Are you saying you know more about turbocharging than me? Is that what you want everyone to think? That link i provided you is a very close match of how i was trying to explain what it means when someone is referring to "stage 2 " 3 or whatever stage. I was hoping you would finally understand the basics of properly setting up a turbo car for increased boost,but you seem defiant and try to use big words in an effort to back up your statements.

 

I'm sorry, do you want me to use smaller words?

You're not comprehend... er... getting it.

Anybody can make any list they want with "stages" or "levels" or "Sequences," etc, in those different parts, any combination of parts could be listed.

"Stages" mean squat, and are only relevant in the mind of the person using that to describe what they do or have done, it mean NOTHING to anybody else.

As far as setting up a turbo car properly, I have no issues with that, the several turbo cars I've built or helped set-up speak for that, in addition to the N/A, supercharged and nitrous fed vehicles I've also had my hands into.

 

If I was out at the local car hangout spot, and a kid that was BSing about his car said he had a "stage 2 turbo", I would have not learned anything more about his setup. If I then asked him what size turbo it was, and he couldn't answer me except to say "stage 2" again, I would then think he was either an idiot, or bought the car that way and knew nothing about it.

Now if someone asked me what my car had, I would say a 76mm T4 running 14 psi, 3.5" catback, etc. Car lingo at least around me doesn't go by stages...it goes by the technical terms of what you actually have under your hood. I do get what your saying, but nobody really refers to "stages" when talking about thier setup around here.

 

Just thought I'd through this out there, Car Craft magazine did a turbo fox body mustang build for under 7k. They bought an LX which had a 5.0 transplant and then got a turbo charger kit for it. The car was 2k and the rest was all turbo related stuff. At the end it was was puting out something like 440rwhp and 550rwtq. Of course they did next no nothing to the engine aside from 45lb injectors. The engine will blow eventually but still inpressive.

 

Thats a pretty specific list that refers to Z31 300ZXs as a guide that works well when building them up to be a decent fun street car. I've worked on one that would stomp your Firebird.

 

I doubt that. I have owned a turbo Z myself. Even with the increased boost, it would have a very hard time with my L98 bolt on car.

 

Now don't get me wrong, the Z can be built up to be fast. If you spend the necessary amount of money to buy the electronics for increasing the boost pressure,but remember they are heavier cars compared to Thirdgens. The average Nissan Z weighs in at 3500 lbs plus.

 

I wanna Spork turbo...

 

Yes, but isn't that because they are (the twin turbo models) AWD? That would really help it launch (if you know how to properly launch an AWD car).

 

I heard the drivetrains on the early 90's awd cars were weak...much like the dodge stealth/mitsu 3000gt's. Engine bays are tight cramped too, making it a pain to work on. I havent owned one or know anyone with those cars. I never seen a fast one at the track tho so must be for a reason...either they are too expensive to make fast and/or just not practical at higher hp levels. Only knew one that went into the 11's in the area and it had alot of mods...but my n/a 383 would compete with it if not beat it.

 

The 300ZX was not an AWD car.

About 2 minutes of research would pay off.

The Z31 (1984 to 1989) 300ZX weighed between 2888 and 3027 lbs.

The Z32 (1990 to 2000) 300ZX weighed between 3186 and 3602 lbs, the heaviest being a TT, 2+2 with T-tops.

 

It hardly cost us anything.
K&N intake was used $20
Porting out the exhaust and intake manifold was $300
Full turboback exhaust was expensive little over $600
We got a used Apex-i AVCR digital boost controller of cl for $150
After that little work we had in to it I raced it in my northstar Eldorado... and it walked me hard on the top end, leaving me like I was stading still and the boost was only set to 9 psi (stock is 6.7).

 

3000 gt's are very cramped engine bays. nice cars if kept well and clean.

 

First off this is a n interesting post regarding ricers, to put things clear classic muscle cars are just that rolling steel, you had mini mouse motors, mouse motors, and rat motors, aka- small block-small block with bigger crank and bore and a big block/ true car enthusiasts can see a car for what it is. Now when a hot rodder looks under the hood of a n import they see what looks to be a circuit board with no intimidation, you bring the four banger boys to a real car show pop the hood and see a block of steel or aluminium they are intimidated and instantly know that the man standing or sittining next to it has a set of ***** and put his scarred drug knuckles all over that block from start to finish, ***** boy has an image of his kids meal cracker jack toy and realizes he doesn't have a humble piece of American history and starts to doubt his manhood and possibly his roots. The 50 year old man or 60 with the hot rod cohort ever share or converse with the cell boy about the meat under the hood or the ford 9 inch the 12first bolt main 35 spline drive shaft or body work because bondo boy knows nothing about welding, any American is A true impression scattered a lego

 

At first I was like:

But a I read farther I was like:

FYI, a "Mouse motor" is referring to a Small Block Chevy, a "Rat motor" is referring to a Big Block Chevy, nothing else. Never heard any one use the term "Mini-mouse motor" before.

