no_more_rice

Ok, so what's the point? So there are a few baller FD owners out there with other high dollar cars, I think that's axiomatic but I don't see how it's germane to this thread....

Mahjik

iTrader: (1)

I would agree on the first part. I know many owners who have never been on this forum and have own a FD longer than I've had mine. However, I highly doubt that 25% of FD owners are ballers and have a FD as a toy car. I'm sure there are several wealthy sports car enthusiast who do, but I don't reckon that's in the neighborhood of ~3000 individuals in the US.

M104-AMG

iTrader: (8)

Two independent mechanicsI know call BMW drivers frustrated Porsche guys . . .

spanks13

iTrader: (5)

I'm having trouble gathering a conclusion from this thread. Its one of the first I've read with a decent amount of interest on this board that wasn't written by Howard Coleman

Is it the power delivery? Is it the cost/maintenance? Is it the comfort level? What is not nice about a 500rwhp turbo rotary in an FD?

Those big, lumpy, lazy, rough running (modern) v8s you guys always complain about will cruise down the highway sipping gas at 500 rwhp. A c6 zo6 with little money invested will reach that power and drive like stock.

I don't want to turn this into a v8 vs rotary discussion, but rather an NA vs turbo discussion. Many people say that turbo engines are more livable on the street because of their out of boost mannerisms. However, and for the first time I am reading this, many people are unhappy with the result of a 500rwhp rotary.

In an NA car you can easily modulate the power that you're putting to the ground.

All the videos I've seen of people in turbo cars floor it, wait, blow the tires off, shift...wait, blow the tires off and repeat until you're in a high enough gear.

Is this the main issue in a street car?

1QWIK7

iTrader: (33)

lol thats one guy. He also has a highlander on his list. And some people have landcruiser in there as well.

Doesnt mean they all prefer the FD as a track car. The FD IS a great track car but just because ONE exotic car owner chooses an FD for his track car, doesnt mean anything.

The fact that owner is from california makes me believe he got a rare FD (96 so thats RHD etc) instead of just finding the FD for track specifics.

no_more_rice

That's the primary issue. Most seem to agree the relatively peaky/narrow powerband of a big single turbo FD is not well suited to the street or really even the track - certainly not a mountain road. Little question a 500 rwhp (13b) FD is exciting to drive (haven't been in one, but I can imagine), but are you faster when the curves arrive than the guy with 350-400 rwhp 20b n/a or 13btt who has a broader spead of power that is easier to manage? Most are saying no....a track test between the two is the only way to prove it

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

You had your mind made up before you posted this thread

I'll guarantee you a 500 rwhp FD will be faster on a road course than 350 rwhp FD whether it's a single turbo car, twins, 20b n/a etc..... I don't need to ask about it I have the experience to simply tell everybody this is a fact. This would also be true on a twisty mountain road unless it was rediculously twisted like a small autcross course.

I was just beaten this weekend by a Honda Civic (decent aero from the factory) with an acura RSX boosted engine that was shifting into 6th gear just before the timing tower and boucing off the rev limiter soon after at 157 (actual true gear MPH). A high horse power front wheel drive car is very hard to drive through corners etc... because you're asking those front tires to turn and lay down power at the same time. I of course was faster through the corners but he was fast enough and a frikken bullet on any straight line. Happy to say I did barely beat him Sunday besting his Saturday time but his turbo died and he may off beaten me again had his turbo continued to work. My point is POWER AND WEIGHT out weigh most everything when it comes to motor sports because there are so many things you can do to make the car handle or put that power to the ground.

I think when you 1st posted you had it in your mind that a 350 rwhp well setup twin turbo track car would beat a 500 rwhp well setup single turbo track car because of the power band/delivery and that's not even a close race. The 350 rwhp car would likely get lapped in a 30 minute session.

So lets close that book right now. The 500 rwhp FD will CRUSH a 350 rwhp FD on most any road but it just might blow up in 50 miles

However as everyone has said already the twin turbo car will be a better daily driver, more reliable, less maint., etc... but someone like Rich is going to prefer even his DD to be a beast just so he can grin once on the way into work and once going home regardless of the price and there are plenty more just like him so really it's a matter of picking your poison.

no_more_rice

Guarantee is a strong word, where's the evidence? The fact is previous track tests (as I already cited) have shown peaky powerband cars losing to cars with a broader spread of power. Of course the type of track is going to play a role. I think you're a bit biased because the big track at VIR favors hp.

Not the roads I frequent in the mountains of NC. No way a 500 rwhp FD would ever get the power to the ground and stay hooked up in mountain switchbacks at full throttle. Not a chance in hell.

Again, "likely' etc doesn't cut it. Getting the power to the ground is what matters.
http://sportcompactcar.automotive.co...mes/index.html This car beat 500-600 rwhp Supras.

