Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Sorry, lets talk with brains.

Nissan made a turbo model , thus being a better car.

A turbo DEAD STOCK ( im talking dead stock ) R32 will totaly ( i mean , totaly) rip a R32 N/A DEAD STOCK around anywhere, anyplace. They have better brakes,slightly stiffer chasis ( not noticble whilst driving at low speeds ) and better gearbox etc. As N/A cars that nissan made didnt have LSD's.. whereas turbo skylines did.

So , seriously... If you think a Turbo will not beat, or be very close to a non turbo R32 or be it R33, R34.. You have mental issues.

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Forget about the chassis/suspension etc.. Looking at a pure acceleration point of view.

The dead stock R32 GTST weighs more and only makes 10fwkw more than the R32 RB25DE N/A.

Unfortunately it will not totally 'rip' the N/A.

As said above.. weighs more but makes slightly more power.

LSD's at this power level is not really requried.

It will be very close.. lol even NA V6/VL/R31 commodores used to get the jump on my old stocker through first gear, I would then click second and slooooowllly wind past them. No doubt the N/A with basically the same power it will be much harder to catch.

Once we start looking at the R33 and R34's the difference is much greater.

i remember johns r33 when he still had the rb25de in it. with the AVC-R it took me a fair bloody while to pull away and i had a 14.9 @ 106mph turbo mx6 at the time... NA can go if you fiddle, but same mods to turbo and they perform better. A larger exhaust on an NA will give say 5% increase of power at the wheels but a turbo will be more like 15% because its not just the exhaust, it spools quicker and it runs a few psi extra... but nothing compares to weight. i had a stock r32 turbo motor in an s13 and ran 14's flat. bit more boost than standard saw it push 153kw at the wheels and 13.6's.....

some non turbos are good. some are not(rb20e grr) im building myself a rb30de with vvt and i should be able to beat rb20det powerd skylines that arnt too hard out modded.

boosted is good if you want high power cheepish. but they do cost alot more to run with gas and insurance

i get sick of everybody asking me why im not going turbo. but then how meny people these days build a rb30de? i know of atleast 3 of my mates who are in the process of building rb30dets with huge turbos like gt35/40s or somthing and there aiming for 300rwkw so i want to be differnt.

The turbo's providing they are in good nick are actually not that much heavier on fuel. Mine used to see 470km/s per tank and that was always giving it stick, i never used to limp it around off boost, always up on boost in second gear out of corners, off the lights first was off boost, click second up on boost and accelerate to the speed limit.

The RB30DET is now seeing 400-430km's per tank on the pfc base map, the base map runs a little rich once out of closed loop, this can be seen by taking off lightly, a little stream of black smoke trickles from the exhaust.

Give a turbo vs a cammed up N/A the turbo will be better on fuel.

Edited by Cubes

why are people still comparing Turbo Vs. NA????

This thread was originally asked if NA's are good, and its just been put simply that they are good and if in the right hands are able to perform with other types of cars.

You know what I bought a Turboed R33 and it was a very nice car to drive and I wish sometimes that I still had it, but after having driven N/A cars for the past 20 years I wish now that I had gone for a nice straight non turboed R33 and just done some of the basic mods like bigger exhaust cams T/B and intake, because every car that I have performed these mods to I have always gotten a very nice driveable car that is cheap on fuel and very easy to drive and very forgiving if you do something stupid - turbo cars are not so forgiving if you do something stupid or even not so stupid

BTW I think you could do far worse than a N/A R33 - great choice

You know what I bought a Turboed R33 and it was a very nice car to drive and I wish sometimes that I still had it, but after having driven N/A cars for the past 20 years I wish now that I had gone for a nice straight non turboed R33 and just done some of the basic mods like bigger exhaust cams T/B and intake, because every car that I have performed these mods to I have always gotten a very nice driveable car that is cheap on fuel and very easy to drive and very forgiving if you do something stupid - turbo cars are not so forgiving if you do something stupid or even not so stupid

