Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp
08-24-2006, 11:04 AM
#1
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: mountaintop, PA, USA
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp
The only answer i have been getting is that na cars have a very linear torque curve compared to a turbo car. Please give me some information on why an 250 whp na hatch can go 11.44. But my same whp turbo car only goes 13.5. Thanks
08-24-2006, 11:08 AM
#4
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (trecool44)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by trecool44 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The only answer i have been getting is that na cars have a very linear torque curve compared to a turbo car. Please give me some information on why an 250 whp na hatch can go 11.44. But my same whp turbo car only goes 13.5. Thanks</TD></TR></TABLE>
thats a big reason. TQ wins the race.
oh and HP dont mean ****. TQ on the high end, with right gears is a winner.
thats a big reason. TQ wins the race.
oh and HP dont mean ****. TQ on the high end, with right gears is a winner.
08-24-2006, 11:09 AM
#5
Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Posts: 1,459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (Archidictus)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Archidictus »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Four words:
Area under the curve.</TD></TR></TABLE>
/thread.
the NA car may be making the same power as the FI, but the NA engine is making that power for alot longer than the FI engine
Area under the curve.</TD></TR></TABLE>
/thread.
the NA car may be making the same power as the FI, but the NA engine is making that power for alot longer than the FI engine
08-24-2006, 11:24 AM
#6
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (trecool44)
what kinda car is boosted, ur talkin about an all mototr eg, whats the other car, and like wha a couple other people said. an all motor setup is making that power decently sooner in the rpm band then that boosted car will, so theres ur answer... TURBO LAG, plus whatever the weight diff b/t that eg and ur car is adds to ur prob as well, depending on what kinda car u got
Trending Topics
08-24-2006, 12:08 PM
#8
cute little bastard
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sersey Jhore
Posts: 7,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (trecool44)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Archidictus »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Four words:
Area under the curve.</TD></TR></TABLE>
x2
Also the 250whp N/A cars running 11s/12s almost ALWAYS are running slicks. You were running street tires right?
Area under the curve.</TD></TR></TABLE>
x2
Also the 250whp N/A cars running 11s/12s almost ALWAYS are running slicks. You were running street tires right?
08-24-2006, 12:18 PM
#9
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (trecool44)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by trecool44 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The only answer i have been getting is that na cars have a very linear torque curve compared to a turbo car. Please give me some information on why an 250 whp na hatch can go 11.44. But my same whp turbo car only goes 13.5. Thanks</TD></TR></TABLE>
maybe you need practice on your launches? maybe it's your tires like SkoundrelUSA said.
maybe you need practice on your launches? maybe it's your tires like SkoundrelUSA said.
08-24-2006, 01:31 PM
#10
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Miura-Shi, Japan
Posts: 1,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (trecool44)
1. N/A cars are easier to drive.
2. N/A cars are never full weight.
other than that, a turbo car making 250 should kill 250hp all motor car. Whoever said area under the curve is right, but 9 times out of 10 a turbo car has more area under the curve. A properly done turbo setup will hit 250hp and hold it there for the rest of the rpm rev range, while a N/A car slowly creeps up there.
2. N/A cars are never full weight.
other than that, a turbo car making 250 should kill 250hp all motor car. Whoever said area under the curve is right, but 9 times out of 10 a turbo car has more area under the curve. A properly done turbo setup will hit 250hp and hold it there for the rest of the rpm rev range, while a N/A car slowly creeps up there.
08-24-2006, 02:15 PM
#11
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (narfdanarf)
technicaly a turbo car should be faster...
traction is a big problem with turbo vehicles due to the sudden "up" in HP. all motor power is more linear so the tires are not subjected to such a power increase in such a short period of time.
i mean think about it.
you start off in 3rd gear, vehicles are identical in every way except on is making 250 hp and 150 trq. turbo build is making 250 hp and 150 trq. even though we know the turbo will make more torque,BUT for the sake of argument both motors making same powerl.
starting off in 3rd gear, both same amount of traction, the turbo will win due to hitting power band sooner.
traction is a big problem with turbo vehicles due to the sudden "up" in HP. all motor power is more linear so the tires are not subjected to such a power increase in such a short period of time.
i mean think about it.
you start off in 3rd gear, vehicles are identical in every way except on is making 250 hp and 150 trq. turbo build is making 250 hp and 150 trq. even though we know the turbo will make more torque,BUT for the sake of argument both motors making same powerl.
starting off in 3rd gear, both same amount of traction, the turbo will win due to hitting power band sooner.
08-24-2006, 02:38 PM
#12
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Trap or die
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
expletive na, turbo is it, and in the 1/4 mile the same **** a turbo car will win, but then u have people who race from stoplight to stoplight and yes a na car will win, but its all about what your cars setup for. but then again what kind of turbo car is doing the same whp as a na car? My stock turboed sohc before had the same whp has a built bseries vtec likw 200-215?
08-24-2006, 03:04 PM
#15
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: murfreesboro, tn, usa
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (jaydem_ekizzle)
i`m sure the n/a car has alot less weight . my ef had about 180 to the wheels and i dumped many a turbo eg and an accord with a 75 shot of nos . it was a std 91 hb and it really impressed me for the last 15 years i owned it .