Nope. Book is still wide open. Until proof is offered, your's is simply another opinion. Btw the comparison here big single turbo dyno queeens vs 350-400 cars. Most FDs with twins or quick spooling singles have no problem getting more than 350 rwhp. In reality we're talking about ~ 100 hp difference - most singles never achieve a true 500 anyway, they're in the high 400s, and they give up alot in power delivery to hit that number. Thats' the limitation of tuning a 1.3 L engine with low torque output, you can't have everything. You MUST give up some low end and sacrifice a broader spread of power.

The only way a 500 rwhp always wins or "crushes" is on the drag strip or the salt flats.

Supernaut

iTrader: (83)

I think alot of people have passed this mark. I'm also sure David is well north of the stated figure. If I wasn't building a replica and had I known what I know now, I would have gone 3-rotor N/A from the start. I think 3-rotor N/A is more viable than alot of people think.

no_more_rice

I was referring to the average price of our cars I'm well aware the conversion is far north of $15k, and most people have considerably more than $15k in mods even with a 13b

With a car this old, any upgrade is a 100%+ negative return investment. You do it because you love the car.

allrotor93

iTrader: (126)

I plan on tracking my 45r powered 20B FD next year...may just take the intercooler hose off and run it N/A but it will be done!

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

If Steve Millen posted that he'd prefer a 500 rwhp FD to 350 rwhp FD for his next hill climb I don't think you'd mention anything about a Low HP FD beating a 600 rwhp supra in some magazine contest because hopefully you'd consider the fact that he could possibly know more than you.

I'm certainly not Steve Millen but I've driven these cars with various amounts of weight and power, tire sizes, suspension and brakes etc... on various road courses and instructed in literally 100s of differently prepared track cars and I can assure you that two equally well prepped FDs for their individual HP levels the 500 RWHP CAR WINS HANDS DOWN At very small autocrosses I'll place my money on the miata or maybe 10 hp go cart.

Also don't forget that VIR has 4 different configurations (actually 5 counting the patriot course but I've never driven it) and Summit Point has 3 so I've been on plenty of small tracks as well.

Hopefully you'll agree now that a decently prepped low HP FD like mine will run faster laps than the Porsche 997 GT3 with the proof I provided correct? A 500 rwhp FD would likely run a lower time than most of the field including the viper and although the Grand course is long it's actually an extremely technical track which is why the car mags use it to keep the playing field level.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

I think what we're talking about here is a matter of degrees.

The delta between 350 to 500 horsepower is far too great a margin to make up for with the driveability of the TT car. 50 maybe. 150, no.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Oops after rereading that I of course agree completely.

no_more_rice

And, again (what's frustrating about these threads is the same points that were already discussed keep being raised again by people who drop in and read the last two pages), it's not a simple equation of x additional hp = x additional reduction in lap time, that's pure nonsense. The way some people talk on here a single turbo FD could run down a AWD Gallardo no problem, it's just sheer bullshit. The car is 20 years old, has zero traction control, no AWD, and struggles to get a very peaky and borderline violent 500 rwhp powerband to the ground.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

Don't let the fact that the car is 20 years old fool you. That's meaningless all by itself.

Agreed, many cars will be easier for less than professional drivers to drive fast because of all the modern control gizmos—the GTR is a good example, but a well set up FD is not that difficult a car to drive, and $1000 buys you race logic traction control if you're really worried about it.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

DUDE again you seriously are disrespecting this car

I could run down a Gallardo in my current car possibly as it is but easily with just a little more setup and upping the boost some.

Remember the Civic I mentioned it ran a 1.198 at Summit Point (main course) and that might be a hard # for the Gallardo to beat. I haven't read much about them because frankly I don't have a chance at owning one.

thewird

iTrader: (8)

Fritz Flynn, there is no point trying to reason with him. His mind was made up way before starting this thread (pretty much all his posts are about how weak the FD is compared to X) so no matter who its coming from or what evidence you provide, he won't change his mind. In his mind a 500 rwhp FD can only spinout if you give it WOT coming out of a corner. Some people are just ignorant, just ignore him like I did and let him stay in his own little world.

thewird

no_more_rice

No, I'm not ignorant, son, but I have a low tolerance for random boasting (which you seem particularly well versed at) that isn't backed up by facts. Your track times at Mosport are slow, your little toy would be destroyed by a professional driver in a 997 GT3. End of story.

thewird

iTrader: (8)

Again more ignorance which doesn't deserve a proper reply. Please continue.

thewird

no_more_rice

Correction, you have no reply because you're about 10 seconds off the pace, which is an eternity in racing. Sorry, you lose.

http://www.trackpedia.com/wiki/Mospo...tional_Raceway

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

His track times are far from slow As mentioned he's running the same times as well driven GT3 997s so put a pro in either car and the results should be the same.

In my comparison Im faster with less tire, non pro driver up against the pro and carrying a passenger so in effect I'm stomping the GT3 997

antiSUV

iTrader: (10)

All of this recent back and forth is just reminding me why I put no_more_rice on my ignore list months ago.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

AGAIN that's a GT3 997 cup race car that cost about 400k to build so your damn right he's slower. However give me a well setup 500 rwhp FD on 315 dunlop slicks and I'll give the GT3 997 pro driven cup car a race.

no_more_rice

Previously you referenced low 1:20s