 

I think a Rat motor just refers to a big block, but people usually assosciate it with Chevy Big Blocks.

 

I read that post and was left with Picard.jpg

 

Two words: NUT SWINGER

Half that post looked like it was taken straight out of "2 FAST 2 FURIOUS".

 

No, it's a Chevy thing. Mouse and Rat was always refering to Chevy motors, why or how it started, I don't know, but that's how it is. Some people think it has to do with Rat Fink, but nothing I found says that, and some info says that Rat Fink came after the term "Rat motor."

Your post makes me:

 

you do know that fcon isn't a nickname for a fuel controller but rather the name of an actual product right?



I notice you are changing your tune a little bit. first you said no honda's came turbo now you at least are changing it to not many. you could of at least admitted to being wrong in the first place. it does wonders for earning respect that you not only lack from me but from your own peers.

second the rx7 turbo is not a 4 cylinder. for that matter it is a 0 cylinder car. where do you get that it was a 4 cylinder from?

second you make claims that they won't beat any stock camaro/firebird? you might wish to rethink that. even more so if you are talking non later year versions as there are quite a few v6 and low end v8's
if you are talking thirdgen versions then yes even then most turbo cars and even some non turbo cars can handle the thirdgen versions and some evne run with the later ls1 versions.

plus with boost being there it isn't that hard to bring the performance up a bit as long as you aren't wanting to go crazy.

 

Because most if not all Domestic cars with a performance trim available, have V8s. Cadillac CTS, Charger, Challenger, Camaro, Firebird, Grand Prix, G8, Mustang, Monte Carlo EVERY truck with the exception of the SRT10, 300C. I really cannot think of a newer American car that had " top model " performance option with a V6. ( The only thing even close is the Grand Prix GTP with a SC'd V6 and it still isnt as fast as the GXP with a 5.3 V8 )

Ford is the only one I can think of that has a performance model that doesn't have a V8. ( Whatever the 300hp Focus is called ) But I'm not sure we could even count that being as the car is a FWD wagonish thing. On the same token, I'm not 100% positive we could count the Grand Prix and Monte Carlo since they are FWD as well.

American companies love V8s. ( I'm referring to GM, Ford and Chrysler here ) Hell, look at the Hennessy Venom GT and the SSC Ultimate Aero. I'm not sure on the price of the Venom, but the 2010 SSC was $740,000 IIRC and it has a 6.3 Twin Turbo V8. And the Venom uses a LS block as its base.

 

i thought it was, i mean it had 4 wheel steering, or am i wrong again?

 

anyone want me to translate this?

 

like how people call nitrous oxide NOS? even if it isnt NOS brand? say if it were from zex or someone else, always hated that.

 

not to poke a dead bear (whatever i jut said) but if everyone talks about something one way as a majority, doesn't it get accepted that way, like how noone talks about hitler like a good guy, and well noone thinks he is (not saying he is lets make that clear)

 

exactly forget arguing turbos against v8s, combine them and break records

 

thats a good question

 

thats a fact, not an opinion

 

ninetyone isn't a mod, and you should hold yourself to a higher standard than the rest of us because you are, that doesn't mean act as though your better and degrade our comments

 

they did it because it was EASIER than turboing/modding the stock engine also it was probably cheaper and also alot more popular depending on how they sold that idk

 

So because a car is FWD, it can't deliver results that are equal to or better than what you consider performance cars?

All you're trying to do is say that "performance cars" can only be RWD American Muscle cars.

It's not a majority that is using this "stages" term to describe turbos.

To put it another way, if a majority of people said 1+1=3, they would still be wrong.

It's already been answered.

I think you need to look up the difference between fact and opinion.

Just because I feel that steak tastes better than chicken, does not make me wrong if you feel that chicken tastes better than steak.

Something being easier, again is an opinion. I feel it was easier for me to turbocharge a couple of my vehicles, than it would have been to swap in V8s.
Price can also be a non factor. Depending on where the parts are sourced from turbocharging could be cheaper or more expensive than swapping in a completely different engine.

