the way to save money. That is the wrong way to approach any sort of car modding.
So why?
Ignorance is the easy explanation, and in many cases I think it's the correct explanation. People hear one thing or another, so they parrot it around without any real experience.
The "ghetto" factor is another good reason. There is a certain type of person that forgets that hot-rodding began not by purchasing parts out of a catalog, but by fabricating components and modifying what came with the vehicle. For some odd reason this has turned into something to look down upon, and I don't know why. What exactly is wrong with fabricating up components to extend the capabilities of what is stock? Maybe it is a defense mechanism for those who are catalog modders. They can't build stuff, so they just write cheques to someone else and make themselves feel better by saying those who fabricate their own stuff and don't just replace anything are being cheap or ghetto.
Or, there could be backlash from the load of people taking on such a project, blowing their engine, and then automatically all such setups are unreliable, ghetto, time wasters, etc. Ask many of the people who have done turbo-NA setups and then blown up the engine. They went that route because they thought it was the way to save money. That is the wrong way to approach any sort of car modding.
04-25-10, 10:48 AM
#16
BDC Motorsports
For as long as I can remember, the whole turbo-NA thing has been controversial. It has been almost 10 years since I started posting turbo-NA stuff and much of the attitude has not changed. When I did my original exhaust-spacer prototype install, there were actually polls posted to the 2nd gen forum asking "Will Aaron Cake's Butchered NA every run again?". Sadly that poll was lost when all polls were given a time out to automatically delete. But that's incidental; you still see posts all the time saying that it can't be done, you can't run much boost, etc.
So why?
Ignorance is the easy explanation, and in many cases I think it's the correct explanation. People hear one thing or another, so they parrot it around without any real experience.
The "ghetto" factor is another good reason. There is a certain type of person that forgets that hot-rodding began not by purchasing parts out of a catalog, but by fabricating components and modifying what came with the vehicle. For some odd reason this has turned into something to look down upon, and I don't know why. What exactly is wrong with fabricating up components to extend the capabilities of what is stock? Maybe it is a defense mechanism for those who are catalog modders. They can't build stuff, so they just write cheques to someone else and make themselves feel better by saying those who fabricate their own stuff and don't just replace anything are being cheap or ghetto.
Or, there could be backlash from the load of people taking on such a project, blowing their engine, and then automatically all such setups are unreliable, ghetto, time wasters, etc. Ask many of the people who have done turbo-NA setups and then blown up the engine. They went that route because they thought it was the way to save money. That is the wrong way to approach any sort of car modding.
So why?
Ignorance is the easy explanation, and in many cases I think it's the correct explanation. People hear one thing or another, so they parrot it around without any real experience.
The "ghetto" factor is another good reason. There is a certain type of person that forgets that hot-rodding began not by purchasing parts out of a catalog, but by fabricating components and modifying what came with the vehicle. For some odd reason this has turned into something to look down upon, and I don't know why. What exactly is wrong with fabricating up components to extend the capabilities of what is stock? Maybe it is a defense mechanism for those who are catalog modders. They can't build stuff, so they just write cheques to someone else and make themselves feel better by saying those who fabricate their own stuff and don't just replace anything are being cheap or ghetto.
Or, there could be backlash from the load of people taking on such a project, blowing their engine, and then automatically all such setups are unreliable, ghetto, time wasters, etc. Ask many of the people who have done turbo-NA setups and then blown up the engine. They went that route because they thought it was the way to save money. That is the wrong way to approach any sort of car modding.
B
04-25-10, 10:50 AM
#17
In short: Don't criticize success which was based on a combination of fabrication and DIY inginuity.
Bottom line, you can't just slap a turbo on a n/a and have an instant TII, there are too many differences!
However, it's been done, most rednecks fail, and many who have done their homework and apply the right combination of fabrication, skill and for some, luck, have succeeded. For the talented, give it a whirl, for the redneck, sell the n/a and buy a TII and save some money.
Aaron is an example of a young brave redneck with good fabrication skills, an "I can do it attitude", great DIY talent, did his homework, and along with all that a sprinkling of a little lucky fairy dust and had great success. Most admirable is the amount of knowledge he has shared with the community, for this he deserves appreciation for what he offers from all that care to read about his efforts.....
Being a camden owner I know all about creativity and the dreams and pursuits of more power. (in other word, I'm stuck making the best of this thing, should've gone turbo, lol)
Bottom line, you can't just slap a turbo on a n/a and have an instant TII, there are too many differences!
