THSCC Forums

I agree with you there, those that praise VTEC or VVTI yet bash turbo lag seem to be confused to me...

They're a lot better when you have two of them...

_________________
Karl S.
2014 Baby, 2014 House, 2013 Ford Focus ST, 2013 BMW 328i, 1994 Mercedes E320
(Insert passive aggressive signature line here)

The way I was looking at it was trying to extract higher horsepower than stock from the same block, the N/A engine in stock form being the baseline.

To increase power without boost, you would have to spin the motor quicker or make it pump more air. Some of the things associated with that I can think of would likely affect streetability and smog (i.e. cams or really opening up the ports on a rotary engine). High rpms also tend to be deemed as unstreetable and can result in a powerband not very friendly for street driving. The closer to the bleeding edge also tends to make the motors less durable (as would running excessive levels of boost in super/turbocharged motors).

Different strokes for different folks, I suppose. As much as I like turbos, one of these days, I'd love to have a high-revving (like 10,000 rpm+) N/A motor in a four-wheeled vehicle, just for kicks.

My other favorite line:
It can be fast, cheap or reliable. Pick two.

I find that the "triangle" philosophy can be applied at a more microscopic level in choices of vehicle or component construction. Something has to "give" - you can't have your cake and eat it too...if you do, it's really expensive cake.

Regards,
--Ashraf

the eternal super versus turbo argument. . .

I think the point that is missed is that this is not a simple supercharger/turbocharger debate, its what is appropriate for the mini.

Characteristics of the mini that I think are pertinent here:

A. quirky, so supercharger whien is a benefit, not a problem
B. Short wheelbase, LSD means it can actually put the instant on torque of the supercharger down, unlike many FWD cars where lag is indeed a "benefit"

Refinement is not something that is key, the mini is a little "punk", and the supercharger helps reinforce that attitude more so than a turbo IMO.

I generally prefer turbos for their higher efficiency, lag rarely shows up as a huge problem except on the tightest of courses (like autocross!), but superchargers (namely, roots type chargers) are the best when it comes to response, and thats key in the mini and in exagerating that "small" feeling.

_________________
2012 MX-5 Sport SUV

It really is a matter of personal preference, but I too prefer the throttle response of a S/C vs a Turbo. Over the years I have owned 3 Turbos and 2 s/c cars. The S/C ones juts repsonded better at the low RPM range when needed. I realize that you can be in a better RPM range with a quick shift, but I liked the idea I didn't always need to do that. I also really like the way that the vehicles responded in low speed areas. Having the power in the lower bands just seems to be more usable.

Granted The turbo cars were from the 80s and 90's, but even the WRX I drove for a week still had that lag anywhere under 3K.

_________________
Marty Howard
2011 NASA SE Factory Five Challenge Champion
Track Events Logistics Coordinator - TZC/THSCC
2007 Factory Five Challenge Car.
http://www.mh-motorsports.com

plus given that the mini actually isn't all that light anymore (weighs almost TWICE as much as an original mini 1210kg as opposed to 617kg for the original Morris), it needs all the help it can get in amplifying its "smallness", and this includes instantaneous throttle response IMO. It is certainly small in outer dimensions, but its now solid build quality has made it quite the porker for its size. The mini was never about being a drag monster, leave that for the SRT-4's of the world, this car is about being small, light on its feet, and "quick".

_________________
2012 MX-5 Sport SUV