Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI ( turbo)
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,770
Likes: 0
From: md, us
Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI ( turbo)
Taken from another thread I think this will be a good starting point to have a debate/discussion
On a "REAL" Turbo and or NA engine you can spend upwards of 8-15K give or take on a 4cyl. Ok now match your 1,300.00 HYtech or SMSP header price to a fullrace manifold We will be generous and say 1,300 ok so were even (but that's excludes DP). Now add a "real" turbo BAMM! 900 - 1800.
Most of the things you will purchase for NA you will purchase for Boost. But it can cost more for boost setups IE bigger injectors or exhaust (yes even the guys running 3 inch for NA its going to cost more for a 4inch aluminum exhaust and DP).
EMS can break out to be the same. But... factor in A "real" boost controller 250- 1400. Which still excludes a good BOV and Wg combo 450 -1700 ( some people run twin Wg's) So keep in mind the tial 60mm WG price X2 and 50MM BOV price DT. There are still alot of things left out this is just the to get the ball rolling
This will be the starting point. Hopefully this will bring new light and true to some "myths" and maybe a few people can learn a few things from other even myself. With that being said. Now lets get ready to rumble....
On a "REAL" Turbo and or NA engine you can spend upwards of 8-15K give or take on a 4cyl. Ok now match your 1,300.00 HYtech or SMSP header price to a fullrace manifold We will be generous and say 1,300 ok so were even (but that's excludes DP). Now add a "real" turbo BAMM! 900 - 1800.
Most of the things you will purchase for NA you will purchase for Boost. But it can cost more for boost setups IE bigger injectors or exhaust (yes even the guys running 3 inch for NA its going to cost more for a 4inch aluminum exhaust and DP).
EMS can break out to be the same. But... factor in A "real" boost controller 250- 1400. Which still excludes a good BOV and Wg combo 450 -1700 ( some people run twin Wg's) So keep in mind the tial 60mm WG price X2 and 50MM BOV price DT. There are still alot of things left out this is just the to get the ball rolling
This will be the starting point. Hopefully this will bring new light and true to some "myths" and maybe a few people can learn a few things from other even myself. With that being said. Now lets get ready to rumble....
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,050
Likes: 3
I'll add more later, but in your experience, how often are you breaking things due to the added stress of the ridiculous amount of torque/hp you're making because you're turboed?
There is something to be said for the simplicity of an NA engine, though in order to be competitive, I think that the work done on the NA engine must be of higher quality than for the boosted engine. Turning a **** and tuning is much easier than porting a head.
Good thread
There is something to be said for the simplicity of an NA engine, though in order to be competitive, I think that the work done on the NA engine must be of higher quality than for the boosted engine. Turning a **** and tuning is much easier than porting a head.
Good thread
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,770
Likes: 0
From: md, us
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (Acidcrakker)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Acidcrakker »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I know very little about both. I believe N/A is more money.
This thread is a giant E-Fight waiting to happen</TD></TR></TABLE>
Why do you believe it will cost more post your thoughts so we have a discussion not just and "i think" with no back up. FYI I am NOT picking on you. For a change I want to have a thread with actual back information to whats being posted instead of the usual bandwagon replies with no backing
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mgags7 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I'll add more later, but in your experience, how often are you breaking things due to the added stress of the ridiculous amount of torque/hp you're making because you're turboed?
There is something to be said for the simplicity of an NA engine, though in order to be competitive, I think that the work done on the NA engine must be of higher quality than for the boosted engine. Turning a **** and tuning is much easier than porting a head.
Good thread </TD></TR></TABLE>
To the first part of your question I think breakage is going to happen with any build and cannot be avoided. But alot of it is driver I have never broken an Axel yet and I am still on my OEM axle's with countless 1.6 60foots for example
The other part of your comment. The same parts you use in a N/A motor your can/will use in a "REAL" turbo build. Lightweigth rods vs Heavy strong boost rods cost around the same so does the pistons. So... the blocks are prettymuch identical but... in some cases you can spend way more money on sleeving due to higher boost levels but then again adding a deck can be costly also so there about even as far as the block goes IMO
Now on to the head. The same money can be spent threw vavletrain including rocker assembly cams ect. Also porting with boost applications as well as N/A. The key with boost is make more power on less boost but that's another subject.
