What form of aspiration does your car use?

[sn00pie]

Originally posted by HexenLord
Im not a big fan of turbo. Its too limited... and expensive.
All of my cars are N/A or supercharged. You hardly EVER see a car
on turbo running under 9 seconds on the track. and their top speed is almost always under 300 mph. I recently went through a mass change in my cars. I have a top fueler that will do 4.7 secnods in the quater mile, top speed? Who the hell knows, I've had it up to 350... in the quater! (479 mph on the salt flats last summer). And a nova that will probably end up breaking a world record here soon. I drive it on the street, and Ive clocked it at 400 mph before. Can turbo do this? Maybe with about 250,000 dollars. How much did I spend? On both of my cars... hardly anything!!! I just did all of the work myself, and 99% of the parts were UNDER 3,500!

Mph? That's a typo right?!

 

[sn00pie]

Originally posted by ZeroCool85
Singapore? My Uncle lived in Singapore for 2 years, he works for Exxon, jag_man precaution do not chew gum in Singapore its a $1000 fine, no joke man!!!

Actually chewing the gum or throwing the gum on the street?

 

[Ser0119]

Originally posted by rufrgt_sn00pie2001


Mph? That's a typo right?!

The guy is full of ****. Read some of his other posts.

 

[White_GSL_SE]

Hey! Can't you guys read his sig?!? IT SAYS:

"You dont want to mess with me"

:darkside: :fdevil: :darkside:

I HATE people who can't follow directions!

 

[Hooligan]

Originally posted by HexenLord
Im not a big fan of turbo. Its too limited... and expensive.
All of my cars are N/A or supercharged. You hardly EVER see a car
on turbo running under 9 seconds on the track. and their top speed is almost always under 300 mph. I recently went through a mass change in my cars. I have a top fueler that will do 4.7 secnods in the quater mile, top speed? Who the hell knows, I've had it up to 350... in the quater! (479 mph on the salt flats last summer). And a nova that will probably end up breaking a world record here soon. I drive it on the street, and Ive clocked it at 400 mph before. Can turbo do this? Maybe with about 250,000 dollars. How much did I spend? On both of my cars... hardly anything!!! I just did all of the work myself, and 99% of the parts were UNDER 3,500!

The old adage "No replacement for displacement" is always true, but you're a bit biased and misinformed about turbocharging. Turbo's are still on the rise, technologically, and supercharging is still the weapon of choice for 3-second dragsters. And yes, if you put a deisel truck turbo on a 5.7L V8, I'm sure you can get just a bit beyond 300mph.

 

[White_GSL_SE]

The only replacemet for cubic inches is cubic cash.

But if there is no replacement for displacement really, then why is ist possible for a 1.3 liter turbo rotary to produce 600 hp? I think the old addage should be changed to: There is no replacement for displacement, except better technology.

 

[risingson77]

Rotaries are an inherently more efficient design. You're not constantly fighting inertia, so that helps. Too bad we don't yet have a fuel-efficient and somewhat more forgiving (read: not as detonation prone) rotary. Oh well, the Otto didn't get where it is today overnight.

 

[White_GSL_SE]

Ah, but it is coming. Renisis babyyyyy! And just wait until hydrogen fuel is readily available. The rotary design handles hydrogen combustion readily and efficiently.

http://www.monito.com/wankel/hydrogen.html

 

[risingson77]

Neat link. :thumbsup:

 

[misnblu]

Im all motor right now and hope to push to the 14's with this motor before I add a shot of nitrous.
I'll then be in the 13's and not bad for a relatively slow Cavalier.
Turbo's and superchargers are cool, but all motor is bragging rights, especially when you can keep up with them.
Misnblu

 

[White_GSL_SE]

REAL braggin' rites is a stock 250 hp RX-8 1.3 (no, not a typo, that's 1.3) liter NA engine. Stock mind you. Wait until I do the exhaust mods for a few hunderd buck and up that to the 280-300 hp range. Then there is porting, injectors, air intake, pullies, etc., etc... Still no nitrous or turbo.

I'll bet you surprise quite a few people with a Z-24 that moves like that though.

 

[misnblu]

Originally posted by White_GSL_SE
REAL braggin' rites is a stock 250 hp RX-8 1.3 (no, not a typo, that's 1.3) liter NA engine. Stock mind you. Wait until I do the exhaust mods for a few hunderd buck and up that to the 280-300 hp range. Then there is porting, injectors, air intake, pullies, etc., etc... Still no nitrous or turbo.

I'll bet you surprise quite a few people with a Z-24 that moves like that though.

Going to the track, you have a way to see what everybody runs in their cars and I must say, I do pretty good and am in good company.
The RX8 is a great car and inspiring. If it holds to the puresport of the last generation, then it will be a classic.
Rotary and overhead cam engines just arent the same as far as making power is concerned. The wankel engine ranks as one of the most efficient engine designs and can yield great power to liter potential.
If my cavy were so accepting to mods, Id be much quicker. Leave it to GM for having a Gestapo computer to foil all your mods in the advent of getting more miles per gallon.
Good luck on your RX8.
Misnblu

 

[Mad Medic]

The only replacement for cubic inches is more cubic in..I have a 1981 Chevy Malibu with 427c.i. from a 69 Vette. Would have rather had the Vette but it was cost prohibitive. I'm getting into the mid-low 12's. Problem is getting traction, 9" slicks aren't cutting it. I'm running a Turbo 400 and a Posi-rear-end out of a 70 Chev Impala with 3.73 gears. The trans has a 2500 stall converter and I use a linelock to try and heat up the baby slicks. T
The car (body)is still stock and has buckets and a console.
:chevy:


_______________________

Remember objects in mirror are losing!!

