Whats better?

[J03yL0v3r0]

what is better to put in a car to make it faster

Mid RPM Range Turbo kit or High RRM Range Turbo kit

because in all the tunes setup i see it says mid rpm range turbo kit but i wud think high wud be better & faster.....so whats the best 1 for acceleration & speed

 

[Cowboys965]

Top speed I think is high rpm, for more controllability I think the mid rpm makes less wheelspin idk

 

[friedi]

high

 

[J03yL0v3r0]

so high is better for acceleration

 

[dr_slump]

Top speed I think is high rpm, for more controllability I think the mid rpm makes less wheelspin idk

The mid rpm turbo makes sometimes even more wheelspin. That's why I use it often for my drift cars.

 

[oppositelock]

because in all the tunes setup i see it says mid rpm range turbo kit but i wud think high wud be better & faster.....so whats the best 1 for acceleration & speed

High RPM is faster 98% of the time. People who choose smaller turbos usually do it for the challenge of winning with a slower car. Having a flatter powerband is nice, too.

 

[shmogt]

stage 2 turbo 99.9% makes more torque which would cause more wheel spin. If the car your using accelerates kinda slow and it's gonna be a small track than stage 2 is better, but if your car already has lots of hp and the track is normal or large size than stage 3 is probably way to go. Really up to you

 

[Cowboys965]

stage 2 turbo 99.9% makes more torque which would cause more wheel spin. If the car your using accelerates kinda slow and it's gonna be a small track than stage 2 is better, but if your car already has lots of hp and the track is normal or large size than stage 3 is probably way to go. Really up to you

Oh thanks

 

[dr_slump]

High RPM is faster 98% of the time. People who choose smaller turbos usually do it for the challenge of winning with a slower car. Having a flatter powerband is nice, too.

Flatter powerband? Seriously?
The stage 2 has usually a horrible powerband........

 

[oppositelock]

Flatter powerband? Seriously?
The stage 2 has usually a horrible powerband........

You're saying the stage 3 peaks at a lower RPM than stage 2? GTFO.

 

[Machate-man]

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=216140

Max power from turbos varies from stage 2 to stage 3

You may get more out of stage 2 depending on the car, but the powerband often peaks somwhere in the middle, meaning you need extra long gearing to get anything out of it.

 

[dr_slump]

Flatter powerband? Seriously?
The stage 2 has usually a horrible powerband........

You're saying the stage 3 peaks at a lower RPM than stage 2? GTFO.

What? You can read?
Where did I say that stage 3 peaks at lower RPM? WTF!
I never said that.

.......but the powerband often peaks somwhere in the middle, meaning you need extra long gearing to get anything out of it.

👍

 

[CSLACR]

I agree with dr slump, stage 2 usually sucks. It typically makes for a weird shift point very low in rpm, is very peaky in the middle, and requires gearing for the moon to drive properly.

 

[oppositelock]

What? You can read?
Where did I say that stage 3 peaks at lower RPM? WTF!
I never said that.

If your definition of a flat torque curve is "more high RPM power" then you haven't the foggiest notion what you're talking about. If you move the powerband up closer to redline at the expense of low RPM power then the curve is obviously LESS FLAT. A realistically flat torque curve should peak roughly halfway between idle and redline and taper off evenly in both directions, at least for an NA motor, some turbo motors will actually have a perfectly flat curve from say 1800 to 5000 RPM which then dies off at high RPM. Neither one is what you're describing.

 

[dr_slump]

If your definition of a flat torque curve is "more high RPM power" then you haven't the foggiest notion what you're talking about. If you move the powerband up closer to redline at the expense of low RPM power then the curve is obviously LESS FLAT. A realistically flat torque curve should peak roughly halfway between idle and redline and taper off evenly in both directions, at least for an NA motor, some turbo motors will actually have a perfectly flat curve from say 1800 to 5000 RPM which then dies off at high RPM. Neither one is what you're describing.

You're talking about things I've never said.

Stage 2 turbo:

Ok, so you think that's a good powerband?

 

[oppositelock]

You're talking about things I've never said.

All those things are intrinsically implied by what you said. You said them, you just don't realize it because you can't comprehend what you're saying.

I have no idea what you're trying to say with that image since there's nothing to compare it to. But since you like pictures I made some of my own. I used an Audi RS6 because it has a freakishly flat torque curve which will make the effects of each turbo as apparent as possible.