This thread is a giant E-Fight waiting to happen</TD></TR></TABLE>
Why do you believe it will cost more post your thoughts so we have a discussion not just and "i think" with no back up. FYI I am NOT picking on you. For a change I want to have a thread with actual back information to whats being posted instead of the usual bandwagon replies with no backing
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mgags7 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I'll add more later, but in your experience, how often are you breaking things due to the added stress of the ridiculous amount of torque/hp you're making because you're turboed?
There is something to be said for the simplicity of an NA engine, though in order to be competitive, I think that the work done on the NA engine must be of higher quality than for the boosted engine. Turning a **** and tuning is much easier than porting a head.
Good thread </TD></TR></TABLE>
To the first part of your question I think breakage is going to happen with any build and cannot be avoided. But alot of it is driver I have never broken an Axel yet and I am still on my OEM axle's with countless 1.6 60foots for example
The other part of your comment. The same parts you use in a N/A motor your can/will use in a "REAL" turbo build. Lightweigth rods vs Heavy strong boost rods cost around the same so does the pistons. So... the blocks are prettymuch identical but... in some cases you can spend way more money on sleeving due to higher boost levels but then again adding a deck can be costly also so there about even as far as the block goes IMO
Now on to the head. The same money can be spent threw vavletrain including rocker assembly cams ect. Also porting with boost applications as well as N/A. The key with boost is make more power on less boost but that's another subject.
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
From: handing you your ass
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (md23vtec)
Are you talking about comparing per hp goal or track time goal, longevity or what? It's king of hard to compare apples and oranges without some kind of common goal.
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,770
Likes: 0
From: md, us
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (gogunkergorilla)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by gogunkergorilla »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Are you talking about comparing per hp goal or track time goal, longevity or what? It's king of hard to compare apples and oranges without some kind of common goal.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Well I guess we will go to the extream and say pure WHP. Track time goal will have way to many variables from driver to weight of the car ect. This is prettymuch just a topic on the "engine output" and the all the parts needed to do so and going price vs price. I have built both and IMO the cost of FI towers over an NA build. Even with Randy's 277 WHP H motor 3 years ago
Well I guess we will go to the extream and say pure WHP. Track time goal will have way to many variables from driver to weight of the car ect. This is prettymuch just a topic on the "engine output" and the all the parts needed to do so and going price vs price. I have built both and IMO the cost of FI towers over an NA build. Even with Randy's 277 WHP H motor 3 years ago
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 0
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (gogunkergorilla)
Well from what I understand a good turbo set-up can run upwards of 3-4 k. Its not worth all the hassle IMO.
I like the idea of N/A motor. Just because N/A is supposed to last longer and will put less strain on a motor than FI. N/A is something that not everyone can do.
Its not like you can roll into a shop and say I want an N/A motor for my car. Well you can, but everything has to be down to the T perfected. Were as you walkinto a shop and say you ''I want a turbo'' and you pick out the size turbo you want and bam, your a little fanniboy with a T3 turbo.
N/A is something more that one can appreicate. Like an art form. It takes alotta skill and reaserch to do it. Spend x ammount of dollars on one set of pistons, then building, porting, honeing, and tuning around that set-up.
For turbos you can slap that bitch on there and call it day. Crank up the boost and watch your motor blow.
Its all my opinon here, and if it sounds like Im talking out my *** about some of this stuff, its really cause I am.
On the poll I first opted for the n/a build. But have changedmy mind for the ''I dont care I just like to read posts'' Option.
I like the idea of N/A motor. Just because N/A is supposed to last longer and will put less strain on a motor than FI. N/A is something that not everyone can do.
Its not like you can roll into a shop and say I want an N/A motor for my car. Well you can, but everything has to be down to the T perfected. Were as you walkinto a shop and say you ''I want a turbo'' and you pick out the size turbo you want and bam, your a little fanniboy with a T3 turbo.
N/A is something more that one can appreicate. Like an art form. It takes alotta skill and reaserch to do it. Spend x ammount of dollars on one set of pistons, then building, porting, honeing, and tuning around that set-up.
For turbos you can slap that bitch on there and call it day. Crank up the boost and watch your motor blow.
Its all my opinon here, and if it sounds like Im talking out my *** about some of this stuff, its really cause I am.
On the poll I first opted for the n/a build. But have changedmy mind for the ''I dont care I just like to read posts'' Option.
