xplain to me why is it that a 400 whp boosted car will run low 11's, and a 280 ish allmotor car will run mid to low 11's too ? wtf ?

sorry for this silly question I just need to know

 

Traction, powerband, gearing and at times, weight as well. Under most circumstances, the turbo car with more mph but the same et.

 

hm... also interested in answer

 

The powerband and how it's put down is the main reason.With NA cars the power is always there(when in the band), No waiting for a turbo to spool and in turn waiting for the tires to hook again once it does.

 

and n/a cars are usually somewhat lighter and have less traction issues

 

my trubo hatch with 300whp ran 12.4 at 113 on slicks. Most of it was spining til the 8th. 1/8 mile pass were uselly 10s and the rest of the pass was around 2sec??? thats f-n fast. My 60s were always slow, turbos make power but dont hook till half way down the track


Modified by kamui at 2:20 PM 10/7/2006

 

yup traction is key factor n power to weight ratio

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JDMisGOOD &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The powerband and how it's put down is the main reason.With NA cars the power is always there(when in the band), No waiting for a turbo to spool and in turn waiting for the tires to hook again once it does.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

I launch with boost off my 2-step and I never lose boost when I shift, same goes for a lot of turbo guys. Don't judge dude X who slaps some undersized slicks on his 2900 pound EK with 400 WHP who runs some 11's spinning like a bitch his first time out and say "oh, all 400 WHP turbo cars run 11's".

Buddy of mine has an EG hatch that used to be an all motor car, now has a turbo motor in it. Ultra-basic sleeved 81.5mm B16 with a T3/T67 HO, stock B16 trans, skunk2? drag coilovers, runs with 24.5" slicks, a tilton dual disc clutch, and actually knows how to drive. At 440 WHP it runs consistent 10.7's @ 133. That's with a supposed lag master turbo so he should be falling out of boost on every shift, pulling 1.84 60 foots.

I found around here most people tend to focus in on making as absolutely much power as possible with their turbo motors, and hoping the chassis sorts itself out, or hit their ET goals by plowing through with a ton of MPH, while the all-motor guys who are decidedly limited on power start to rip out weight, and do lots of suspension tweaking.

 

i'm not sure that ur #'s are exactly accurate but like JDMisGOOD said, it's about the powerband and how it's put down. An NA car comes out the hole harder almost always and runs the 1 an 2 much better as well. It's flat torque curve and effective torque through the gears is how it does it so well. if ur debating turbo vs. na, keep in mind the 1-2 is pretty much just to 330', and that's when the turbo car stretches it's legs.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DIRep972 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I launch with boost off my 2-step and I never lose boost when I shift, same goes for a lot of turbo guys. Don't judge dude X who slaps some undersized slicks on his 2900 pound EK with 400 WHP who runs some 11's spinning like a bitch his first time out and say "oh, all 400 WHP turbo cars run 11's". </TD></TR></TABLE>

agreed, if you have a 2500lb or so car with 400whp and not in the 10's or bottom 11's, something is wrong... learn to drive

a 280whp car should not run the same times as the 400whp car of similar weights

the answer to your question is easy.... if they are runnign the same 1/4 mile times, then the 280whp car is lighter and setup better for the launch. gearing and tires with a good driver sets that up. they launch like hell and 60 foot really well.

its not necessarily the power band when comparing a lower powered car to a higher powered car. its gearing and weight.

now what would be interesting is a 300whp n/a car vs turbo 300whp of the same weight...with just gearing being different. that be a good race and a good bench racing debate

 

allmotor cars are lighter

 

All the reasons why N/A cars with less hp often run similar times to more powerful FI cars have been discussed.

However, I think an important reason is anyone serious enough to build 280whp n/a car in the honda realm is going to do everything else to the same extreme, suspension, light weight parts, proper slicks, gearing, etc.; whereas most guys with 400+whp through FI just aren't as focused because it's easier just to add power to get better results. This is a general statement, but fairly accurate.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sahtt &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">However, I think an important reason is anyone serious enough to build 280whp n/a car in the honda realm is going to do everything else to the same extreme, suspension, light weight parts, proper slicks, gearing, etc.; whereas most guys with 400+whp through FI just aren't as focused because it's easier just to add power to get better results. This is a general statement, but fairly accurate.</TD></TR></TABLE>

in bold.