Stock turbo. Perfectly flat across almost the entire RPM range. They only way to get a flatter torque curve is with an electric motor.

Low RPM turbo. Peak torque: 2200 RPM. Not quite as flat as stock with a little tapering off at mid-high RPM.

Mid RPM turbo. Peak torque: 4700 RPM. As advertised, a nice bump in the middle which tapers off evenly to both sides. While not technically as flat as the stage 1, it's better balanced between low and high RPM.

High RPM Turbo. Peak torque: 6700 RPM. Seriously, look at this picture and tell me with a straight face that this is the flattest curve of the four turbos presented. Go ahead. And don't feel tempted to dig through your garage and cherry pick freaks like the GT-R LM road car, for every single one you find I'll find 100 that conform to what I've posted above. Not to mention, in those rare cases the resulting plateau is usually a result of a major loss of torque artificially chopping the top off the midrange peak. Both my GT-R and R390 road cars lose almost 100 lb-ft going from a stage 2 to stage 3. This is not the way you want to create a flatter powerband.

 

[dr_slump]

I have no idea what you're trying to say with that image since there's nothing to compare it to.
I used an Audi RS6 because it has a freakishly flat torque curve which will make the effects of each turbo as apparent as possible.

High RPM Turbo. Peak torque: 6700 RPM. Seriously, look at this picture and tell me with a straight face that this is the flattest curve of the four turbos presented. Go ahead.

I tell you with a straight face that the stock turbo has the flattest torque curve. (ridiculous)

And don't feel tempted to dig through your garage and cherry pick freaks like the GT-R LM road car, for every single one you find I'll find 100 that conform to what I've posted above.

Well, I think your example (Audi R6) is one of these "cherry flat freaks". I can also tell you that you'll find 100 that confirm what I've posted above.

Not to mention, in those rare cases the resulting plateau is usually a result of a major loss of torque artificially chopping the top off the midrange peak.

Rare cases? I ever thought that it's usual and not rare. And it seems that I'm not the only one who thinks so (not you).

Both my GT-R and R390 road cars lose almost 100 lb-ft going from a stage 2 to stage 3. This is not the way you want to create a flatter powerband.

Last: But you know that "powerband" and "torque curve" isn't the same?

 

[oppositelock]

I tell you with a straight face that the stock turbo has the flattest torque curve. (ridiculous)

Ridiculous is right. It seems you forgot the point you were trying to make.

Well, I think your example (Audi R6) is one of these "cherry flat freaks". I can also tell you that you'll find 100 that confirm what I've posted above.

You posted a single peaky stage 2 graph without an accompanying picture of the stage 3 graph that turns this peak into a broad flat curve without neutering the low and mid range torque. You can post a million of those and not prove a thing.

Rare cases? I ever thought that it's usual and not rare. And it seems that I'm not the only one who thinks so (not you).

Two other guys complaining that the stage 2 has less top end than the stage 3, all three apparantly missing the fact that that's not what's being debated.

Last: But you know that "powerband" and "torque curve" isn't the same?

They're fundamentally intertwined. Don't try to deflect with some semantic BS. You know what I meant.

 

[Jaketheflake420]

I use the Stage 2 turbos on my lower horsepower cars, because of more torque and better torque curve. the stage 3 seems to only bog the car down at lower RPM and slow the accelation at lower speeds on shorter tracks with turns.

I found the stage 3 works well for higher horsepower cars or for faster tracks with less tight turns.

 

[CSLACR]

It seems another misunderstanding of what the torque curve means.

 

[dr_slump]

Ridiculous is right. It seems you forgot the point you were trying to make.

No, I didn't. You just don't understand it.

You posted a single peaky stage 2 graph without an accompanying picture of the stage 3 graph that turns this peak into a broad flat curve without neutering the low and mid range torque.

But you live in reality?

Two other guys complaining that the stage 2 has less top end than the stage 3, all three apparantly missing the fact that that's not what's being debated.

The OP asked which turbo is better, so it is an important fact which does matter.

They're fundamentally intertwined. Don't try to deflect with some semantic BS. You know what I meant.

Well, it's true that I know what you mean, but I'm definitely not trying to deflect.

It seems another misunderstanding of what the torque curve means.

That's why I asked him. He didn't answer yet.......

 

[d24689]

A friend of my‘n has a mid RPM turbo on his SL 600 , for drags but because he has the suspension set up just right the loads of torque are put to good use and gets a hella good launch with it , and still hits 250 out tunnell.