Trending Topics
most hood white kid
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,505
Likes: 0
From: Nashville
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (md23vtec)
honestly, I believe NA costs more because of some of the minor things that can add up. You can make more power with your turbo on there, without any bottom end work or head work, but to make the SAME power, you would have to raise the compression and do some sort of head work, which we know by all means is not cheap. Just my .02
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,770
Likes: 0
From: md, us
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (.BigSexy)
Originally Posted by Acidcrakker
Well from what I understand a good turbo set-up can run upwards of 3-4 k. Its not worth all the hassle IMO.
So with that being said that already crushes your 3-4 K theory this doesn't even include most of the parts you need just some of the more common money costing parts. Excludes are 3 - 5 bar map sensor AN fittings, turbo lines, boost controller, Possibly ignition setup and the list goes on and on.
Originally Posted by Acidcrakker
I like the idea of N/A motor. Just because N/A is supposed to last longer and will put less strain on a motor than FI. N/A is something that not everyone can do.
P.S. you can drive a SFWD 750 plus WHP on c16 prettymuch as far as you want cruise on the highway 80 MPH all day long with a properly setup car with no issues. I wonder how many 15:1.1 N/A motors can do the same thing and last
Originally Posted by Acidcrakker
Its not like you can roll into a shop and say I want an N/A motor for my car. Well you can, but everything has to be down to the T perfected. Were as you walkinto a shop and say you ''I want a turbo'' and you pick out the size turbo you want and bam, your a little fanniboy with a T3 turbo.
N/A is something more that one can appreicate. Like an art form. It takes alotta skill and reaserch to do it. Spend x ammount of dollars on one set of pistons, then building, porting, honeing, and tuning around that set-up.
For turbos you can slap that bitch on there and call it day. Crank up the boost and watch your motor blow.
I wont even reply to this comment I'll just say wow
Originally Posted by Acidcrakker
Its all my opinon here, and if it sounds like Im talking out my *** about some of this stuff, its really cause I am.
On the poll I first opted for the n/a build. But have changedmy mind for the ''I dont care I just like to read posts'' Option.
On the poll I first opted for the n/a build. But have changedmy mind for the ''I dont care I just like to read posts'' Option.
Originally Posted by .BigSexy
honestly, I believe NA costs more because of some of the minor things that can add up. You can make more power with your turbo on there, without any bottom end work or head work, but to make the SAME power, you would have to raise the compression and do some sort of head work, which we know by all means is not cheap. Just my .02
P.S. the cost of a say Endyn all out NA port job and FI port is... ready for this the SAME cost
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
From: handing you your ass
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (md23vtec)
Well turbo and NA would have roughly opposite cost curves if you were to plot them out for whp goals. The initial costs for going turbo are going to be rather high even for a low whp goal just because you need a lot of parts/labor/tuning all at once. I'd say up until the low to mid 200whp, or to the point where pistons and headwork are required for more power out of NA it is cheaper to build NA than turbo. Any whp goal within the NA range though is achievable with a turbo using stock block, head and cams. Now NA with nitrous may be a slightly different story.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 0
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (md23vtec)
Lol, told ya IDK MUCH about this just like the topic.
Real quick, You can do a turbo for 3-4 grand on a full set up. This is for regular people. After all we arent the Great MDh23vtec with the 10 second prelude here.
I almost did the turbo last year, but decieded to do a swap instead.
I like the Idea of an N/a build. Id spend more money on a n/a build than a FI build
Real quick, You can do a turbo for 3-4 grand on a full set up. This is for regular people. After all we arent the Great MDh23vtec with the 10 second prelude here.
I almost did the turbo last year, but decieded to do a swap instead.
I like the Idea of an N/a build. Id spend more money on a n/a build than a FI build
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,770
Likes: 0
From: md, us
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (gogunkergorilla)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by gogunkergorilla »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well turbo and NA would have roughly opposite cost curves if you were to plot them out for whp goals. The initial costs for going turbo are going to be rather high even for a low whp goal just because you need a lot of parts/labor/tuning all at once. I'd say up until the low to mid 200whp, or to the point where pistons and headwork is required for more power out of NA it is cheaper to build NA than turbo. Any whp goal within the NA range though is achievable with a turbo using stock block, head and cams. Now NA with nitrous may be a slightly different story.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Hmm interesting. I think I know what your saying but then again maybe not. Care to go into more detail please?