 

somewhat true.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sahtt &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
However, I think an important reason is anyone serious enough to build 280whp n/a car in the honda realm is going to do everything else to the same extreme, suspension, light weight parts, proper slicks, gearing, etc.; whereas most guys with 400+whp through FI just aren't as focused because it's easier just to add power to get better results. This is a general statement, but fairly accurate.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I agree with this guy. I think it's both how the power band is, and what the NA guys do to make their car faster. FI guys just always want to turn up the boost more instead of concentrating on being a better driver.

 

Traction versus weight. Turbo has more traction problems everyone sumed it up perfect. 90 crx dx H-22 build head, hondata stock bottom end, race gas 1700lbs 12.8 @ 105 1.78 60 ft on 22x8x13 M&Hs versus 92 vx hatch full interior B16Sir 2 Turboed 8 psi all stock, hondata street tuned, 90 octane, 1.84 60 ft on 20x8x14 MT ran a 12.98 @ 108 first pass. Look at mph and all other factors.

 

I agree with everyone here; all motor guys are more concerned with weight, whereas turbo guys just turn up the boost to compensate for the weight.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by vxhatched &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Traction versus weight. Turbo has more traction problems everyone sumed it up perfect. 90 crx dx H-22 build head, hondata stock bottom end, race gas 1700lbs 12.8 @ 105 1.78 60 ft on 22x8x13 M&Hs versus 92 vx hatch full interior B16Sir 2 Turboed 8 psi all stock, hondata street tuned, 90 octane, 1.84 60 ft on 20x8x14 MT ran a 12.98 @ 108 first pass. Look at mph and all other factors.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Well... in that example, to be fair there is atleast a 350-400 lb difference between cars.... and you said that turbo car was it's first pass. But yes, it illustrates the traction issues nicely.

 

traction, gearing...

 

I'm a N/A guy myself, so I can only speak to my own experience. I remember when I was out practicing launching on back roads and behind Best Buy. If I messed up, I was like "okay, do it again", thought of what I did wrong and tried to correct it. "Again...Again...Again...Again...Again". I was and still am a very determined racer. If i get a bad time, I don't blame my car I look at what I did wrong and how I can correct it next time. It's like the saying goes "It's a poor carpenter who blames his tools." Yes, all motor guys are crazy. I stripped out the back of my 2001 Honda Prelude

I'm sure turbo guys are just as passionate as us N/A guys. It's probaby easier for us N/A guys, because we can't turn up the boost, that leaves just one thing...our driving. Some of you might be following my thread, https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1652183 , I am determined to hit a 13.9 with 188whp. I know I can do it, I won't up my power until I do. to everyone who does it for the love of the sport N/A and Turbo alike.
-Greg Pantelides

 

okay, so all those people saying that n/a cars are lighter, okay so if i take 2 cars exactly the same CARS, no weight reduction and i slap a turbo on it and thats the only thing really different, okay i doubt adding a turbo is gonna add that much weight . anyway, to me it sounds like traction issues and launch issues, as well as tuning issues. Tune the car, get some practice on ur launch, and get some tires.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by precisionelite &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's probaby easier for us N/A guys, because we can't turn up the boost, that leaves just one thing...our driving. Some of you might be following my thread, https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1652183 , I am determined to hit a 13.9 with 188whp. I know I can do it, I won't up my power until I do. to everyone who does it for the love of the sport N/A and Turbo alike.
-Greg Pantelides </TD></TR></TABLE>


I made sure I hit my 13 with just my stock GSR in my hatch. Street tired and on slicks I bagged it. But now I want a turbo... I'd rather run low 12's - high 11s.

 

also a lot of turbo guys i know always want to run from a roll where you won't catch many all motor guys going from a roll just because starting in boost just isnt fair.

also i think that all motor set-ups are usually more reliable than boost