I find that people that say that swapping a V8 into anything are usually comparing prices of new turbocharging parts, to used V8s and parts. Compare new to new and you will see the price is either not that different or much cheaper to turbocharge an engine in most cases.

A lot of the Scarab idea goes back to the way many Americans think, in that more or bigger = better, which is simply not true.

 

chrysler crossfire SRT-6... very sweet motor setup that you dont hear/see about these days. I've seen them run mid 12's with not much work done.


If you look at the american 4 cylinder cars, the 'Top" models would be Dodge Neon SRT-4, Dodge caliber SRT-4 now, and the Chevy Cobalt SS turbo and previous supercharged version.

THose cares are still top performers in their class. Can be made pretty quick if you know what you are doing. I know alot of 600+hp 10 second and lower SRT-4's, and GM's Ecotec racing cars are making 1200hp out of a cobalt turbo 4 banger

 

yah. Those crossfires were fast. UGLY. But fast. The SRT series four and six cylinders are fearsome predidtors.

 

Hell, if I'm going to build a Z, it's my S30. 2300 pounds

 

Exactly!

Ninetyone was talking about 300ZXs, so I kept it to them only.

 

Z31, Z32, S130, ZX whatever. All slow. It's all about the S30. Lol. Too bad mine needs a lot of work.

 

yes many cars might have them as an option but that doesn't make the option the norm.
the sales of the lower end I4,V6's far outpace the sales of v8's.
most people buy cars for the name/looks then the actual performance it has. plus many people have skewed perceptions of performance and can drive a V6 and think that the car is race ready and see no reason to buy a v8.
as such there are actually dometic companies even producing "performance" models with I4's and V6's. only difference is they don't have an old school name to them that makes you think ol V8 performance.
either way though V8 still is not the norm.

 

Not even sure what the original argument was this time, but I know that when I think of any american RWD sports car like a camaro, firebird, mustang....I think V8. Now that engine may not be the norm, but it's what comes to mind when you mention one of those cars. They aren't really known for the smaller engines whether thats what sells more or not. When the factory designed those cars initially, they designed them with a V8 in mind. The smaller engines are just a more economical and cheaper option if someone wishes to go that route.

I guess it's the same concept as any jap car as well. When you think lancer evo, you think turbo AWD. But most of that model they sell is probably just a base lancer with only FWD. Same goes for subarus, supras, RX7's, basically everything. When you think of the car in a performance aspect, you automatically think of the better engine option, not the base model that could have been purchased as well.

 

Only problem i found with the zx's was if you raised the boost more than a couple of pounds the stock clutch would slip.

 

To answer the main question of this post,I would say,yes, imports can be made very fast. Just like any other car if you put the money into it. I have a friend with a 97' Talon running in the 10's. I prefer the way my thirdgen sounds and looks.

 

Yes you are right on that, the 300zx's i was referring to were 1989 and earlier. The 90 up were closer to 3500lbs. IIRC,they did get a lot heavier from 87' to 89 as opposed to the 84-86 models?

 

The way I understand it, they got heavier as they went on. Due to new tech being put in them.

 

3.5 seconds of Googling....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_300ZX

Has weight breakdown by body type and options for the Z32...

 

all i asked was if it was all wheel steering or not, no need to jump on me for that, ya bully . i saw the answer, and i states that 2=2-4 was a fact, not an opinion, how is that wrong? its a mathematical law . and right it was easy for you, but you have experience with turbos, and well the average joes doesn't but he will remember how fast say his father/uncle muscle car was and think "man i'd like a v8" and because hes here in the land of oppurtunity where big v8s are plentiful and cheap (used but used v8s still run like v8s should) he can easily do the swap. and bigger is better is how women think, nit just in America all over the world

 

The actual quote was this:
Notice the bolded:
2+2 does in fact equal 4, not does not equal 4 as the point was trying to make. Keep up, it's going to be a long ride, especially if you don't read for detail.

There was a time when I wasn't experienced with turbochargers, you know how I got that experience? By picking up some materials and a welder, and putting a turbo set-up together. So the "You have more experience than me doing ______" argument is invalid, all it takes is some research and some effort.