P.s. NA with N20 is not "NA"
but it sure does kick ***
Hmm interesting. I think I know what your saying but then again maybe not. Care to go into more detail please?
P.s. NA with N20 is not "NA"
but it sure does kick ***
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,770
Likes: 0
From: md, us
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (Acidcrakker)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Acidcrakker »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Lol, told ya IDK MUCH about this just like the topic.
Real quick, You can do a turbo for 3-4 grand on a full set up. This is for regular people. After all we arent the Great <U>MDh23vtec</U> with the 10 second prelude here.
I almost did the turbo last year, but decieded to do a swap instead.
I like the Idea of an N/a build. Id spend more money on a n/a build than a FI build</TD></TR></TABLE>
1st whats your Idea of "FULL setup"? Also I am not telling you where to spend your money everyone has there own preference on what's better for them. This thread is to show the cost of turbo vs NA.
2nd please don't talk like i am saying I am better then anyone because you don't know me personally. I help out so many people with the setup's NA, N20, and FI on this forum alone it's not even funny.
3rd maybe your not talking about me I never heard of MDh23vtec
Real quick, You can do a turbo for 3-4 grand on a full set up. This is for regular people. After all we arent the Great <U>MDh23vtec</U> with the 10 second prelude here.
I almost did the turbo last year, but decieded to do a swap instead.
I like the Idea of an N/a build. Id spend more money on a n/a build than a FI build</TD></TR></TABLE>
1st whats your Idea of "FULL setup"? Also I am not telling you where to spend your money everyone has there own preference on what's better for them. This thread is to show the cost of turbo vs NA.
2nd please don't talk like i am saying I am better then anyone because you don't know me personally. I help out so many people with the setup's NA, N20, and FI on this forum alone it's not even funny.
3rd maybe your not talking about me I never heard of MDh23vtec
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,370
Likes: 1
From: Kitty Hawk, NC, 27949
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (gogunkergorilla)
Okay i think that we can come to a conclusion that building a "real" FI motor and a "real" All-Motor motor cost about the same because everything you upgrade in a all motor engine you do the same to the FI motor just different specs.(compression ratio, rods,headgaskets somtimes)
Then when it comes to all the bolt ons to these 2 motors i have to same that turbo is way more expencive. I have built a few all-motor engines....they are fun and everything but its not worth the money in my opinion. Turbo gets you more power for your money. I am now in the process of starting a turbo motor for my prelude its going to cost 12-15grand period. Thing of the huge fuel upgrades needed for FI, dual walbros, inline fuel pumps 1000cc or 1600cc injectors.
this is a good thread
Then when it comes to all the bolt ons to these 2 motors i have to same that turbo is way more expencive. I have built a few all-motor engines....they are fun and everything but its not worth the money in my opinion. Turbo gets you more power for your money. I am now in the process of starting a turbo motor for my prelude its going to cost 12-15grand period. Thing of the huge fuel upgrades needed for FI, dual walbros, inline fuel pumps 1000cc or 1600cc injectors.
this is a good thread
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (md23vtec)
For the money I have spent on my turbo setup on stock block, I could have had a built n/a h22. Boost is definitely more expensive... and definitely worth it.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hondalude »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Okay i think that we can come to a conclusion that building a "real" FI motor and a "real" All-Motor motor cost about the same because everything you upgrade in a all motor engine you do the same to the FI motor just different specs.(compression ratio, rods,headgaskets somtimes)
Then when it comes to all the bolt ons to these 2 motors i have to same that turbo is way more expencive. I have built a few all-motor engines....they are fun and everything but its not worth the money in my opinion. Turbo gets you more power for your money. I am now in the process of starting a turbo motor for my prelude its going to cost 12-15grand period. Thing of the huge fuel upgrades needed for FI, dual walbros, inline fuel pumps 1000cc or 1600cc injectors.
this is a good thread
</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hondalude »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Okay i think that we can come to a conclusion that building a "real" FI motor and a "real" All-Motor motor cost about the same because everything you upgrade in a all motor engine you do the same to the FI motor just different specs.(compression ratio, rods,headgaskets somtimes)
Then when it comes to all the bolt ons to these 2 motors i have to same that turbo is way more expencive. I have built a few all-motor engines....they are fun and everything but its not worth the money in my opinion. Turbo gets you more power for your money. I am now in the process of starting a turbo motor for my prelude its going to cost 12-15grand period. Thing of the huge fuel upgrades needed for FI, dual walbros, inline fuel pumps 1000cc or 1600cc injectors.