BTW I think you could do far worse than a N/A R33 - great choice

I cant see you getting better fuel consumption on a worked na motor then a mild turbo motor making the same if not more power. You can easily drive a turbo car off boost offering relatively good consumption. Im getting close to 10l per 100km with alot of mixed driving in my r33 with basic mods. What exactly do you mean by the car being unforgiving even if you do something not stupid? That doesnt make any sence ?

your talking about off boost driving for econimical cars. whats the point of having a turbo then? that would be boring as driving if you cant go over 3grand or so. my car(rb20e) i rev its nuts off all the time and im stil getting 10k+ a ltr. not so sure how the rb30de is going to be tho.

turbos and N/As cant be compared really. turbos arnt that great unless your wanting lots of power. i love the feeling of hitting boost when iv been in my mates cars. but then i get back in my car and even tho its way slower i still enjoy the smooth power delievery and the sound

turbos can be unforgiving as in when your driving and when your modding them if you make a simple mistake they start detonationg and other stuff.

im guessing thats what he means

in the end its each to there own. and each has there advantages and disadvantages

BADR33,

your talking about off boost driving for econimical cars. whats the point of having a turbo then? that would be boring as driving if you cant go over 3grand or so.

lmao.

So we can get that siiiiik bro pssshhhht sound.

turbos arnt that great unless your wanting lots of power.

lmao.

Edited by Cubes
your talking about off boost driving for econimical cars. whats the point of having a turbo then? that would be boring as driving if you cant go over 3grand or so.

the point of having a turbo is to have the power when we need/want it :D

95% of the time is off-boost driving.

i guess this teaches me for posting when im half asleep.

meh im outa this. too meny "its gota be boosted to be a skyline" guys on this thread. N/As arnt that bad. well with the exception of the rb20e thats just shit.

but the other 5% of driving when your on boost is where all your gas gos quick :rofl:

Harmless stirring...

I think you would be suprised.. a lightly 200rwkw modded rb25det or rb20det really doesn't use much more fuel than standard.

As I said.. my little rb20det was making close to 170rwkw, I would give it a flogging for a full tank and would still manage damn close to the 10.6litres per 100km's it would achieve just normal driving.. Normal driving for me back then was always on boost through second up until the speed limit, little bit of loss of traction through second gear as I exit a corner all the way to work at 5:30am in the morning.

I've since mellowed a lot and still haven't noticed any real difference in fuel consumption.

Providing everything is in good working order there's no reason you shouldn't achieve 10.5-11L per 100km's on a mild rb20 or rb25det. Many do get it yet many also suffer the 250-350km per tank syndrome.. unsure what is wrong with those cars. Some just seem to swallow the juice.

more power you have, more fuel you'll use. this is why mildly modded cars will drink more fuel .. cos they are driven faster.

however if you can maintain the same driving habits, the fuel consumption should be better as you are making the same power with less fuel.

sweet as. im just sick of people taking the shit outa me cus im non turbo and im building a non turbo engine. thats all.

sorry if i stepped on anybodys toes.

yeah it effectively produces the power more efficiantly.

as we all know skylines run excessivly ritch with fuel. as you do more mods the air/fuel is leaned out with basic mods so you gain power

the extra fuel is used to help keep the cylinders colder so less chance of detonation etc.

when you hear about people running lean or using low octain fuel they get detonation due to the extra heat inside the cylinder due to the lack of cooling from the petrol/octaine causing the gas to explode at the wrong time

this is what i have read and been told. so it might be wrong but it seems to make sence to me. i have found a way to make my car run leaner and i found it has made it run quite a bit better.

how come my mate with 275+rwkw gts25t skyline gets 500ks off a tank when he is thrashing it the hole time? that has a gt35/40 turbo, fmic, injectors, fuel pump, cams and more. i think its just due to the tune he has on his power fc computer so i think that tuneing/servicing/mantinance is the key to getting good fuel miliage