 

alright my bad on the math, but if money isn't a factor and experience isn't a factor, aside from the performance difference which we could argue for days, the only other factor in choosing would be personal preference, which is like saying "i'll paint it red because i like red" while people argue "but blue is cheaper" "a blue car will go faster" "it takes less experience to paint a car blue" i know these are terrible examples but i feel they make my point, if you say that cost, time, the work it takes to make it run right, aren't factors then well nothing is

 

I have a Z32 and it doesn't feel like a heavy car, doesn't even feel like a 22 year old car, no squeaks, no rattles and everything works. It's a luxury performance car, so it's going to have some weight (although luxury then is nowhere near what it is now LOL). Pop the hood and yes there's a lot to take in, but poping the hood on a TPI car gets the same initial reaction too. It makes me sick to see one riced out, takes the class right out of the car. I don't really see where cramped engine compartments factor in, most small engines have spark plugs in the top of the head and the oil filter is within reach, so maintenance is pretty easy and those are the only reasons I can think of for needing room in there.
I like american muscle, but I can appreciate the other cars out there too. I don't need a 500 horsepower car to get to work and back or get grocerys, having all that power on tap for just in case you get lined up with another sports car is useless. I have my Iroc because it looks good and is quick, not because it's quick and looks good, I could go back to stock and be perfectly happy.

 

Simple answer. There are some damn ugly rides out there but "some" people think they look good. You can judge any import honda acura nissan toyota however you want but the fact of the matter is that with the right supporting mods and know how any car can be fast. A true mechanic/ gear head knows this. I own a 71 chevelle and have put small black to big blocks in it from carburator to fuel injection. I have also owned many other muscle cars 67 camaro 69 plymouth gtx 63 nova ss. Good old american muscle everyone loves the feel of torque.

I have also built many imports from a honda hatchback to a nissan 300zx and to a toyota supra.

Take this view and do the match on cylinder output between most naturally aspirated engine. Id bet you wuld find in most cases that bewteen chevy v8's to honda 4 cylinders the 4 cylinder is only half a v8 but the 4 banger can rev to 8000rpm stock the v8 cant. Were talk to totally different type of power outputs where gears and transmissions make all the difference.

I currently daily drive a 92 honda prelude that will beat most v8's stock for stock with ease. Its a h22 vtec motor only with headers and full exhaust and it runs a 13.9 all day long and still gets 30 mpg highway.

I like both cars hondas in no way are any type of performance vehicle or luxury but are great point a to point b and fuel economy but are just as fast as v8's not all hondas but also not all american muscle cars from factory are very fast either most barely made 14's

There is no argument here usually just someone who think they know to much but really dont know enough.

My finishing statement is though I love my american muscle because I love torque but anyone here who knows toyota supras and what stock longblocked 2jz's are capable of with just a turbo upgrade injectors and tune will tell you that imports are definately fast and in just as many time are faster then american just as american is faster then import.

Hand in hand my friends. You can build a radical v8 and run 10's but there is a little honda lurking around somewhere that runs 9's or vice versa.

Peace.

 

Okay, let's put things into perspective here. The Chevy V8 wasn't designed to rev to 8000-RPM stock, so bringing it that high in the RPM band would be completely meaningless, it would only hurt performance. Also, you mentioned earlier that a true mechanic would know that any car built right can be fast, well my response to that is that a true mechanic would also know that RPM isn't the only thing that depicts what an engine is capable of. We build engines around their RPM potential, meaning how much air is literally being consumed during quench. If an engine's bore size isn't taking in the amount of air necessary to maximize the cubic inch displacement, then RPM's will obviously suffer because the engine is being choked. I also don't see you comparing your 4-banger with Chevy's new LFX V6 engine. Getting back to V8's though, put a set of 32-valve heads on any SBC, then test your theory again about RPM ability. Here is a good example, a big inch SBC with 32-valve heads. Mind you, this is a race engine, but Russ also offers street heads with the same RPM potential for any SBC, making power throughout the RPM band WITHOUT the need for variable valve timing...



... lol @ radical V8's needed to run tens. I can show you cam only V8's running in the tens. I can show you stock GM V6's and V8's running in the nines with boost. I can show you daily driven V8's running in the 8's. Take your pick.

 

That engine with the 32 valve heads is cool and all, but all that money and R&D for only 813 HP? That engine was a 434 cubic inch with 15:1 compression!! Forget ever running pump gas or driving that on the street. I could make 700 HP by putting a turbo on a stock 6.0 LSx engine....or even more on my 5.3 if I just added forged pistons and rods. And those are engines you can run on 93 pump gas and drive every day. I've also seen plenty of pump gas big cube LSx engines making 700+ HP all motor and they are driven on the street.

Same goes for most turbo jap engine as well. You can make some nice power numbers on an engine that can still be street driven....a turbo is great for keeping an engine sounding and driving mostly stock until you get on the loud pedal.