this is a good thread
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,770
Likes: 0
From: md, us
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (92hondalude)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hondalude »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Okay i think that we can come to a conclusion that building a "real" FI motor and a "real" All-Motor motor cost about the same because everything you upgrade in a all motor engine you do the same to the FI motor just different specs.(compression ratio, rods,headgaskets somtimes)
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I think you put what I was saying in a nutshell great post
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hondalude »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> Then when it comes to all the bolt ons to these 2 motors i have to same that turbo is way more expencive. I have built a few all-motor engines....they are fun and everything but its not worth the money in my opinion. Turbo gets you more power for your money. I am now in the process of starting a turbo motor for my prelude its going to cost 12-15grand period. Thing of the huge fuel upgrades needed for FI, dual walbros, inline fuel pumps 1000cc or 1600cc injectors.
this is a good thread
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I wouldn't say its a waste of money it's all personal preference. I have had and still have kick *** NA/N20 setups. It's all in what your going for
P.S. a single walbro 255 is good for roughly 600 whp give or take with stock lines and 1000cc injectors keep that in mind with your setup
. Goodluck
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I think you put what I was saying in a nutshell great post
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hondalude »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> Then when it comes to all the bolt ons to these 2 motors i have to same that turbo is way more expencive. I have built a few all-motor engines....they are fun and everything but its not worth the money in my opinion. Turbo gets you more power for your money. I am now in the process of starting a turbo motor for my prelude its going to cost 12-15grand period. Thing of the huge fuel upgrades needed for FI, dual walbros, inline fuel pumps 1000cc or 1600cc injectors.
this is a good thread
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I wouldn't say its a waste of money it's all personal preference. I have had and still have kick *** NA/N20 setups. It's all in what your going for
P.S. a single walbro 255 is good for roughly 600 whp give or take with stock lines and 1000cc injectors keep that in mind with your setup
. Goodluck
most hood white kid
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,505
Likes: 0
From: Nashville
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (md23vtec)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by md23vtec »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
little things? There are so many "little things" that add up on a turbo build its not funny. And again the same work put into a NA motor can/will be done on a FI motor so you guys are going to have to come up with something better then that.
P.S. the cost of a say Endyn all out NA port job and FI port is... ready for this the SAME cost </TD></TR></TABLE>
you missed my point...
say this, you put roughly 3 grand into a bolt on turbo kit/piece together, whatever it may be. And that kit nets you 330whp. Now this is ALL hypothetical. To get 330 whp out of that SAME motor going N/A, it WILL cost more than 3000. You will spend a 1/3 of that 3 grand on a header, and that'll get you what, 10-12 whp? And I never said the port job for an N/a and an FI application were different. Go back, re-read my post and see if you can actually comprehend what I was trying to say.
now remember, all of this is hypothetical.
little things? There are so many "little things" that add up on a turbo build its not funny. And again the same work put into a NA motor can/will be done on a FI motor so you guys are going to have to come up with something better then that.
P.S. the cost of a say Endyn all out NA port job and FI port is... ready for this the SAME cost
</TD></TR></TABLE>you missed my point...
say this, you put roughly 3 grand into a bolt on turbo kit/piece together, whatever it may be. And that kit nets you 330whp. Now this is ALL hypothetical. To get 330 whp out of that SAME motor going N/A, it WILL cost more than 3000. You will spend a 1/3 of that 3 grand on a header, and that'll get you what, 10-12 whp? And I never said the port job for an N/a and an FI application were different. Go back, re-read my post and see if you can actually comprehend what I was trying to say.
now remember, all of this is hypothetical.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,370
Likes: 1
From: Kitty Hawk, NC, 27949
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (ProjectBB6)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ProjectBB6 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">For the money I have spent on my turbo setup on stock block, I could have had a built n/a h22. Boost is definitely more expensive... and definitely worth it.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
yes and you probalby have the same top power then any all motor h22 would have if not more.