 

[risingson77]

Nice! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Ya gotta love super-fast yet super-roomy and comfortable American highway cruisers...

 

[misnblu]

Originally posted by Mad Medic
The only replacement for cubic inches is more cubic in..I have a 1981 Chevy Malibu with 427c.i. from a 69 Vette. Would have rather had the Vette but it was cost prohibitive. I'm getting into the mid-low 12's. Problem is getting traction, 9" slicks aren't cutting it. I'm running a Turbo 400 and a Posi-rear-end out of a 70 Chev Impala with 3.73 gears. The trans has a 2500 stall converter and I use a linelock to try and heat up the baby slicks. T
The car (body)is still stock and has buckets and a console.
:chevy:

Do you have some pictures of this beast?
I really love the muscle car era and would like to see what she looks like.
Check out some hotrods that cruise our area and come to the Cruising the Coast on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.
Oh, and the rule still applies, theres no replacement for displacement.
Later.
Misnblu



_______________________

Remember objects in mirror are losing!!

 

[Dudebusta]

my theory is if you need to turbocharge/supercharge an engine, its not bloody big enough! haha.

ive thought about supercharging the 3500 in the pagero...doesnt really need it. NA ALL THE WAY!

 

[Dudebusta]

Originally posted by HexenLord
Im not a big fan of turbo. Its too limited... and expensive.
All of my cars are N/A or supercharged. You hardly EVER see a car
on turbo running under 9 seconds on the track. and their top speed is almost always under 300 mph. I recently went through a mass change in my cars. I have a top fueler that will do 4.7 secnods in the quater mile, top speed? Who the hell knows, I've had it up to 350... in the quater! (479 mph on the salt flats last summer). And a nova that will probably end up breaking a world record here soon. I drive it on the street, and Ive clocked it at 400 mph before. Can turbo do this? Maybe with about 250,000 dollars. How much did I spend? On both of my cars... hardly anything!!! I just did all of the work myself, and 99% of the parts were UNDER 3,500!

id like to see you hit 400mph in a car you dont even own you wanker

 

[Mad Medic]

Hey HexehLord sounds like that machine could do some major damage at the strip. Is it really streetable? Anyway just a observation about your comment concerning Turbo's vs. Superchargers. I read a good article(tech) on the NHRA website on this very topic. To avoid the math lesson the most efficient blower uses 25- 35% of engine HP to drive the blower while turbo's use 6-14%. It has to do with the free HP available from exhaust as opposed to the requiement of driving a blower. Seemed to make sense when I read it.
misnblu- I'm working on getting a digital photo to post. I have to "borrow" it from work.
:chevy:+:ford:=:argue:

 

[AltF8]

Love my turbo...I'll never go back. I've even got the wife 80% convinced to replace her '99 Neon Sport with the new turbo coming soon.

 

[Shelby Z]

I own a 87 Daytona Shelby 4 cylindr 2.2L turbo. i'm running 20psi which gives me 300hp and 13sec. 1/4 mile.
I love the power of a turbo.

 

[AltF8]

Originally posted by Shelby Z
I own a 87 Daytona Shelby 4 cylindr 2.2L turbo. i'm running 20psi which gives me 300hp and 13sec. 1/4 mile.
I love the power of a turbo.

20 psi!? Wow, what mods did you do to safely run that (or are you risking it... )?

 

[troy]

an intercooler can easyily handle 30psi saftley

 

[Shelby Z]

its all stock internals, i'm just supplying more fuel witha 5th injector and installed a large intercooler also did some porting. i had this setup for almost a year now, no problems just the intercooler hoses poping off from time to time

you can see her here.
http://silverstone.fortunecity.com/daytona/58/page1987aa.htm

 

[risingson77]

Forced induction (FI) is just a different way of making power. It can be advantageous on a smaller car, or on a competition car that needs its weight to be as low as possible. Think about it: it is possible to ram a V-8 into a Miata. But you'll kill the handling in the process. No, I don't think a V-8 car is incapable of handling...c'mon I know better than that! It's just that an engine that heavy in a car that light could cause a severe weight imbalance. Adding FI would be easier, too.

I do understand the appeal of "all-motor', though. it does seem a bit more pure...

 

[AltF8]

Originally posted by troy
an intercooler can easyily handle 30psi saftley

The intercooler has nothing to do with maximum boost pressure.

Maximum boost is determined by fuel available and compression ratio/fuel octane.

 

[risingson77]

...also the strength of the con-rods, crank, pistons...also block reinforcement is not a bad idea at 30 psi. (see also: KABOOM!!)

An intercooler is an important piece of the puzzle, in any case.

 

[AltF8]

Originally posted by risingson77
...also the strength of the con-rods, crank, pistons...also block reinforcement is not a bad idea at 30 psi. (see also: KABOOM!!)

An intercooler is an important piece of the puzzle, in any case.

I stand corrected. I didn't take into effect that the intercooler would lower intake temps, therefore reducing the possibility of detonation.

Sorry.

 

[Dudebusta]

20lbs of boost...for only 300hp????

they invented v8's for a reason man

 

[risingson77]

Originally posted by Dudebusta
they invented v8's for a reason man

Yeah, so dudes with small wangs could feel manly.

 

[Dudebusta]

so what are rice burners for? its a known fact that Japanese have small ****s...