GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,963 Posts
As I do agree with you on the turbo, but for other reasons.
Its ever tuners dream power adder. Every F&F fan boi would want to make love to a big T88 turbo if they had a chance. I belive the reason teh SRT4 is so popular is because of the turbo, not to mention how cheap it is, and what kinda a** it can hand to people on the street. Yes, its still a Neon, but the GTO was just a Tempest. It might be sacraligious, but i belive that the SRT4 is the GTO of modern days. Its the first car to put a powerful engine into a compact car.

The supercharger is much cheaper over the turbo, and a whole heck of a lot easier to package. tweeking a supercharger is just as easy, if not easer with a supercharger. The turbo is more efficient as it doesnt draw massive power from parastic loss. But a pulley and fuel upgrade could make this car hit 300hp easy. The 2.0 ecotec is forged I belive, so power can keep on coming. I think that GM should stick with the turbo as they turbo there sport compact race cars, why not bring the race knowlage to the street!! DUH!!
and there is a turbo 2.0 ecotec, but its in a Saab.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,963 Posts
Originally posted by banzai79@Mar 26 2004, 10:11 AM
I doubt the parasitic loss from the pulley is any worse than the exhaust backpressure introduced by a turbo.
a turbo has a lot less then a supercharger. Figure for every 100hp you make with a power adder, you lose about 30 with the blower, and 3 with a turbo. With modern turbos and the way the exhaust manifold is shaped, turbo lag and backpreasure is pretty limited.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,963 Posts
Originally posted by god@Mar 27 2004, 12:47 AM
i would love a saab 9-3 aero... but im only 19 with no job, and cant afford one haha
ahh dude... your god, you have a job.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top