</TD></TR></TABLE>yes and you probalby have the same top power then any all motor h22 would have if not more.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,370
Likes: 1
From: Kitty Hawk, NC, 27949
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (92hondalude)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by md23vtec »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I think you put what I was saying in a nutshell great post
I wouldn't say its a waste of money it's all personal preference. I have had and still have kick *** NA/N20 setups. It's all in what your going for
P.S. a single walbro 255 is good for roughly 600 whp give or take with stock lines and 1000cc injectors keep that in mind with your setup . Goodluck </TD></TR></TABLE>
But if i only had 600hp i wouldnt be able to take on you.
Thanks man.
I love this topic!
I think you put what I was saying in a nutshell great post
I wouldn't say its a waste of money it's all personal preference. I have had and still have kick *** NA/N20 setups. It's all in what your going for
P.S. a single walbro 255 is good for roughly 600 whp give or take with stock lines and 1000cc injectors keep that in mind with your setup . Goodluck </TD></TR></TABLE>
But if i only had 600hp i wouldnt be able to take on you.
Thanks man.
I love this topic!
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,770
Likes: 0
From: md, us
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (.BigSexy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .BigSexy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
you missed my point...
say this, you put roughly 3 grand into a bolt on turbo kit/piece together, whatever it may be. And that kit nets you 330whp. Now this is ALL hypothetical. To get 330 whp out of that SAME motor going N/A, it WILL cost more than 3000. You will spend a 1/3 of that 3 grand on a header, and that'll get you what, 10-12 whp? And I never said the port job for an N/a and an FI application were different. Go back, re-read my post and see if you can actually comprehend what I was trying to say.
now remember, all of this is hypothetical. </TD></TR></TABLE>
No you missed the point.... re-read the whole thread!!!!! To build the motor in both cars hypothetically speaking is going to cost roughly the same. The addition of all the turbo parts is whats the killer. Not once did I say stock motor FI vs Built motor NA.
you missed my point...
say this, you put roughly 3 grand into a bolt on turbo kit/piece together, whatever it may be. And that kit nets you 330whp. Now this is ALL hypothetical. To get 330 whp out of that SAME motor going N/A, it WILL cost more than 3000. You will spend a 1/3 of that 3 grand on a header, and that'll get you what, 10-12 whp? And I never said the port job for an N/a and an FI application were different. Go back, re-read my post and see if you can actually comprehend what I was trying to say.
now remember, all of this is hypothetical. </TD></TR></TABLE>
No you missed the point.... re-read the whole thread!!!!! To build the motor in both cars hypothetically speaking is going to cost roughly the same. The addition of all the turbo parts is whats the killer. Not once did I say stock motor FI vs Built motor NA.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 0
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (md23vtec)
I certainly mean no offense towards you. Im just saying that 98 percent of the people who frequent the Honda Boards online do not have as much knowledge as someone like yourself.
If Im not mistaken you are the one with the ten second prelude right?
For the 98 percent of those people out there (myself included) Id Only spend mabey 4 grand on FI parts. But Id be willing to spend double that for a N/a build that outputs the same ammount of power.
Can I list all the part prices for you? Probally not.
Am I willing to bet that the awnser to the orignal question can go either way with enough reaserch? Yes
If Im not mistaken you are the one with the ten second prelude right?
For the 98 percent of those people out there (myself included) Id Only spend mabey 4 grand on FI parts. But Id be willing to spend double that for a N/a build that outputs the same ammount of power.
Can I list all the part prices for you? Probally not.
Am I willing to bet that the awnser to the orignal question can go either way with enough reaserch? Yes
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,370
Likes: 1
From: Kitty Hawk, NC, 27949
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (Acidcrakker)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Acidcrakker »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I certainly mean no offense towards you. Im just saying that 98 percent of the people who frequent the Honda Boards online do not have as much knowledge as someone like yourself.
If Im not mistaken you are the one with the ten second prelude right?
For the 98 percent of those people out there (myself included) Id Only spend mabey 4 grand on FI parts. But Id be willing to spend double that for a N/a build that outputs the same ammount of power.
Can I list all the part prices for you? Probally not.
Am I willing to bet that the awnser to the orignal question can go either way with enough reaserch? Yes</TD></TR></TABLE>
I see where you are comming from but.....
Why would you want to do that when you could spend that 8 grand on a motor and turbo setup with 2 times the power of your 8k all motor?
Maybe im just to much of a power freak....
If Im not mistaken you are the one with the ten second prelude right?
For the 98 percent of those people out there (myself included) Id Only spend mabey 4 grand on FI parts. But Id be willing to spend double that for a N/a build that outputs the same ammount of power.