However, it's been done, most rednecks fail, and many who have done their homework and apply the right combination of fabrication, skill and for some, luck, have succeeded. For the talented, give it a whirl, for the redneck, sell the n/a and buy a TII and save some money.
Aaron is an example of a young brave redneck with good fabrication skills, an "I can do it attitude", great DIY talent, did his homework, and along with all that a sprinkling of a little lucky fairy dust and had great success. Most admirable is the amount of knowledge he has shared with the community, for this he deserves appreciation for what he offers from all that care to read about his efforts.....
Being a camden owner I know all about creativity and the dreams and pursuits of more power. (in other word, I'm stuck making the best of this thing, should've gone turbo, lol)
04-25-10, 12:13 PM
#18
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,840
Received 2,604 Likes
on
1,847 Posts
it just didn't make any sense to spend all that time or money to even do a t2 swap on an NA.
things have changed though obviously, but i think that's part of it
04-25-10, 12:30 PM
#20
Right now i'm starting the process of doing a s5 6 port turbo also. I am not yet going to start my write up until i source all the parts, wich should be in the next week or so, maybe 2. But just as a taste for whats to come.... s5 n/a stock port, bnr stage 2, 720 primaries, 1000 secondaries, racing beat 3" dp, modded s5 t2 lim, s5 t2 uim and throttle body, greddy elbow, corksport front mount, microtech lt-10s and all the goodies that go along with that, hks bov, s5 t2 front cover, rb oil filter pedistal, and premixing. there are probably some other things that i forgot to mention. keep an eye out for my build, it will be on this thread: https://www.rx7club.com/2nd-generation-specific-1986-1992-17/s5-6-port-turbo-whos-done-questions-inside-890359/
Izzy
Izzy
04-25-10, 04:27 PM
#21
HAILERS
Join Date: May 2001
Location: FORT WORTH, TEXAS,USA
Posts: 20,563
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes
on
19 Posts
I've made one of those non turbo to turbo items. Gutless wonder down in low rpms without the twin scroll and lack of aux actuators. I've a fully functional non turbo 86 that's got more torque down low.
I meant to say drivability sucks for daily driving.
I meant to say drivability sucks for daily driving.
04-25-10, 05:08 PM
#22
I think its looked down upon because of Aaron Cake's popular write-up on doing it the most difficult way possible. People look at that write-up and **** their pants. Even more when they see his recent stuff. Another reason is all the different ways to do it, turbo selection, manifold, oil/coolant supply, intercooler setup/piping, ECU, etc.
One of our normal average-joe members needs to make a write up using the TII intakes. People get discouraged by Aaron's write-ups because he seems more mechanically inclined than the average person. As long as you are educated on turbos (read a book) it is easy as crap. If you don't read up on turbos you will blow your engine.
As for dyno I did mine yesterday, mods are in the sig. 173whp/150tq, 7psi @ 5000rpm and 2-3psi from 7-8000rpm. AFRs are in the mid 10s after 5000. Its a safe setup but the boost drop shows the turbo is too small for the engine. The stock ECU runs it rich/safe enough for you to be able to beat the crap out of the car so its a cheap temporary setup until you can save for an upgrade but you are ultimately losing money. You should consider a different turbo and ECU.
One of our normal average-joe members needs to make a write up using the TII intakes. People get discouraged by Aaron's write-ups because he seems more mechanically inclined than the average person. As long as you are educated on turbos (read a book) it is easy as crap. If you don't read up on turbos you will blow your engine.
As for dyno I did mine yesterday, mods are in the sig. 173whp/150tq, 7psi @ 5000rpm and 2-3psi from 7-8000rpm. AFRs are in the mid 10s after 5000. Its a safe setup but the boost drop shows the turbo is too small for the engine. The stock ECU runs it rich/safe enough for you to be able to beat the crap out of the car so its a cheap temporary setup until you can save for an upgrade but you are ultimately losing money. You should consider a different turbo and ECU.
Basically you only use the "block" of the NA. I think it was JRat that did this write up.
As far as more power on the NA/T
I have the mods below on my Turbo II, running 6-8 psi (stock boost), and made 194WHP on a Dyno Dynamics Dyno. This was with the factory downpipe, 2.5" midpipe with highflow cat, and the Racing Beat Non-Turbo catback.I had considered running a NA/T with my GXL until I found this Turbo II for such a good deal, luckily all the parts I had started collecting were all usable for this one.
Vince
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
thecody59
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
14
01-23-16 11:52 AM