08-24-2006, 04:01 PM
#17
Go Tigers!
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (trecool44)
lol @ you guys are comparing poor turbo builds to good NA builds.
people on here are stupid. They put GIANT turbos on their cars with shitty gearboxes and fall out of boost with shitty tunes.
lets take a gsr with $2000 of NA parts with an extra $300 in dyno tuning
and then lets take a gsr with $2000 of boost parts and an extra $300 in dyno tuning.
Boost makes more power. 90% of the time boost level hp reached with an NA build is for getting respect + attention....but costs 10x more than a cheapo turbo kit.
people on here are stupid. They put GIANT turbos on their cars with shitty gearboxes and fall out of boost with shitty tunes.
lets take a gsr with $2000 of NA parts with an extra $300 in dyno tuning
and then lets take a gsr with $2000 of boost parts and an extra $300 in dyno tuning.
Boost makes more power. 90% of the time boost level hp reached with an NA build is for getting respect + attention....but costs 10x more than a cheapo turbo kit.
08-24-2006, 04:05 PM
#18
Semper Fidelis
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (Bense)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by kaiba »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> 
</TD></TR></TABLE>
/thread
</TD></TR></TABLE>/thread
08-24-2006, 04:18 PM
#19
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: CA, United States
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (Bense)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bense »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">lol @ you guys are comparing poor turbo builds to good NA builds.
people on here are stupid. They put GIANT turbos on their cars with shitty gearboxes and fall out of boost with shitty tunes.
lets take a gsr with $2000 of NA parts with an extra $300 in dyno tuning
and then lets take a gsr with $2000 of boost parts and an extra $300 in dyno tuning.
Boost makes more power. 90% of the time boost level hp reached with an NA build is for getting respect + attention....but costs 10x more than a cheapo turbo kit.</TD></TR></TABLE>
exactly.
took way to long for someone to explain it.
.
a shitty turbo build will be about equal (in this case less) to a good N/A build.
keep in mind, in an average NA build the builder is pulling out all the stops, pulling anything unnecessary, getting the best gear ratios for acceleration, and having a great tune.
an average turbo build is a somewhat gutted car (usually just the rear seats pulled out), stock gear ratios, and usually just a crappy but a it'll-get-the-job-done kind of tune.
however, in your case i'd have to say the NA car is making the same hp but earlier and possibly more torque earlier.
people on here are stupid. They put GIANT turbos on their cars with shitty gearboxes and fall out of boost with shitty tunes.
lets take a gsr with $2000 of NA parts with an extra $300 in dyno tuning
and then lets take a gsr with $2000 of boost parts and an extra $300 in dyno tuning.
Boost makes more power. 90% of the time boost level hp reached with an NA build is for getting respect + attention....but costs 10x more than a cheapo turbo kit.</TD></TR></TABLE>
exactly.
took way to long for someone to explain it.
.a shitty turbo build will be about equal (in this case less) to a good N/A build.
keep in mind, in an average NA build the builder is pulling out all the stops, pulling anything unnecessary, getting the best gear ratios for acceleration, and having a great tune.
an average turbo build is a somewhat gutted car (usually just the rear seats pulled out), stock gear ratios, and usually just a crappy but a it'll-get-the-job-done kind of tune.
however, in your case i'd have to say the NA car is making the same hp but earlier and possibly more torque earlier.
08-24-2006, 04:28 PM
#20
Unceasing Measure
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (knockout)
Most of you people are idiots. The topic isn't "is NA better than Turbo" it's "Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars given the same wieght and whp" which is an entirely different concept. Cost has nothing to do with it, tune has nothing to do with it, weight reduction has nothing to do with it.
A B18C5 EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq will beat a D16Z6 turbo EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq all day every day from any RPM to any RPM.
A B18C5 EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq will beat a D16Z6 turbo EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq all day every day from any RPM to any RPM.
08-24-2006, 04:40 PM
#21
Senior Member
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (Archidictus)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Archidictus »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Most of you people are idiots. The topic isn't "is NA better than Turbo" it's "Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars given the same wieght and whp" which is an entirely different concept. Cost has nothing to do with it, tune has nothing to do with it, weight reduction has nothing to do with it.
A B18C5 EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq will beat a D16Z6 turbo EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq all day every day from any RPM to any RPM.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Depends on the driver
A B18C5 EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq will beat a D16Z6 turbo EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq all day every day from any RPM to any RPM.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Depends on the driver
08-24-2006, 04:41 PM
#22
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (Archidictus)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Archidictus »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Most of you people are idiots. The topic isn't "is NA better than Turbo" it's "Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars given the same wieght and whp" which is an entirely different concept. Cost has nothing to do with it, tune has nothing to do with it, weight reduction has nothing to do with it.