Can I list all the part prices for you? Probally not.
Am I willing to bet that the awnser to the orignal question can go either way with enough reaserch? Yes</TD></TR></TABLE>
I see where you are comming from but.....
Why would you want to do that when you could spend that 8 grand on a motor and turbo setup with 2 times the power of your 8k all motor?
Maybe im just to much of a power freak....
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
From: handing you your ass
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (md23vtec)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by md23vtec »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Hmm interesting. I think I know what your saying but then again maybe not. Care to go into more detail please?
P.s. NA with N20 is not "NA" but it sure does kick *** </TD></TR></TABLE>
What did you think I meant? At around the mid 200whp range, NA gets more expensive. To get the amount of air needed for that much power you'll start to need high rpms, big cams, high compression, more displacement. Then you need a high rpm intake manifold, valves, springs etc. Your now looking a spending $1000's for quality work and parts that will make that kind of power. At that point a $400 Garrett t3/t4 (band new) and a $300 log capable of well over 300whp looks more economical.
Hmm interesting. I think I know what your saying but then again maybe not. Care to go into more detail please?
P.s. NA with N20 is not "NA"
but it sure does kick *** </TD></TR></TABLE>What did you think I meant? At around the mid 200whp range, NA gets more expensive. To get the amount of air needed for that much power you'll start to need high rpms, big cams, high compression, more displacement. Then you need a high rpm intake manifold, valves, springs etc. Your now looking a spending $1000's for quality work and parts that will make that kind of power. At that point a $400 Garrett t3/t4 (band new) and a $300 log capable of well over 300whp looks more economical.
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,770
Likes: 0
From: md, us
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (92hondalude)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hondalude »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
yes and you probalby have the same top power then any all motor h22 would have if not more.</TD></TR></TABLE>
With his personal car I'll say don't know about all that. 277 WHP NA H22 was pretty damn fast and knowing what we know now vs 3 years ago I am sure more power can be attained
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hondalude »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
But if i only had 600hp i wouldnt be able to take on you.
Thanks man.
I love this topic!</TD></TR></TABLE>
Whp isn't everything it's in the setup and getting everything to work together as well and knowing the car. But.. if you plan on taking out Steve or myself then yes you will need big hp. Look into two bosch 044's or a weldom pump. The thing I don't like about the twin walbros intank is the stock fuel lines can only flow so much.
I think the prelude has been slow lately and this is a good thread to "spice" things up. Also thanks to BigSexy and the others for views and having a civil debate which is all good fun and learning I hope it stays somewhat on track
yes and you probalby have the same top power then any all motor h22 would have if not more.</TD></TR></TABLE>
With his personal car I'll say don't know about all that. 277 WHP NA H22 was pretty damn fast and knowing what we know now vs 3 years ago I am sure more power can be attained
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hondalude »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
But if i only had 600hp i wouldnt be able to take on you.
Thanks man.
I love this topic!</TD></TR></TABLE>
Whp isn't everything it's in the setup and getting everything to work together as well and knowing the car. But.. if you plan on taking out Steve or myself then yes you will need big hp. Look into two bosch 044's or a weldom pump. The thing I don't like about the twin walbros intank is the stock fuel lines can only flow so much.
I think the prelude has been slow lately and this is a good thread to "spice" things up. Also thanks to BigSexy and the others for views and having a civil debate which is all good fun and learning
I hope it stays somewhat on track
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 0
Re: Disscussion of cost and efficency NA Vs FI (92hondalude)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hondalude »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I see where you are comming from but.....
Why would you want to do that when you could spend that 8 grand on a motor and turbo setup with 2 times the power of your 8k all motor?
Maybe im just to much of a power freak.... </TD></TR></TABLE>
This how I see it. 8 grand for an engine build would be a massive motor. The a little down the road picking out a Turbo, nO2, or supercharger aplication on top off that power plant you all ready have. It blows my mind just thinking about it.
I see where you are comming from but.....
Why would you want to do that when you could spend that 8 grand on a motor and turbo setup with 2 times the power of your 8k all motor?
Maybe im just to much of a power freak....
</TD></TR></TABLE>This how I see it. 8 grand for an engine build would be a massive motor. The a little down the road picking out a Turbo, nO2, or supercharger aplication on top off that power plant you all ready have. It blows my mind just thinking about it.