Edited by BADR33

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I've done this both ways, I'd use the original loom & swap plugs on the engine side as you'll usually end up changing a lot of those anyway. Series 1 is usually non ABS which requires wiring which I can't remember how to do as haven't done it for over 15 years. The auto inhibitor is easy to bypass or in the meantime you can put it in neutral & unbolt it & tape it somewhere in the bay haha, then just wire reverse lights. I'd go straight to aftermarket ecu. A few basics are built in ignitor coils & reverse the CAS wiring, sort the plugs for whatever injectors & IAC-you can use an adaptor for the neo type otherwise the s1 will still work, use the knock sensors that suit the loom & it'll be pretty much running.  
    • This is for an RB20DET. Sorry for not including that. 
    • Welp, this is where my compression lands after my rebuild. Thoughts? I have ~6 hours on the motor. 
    • Well, after the full circus this week (new gearbag, 14 psi actuator on, injectors and AFM upgraded, and.....turbo repair) the diagnosis on the wastegate is in. It was broken. It was broken in a really strange way. The weld that holds the lever arm onto the wastegate flapper shaft broke. Broke completely, but broke in such a way that it could go back together in the "correct" position, or it could rearrange itself somewhere else along the fracture plane and sit with the flapper not parallel to the lever. So, who knows how and when exactly what happened? No-one will ever know. Was it broken like this the first time it spat the circlip and wedged itself deep into the dump? Or was it only broken when I tried to pry it back into place? (I didn't try that hard, but who knows?). Or did it break first? Or did it break between the first and second event of wierdness? Meh. It doesn't matter now. It is welded back together. And it is now held closed by a 14 psi actuator, so...the car has been tuned with the supporting mods (and the order of operations there is that the supporting mods and dyno needed to be able to be done first before adding boost, because it was pinging on <<14 psi with the new turbo with only a 6 psi actuator). And then tuned up a bit, and with the boost controller turned off throughout that process. So it was only running WG pressure and so only hit about 15-16 psi. The turbo is still ever so slightly lazier than might be preferred - like it is still a bit on the big side for the engine. I haven't tested it on the road properly in any way - just driven it around in traffic for a half hour or so. But it is like chalk and cheese compared to what it was. Between dyno numbers and driving feedback: It makes 100 kW at 3k rpm, which is OK, could be better. That's stock 2JZ territory, or RB20 with G series 550. It actually starts building boost from 2k, which is certainly better than it did recently (with all the WG flapper bullshit). Although it's hard to remember what it was like prior to all that - it certainly seems much, much better. And that makes sense, given the WG was probably starting to blow open at anything above about 3 psi anyway (with the 6 psi actuator). It doesn't really get to "full boost" (say 16 psi) until >>4k rpm. I am hopeful that this is a feature of the lack of boost controller keeping boost pressure off the actuator, because it was turned off for the dyno and off for the drives afterward. There's more to be found here, I'm sure. It made 230 rwkW at not a lot more than 6k and held it to over 7k, so there seems to be plenty of potential to get it up to 250-260rwkW with 18 psi or so, which would be a decent effort, considering the stock sized turbo inlet pipework and AFM, and the return flow cooler. According to Tao, those things should definitely put a bit of a limit on it by that sort of number. I must stress that I have not opened the throttle 100% on the road yet - well, at least not 100% and allowed it to wind all the way up. It'll have to wait until some reasonable opportunity. I'm quite looking forward to that - it feels massively better than it has in a loooong time. It's back to its old self, plus about 20% extra powers over the best it ever did before. I'm going to get the boost controller set up to maximise spool and settle at no more than ~17 psi (for now) and then go back on the dyno to see what we can squeeze out of it. There is other interesting news too. I put together a replacement tube to fit the R35 AFM in the stock location. This is the first time the tuner has worked with one, because anyone else he has tuned for has gone from Z32 territory to aftermarket ECU. No-one has ever wanted to stay Nistuned and do what I've done. Anyway, his feedback is that the R35 AFM is super super super responsive. Tiny little changes in throttle position or load turn up immediately as a cell change on the maps. Way, way more responsive than any of the old skool AFMs. Makes it quite diffifult to tune as you have to stay right on top of that so you don't wander off the cell you wanted to tune. But it certainly seems to help with real world throttle response. That's hard to separate from all the other things that changed, but the "pedal feel" is certainly crisp.
×
×
  • Create New...