A B18C5 EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq will beat a D16Z6 turbo EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq all day every day from any RPM to any RPM.</TD></TR></TABLE>
b18c more torque, more top end. put that turbo kit on the b18c. same gearing same everything else.
b18c turbo will win from a roll. power band hits sooner
A B18C5 EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq will beat a D16Z6 turbo EG weighing 2300 pounds and putting down 200whp and 135wtq all day every day from any RPM to any RPM.</TD></TR></TABLE>
b18c more torque, more top end. put that turbo kit on the b18c. same gearing same everything else.
b18c turbo will win from a roll. power band hits sooner
08-24-2006, 04:48 PM
#23
Unceasing Measure
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (mitsuman)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mitsuman »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">b18c more torque, more top end. put that turbo kit on the b18c. same gearing same everything else.
b18c turbo will win from a roll. power band hits sooner</TD></TR></TABLE>
All I have to say is show me. Show me. I dare you to show me a 200whp 135wtq turbo B18Cx that runs the same times as an all motor B18C car making the same power. I dare you.
The theoretical bullshit floating around in here about why turbocharged cars "should" be faster and "would" be faster if, etc. etc. is just lame as expletive. There are 215whp EGs running NA on slicks that are in the 11's. There are no 215whp turbo EGs on slicks running those times. Period. Find one. Prove me wrong. All-motor cars of a given power level are faster in a straight-line than turbo cars at the same weight and power level.
b18c turbo will win from a roll. power band hits sooner</TD></TR></TABLE>
All I have to say is show me. Show me. I dare you to show me a 200whp 135wtq turbo B18Cx that runs the same times as an all motor B18C car making the same power. I dare you.
The theoretical bullshit floating around in here about why turbocharged cars "should" be faster and "would" be faster if, etc. etc. is just lame as expletive. There are 215whp EGs running NA on slicks that are in the 11's. There are no 215whp turbo EGs on slicks running those times. Period. Find one. Prove me wrong. All-motor cars of a given power level are faster in a straight-line than turbo cars at the same weight and power level.
08-24-2006, 04:53 PM
#24
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (Archidictus)
did u read my post from above. the reasons why they run faster times is TRACTION!
from a roll with equal traction, the turbo would win.
simplty based on the fact that the turbo motor starts making more power sooner
from a roll with equal traction, the turbo would win.
simplty based on the fact that the turbo motor starts making more power sooner
08-24-2006, 05:17 PM
#25
Join Date: May 2005
Location: va, va, us
Posts: 1,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Why are NA cars so much faster than turbo cars, same wieght/whp (mitsuman)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Archidictus »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
All I have to say is show me. Show me. I dare you to show me a 200whp 135wtq turbo B18Cx that runs the same times as an all motor B18C car making the same power. I dare you.
The theoretical bullshit floating around in here about why turbocharged cars "should" be faster and "would" be faster if, etc. etc. is just lame as expletive. There are 215whp EGs running NA on slicks that are in the 11's. There are no 215whp turbo EGs on slicks running those times. Period. Find one. Prove me wrong. All-motor cars of a given power level are faster in a straight-line than turbo cars at the same weight and power level.</TD></TR></TABLE>
im with you man, just reading the first post and scrolling down made me furious, i was cussing at myself, all this bullshit theorys every1 is throwing up has got me pissed, i was just hoping no1 got to them before i did while i was scrolling down, but none-the-less at least they have heard "right" theory out of all these bullshit ones, area under the curve is a great four word explaination of this thread, whoever said a turbo car wins caz of the area under the curve needs to go to the top right hand corner of this page and search on some dyno's, caz area under the curve is the weakness of dynos, and no n/a cars won't make nearly as much torque as a fi car would, so comparing a 200 whp and 135 tq na and fi cars is not comparable, and a turbo motor doesn't necessarily make power sooner, it depends on the turbo size, but either way it doesn't matter, its the fact of not when it makes power but how long and flat it can sustain that power, im just going to stop caz it doesn't even matter
All I have to say is show me. Show me. I dare you to show me a 200whp 135wtq turbo B18Cx that runs the same times as an all motor B18C car making the same power. I dare you.
The theoretical bullshit floating around in here about why turbocharged cars "should" be faster and "would" be faster if, etc. etc. is just lame as expletive. There are 215whp EGs running NA on slicks that are in the 11's. There are no 215whp turbo EGs on slicks running those times. Period. Find one. Prove me wrong. All-motor cars of a given power level are faster in a straight-line than turbo cars at the same weight and power level.</TD></TR></TABLE>
im with you man, just reading the first post and scrolling down made me furious, i was cussing at myself, all this bullshit theorys every1 is throwing up has got me pissed, i was just hoping no1 got to them before i did while i was scrolling down, but none-the-less at least they have heard "right" theory out of all these bullshit ones, area under the curve is a great four word explaination of this thread, whoever said a turbo car wins caz of the area under the curve needs to go to the top right hand corner of this page and search on some dyno's, caz area under the curve is the weakness of dynos, and no n/a cars won't make nearly as much torque as a fi car would, so comparing a 200 whp and 135 tq na and fi cars is not comparable, and a turbo motor doesn't necessarily make power sooner, it depends on the turbo size, but either way it doesn't matter, its the fact of not when it makes power but how long and flat it can sustain that power, im just going to stop caz it doesn't even matter