huslindan

dude we all know NA is better lets use hondas for example say a all motor and a turbo hoda with the same hp or even a little less in the NA i would deff pick the na but you are missing the point. our motor us just easier to turbo it ppl could spend the same amout and not a redic amout more to get the smae hp all motor a lot of ppl would do it. but its just to much for our engine. ok

davedavetC

iTrader: (4)

ITBs dont necessarily mean you'll lose tq. depends on the set up/tune/supporting mods.

if you had the right size exhaust with the right compression and head work you could probbaly see equal numbers as far as whp and wtq goes remember this is a 2.4 l engine not a little 1.8 or 2.0 its a pretty big I4 and makes lots of tq as it is.

DeiselFuel2o2

thank you dave. This is why I am interested. Because ITB's on a 2.4 would be very torquy.

Now the reason I said 8k to 10k is number of tunes, cams, head work, port polish, balancing, changing compression ratio etc.

I know cheaper = turbo and thats why most people do it. But why bash on the idea? Woudnt it be sweet to watch/hear a itb'd tc on a road track? Touge? Would love to drive one as well lol.

BlackKnight

This is an example only and not accurate numbers

If you have I/H/E and built engine say you get 210hp 180tq on stock manifold

same mods with ITB you could see 220-230hp but tq would be 170. I have done a crap load of research on this since I was 18 and was into Hondas and racing.

I am not worried about torque myself I am having the engine built and stroked with BC stroker, and I am boosted with a GT3582R. Last dyno before any engine work was 309hp 319tq mustang dyno will be over 500 once shop is done.

MrC could explain this if he tunes in.

yellowxhoodie

iTrader: (16)

wait...
OP, you dont even have a tC.
you drive an xA.

DeiselFuel2o2

wow nice numbers. Must be a relatively flat torque curve to.

I love Honda but i hate the image "ricers" give them.

True you lose torque with ITB's but you maintain HP longer and the toque is where you need it. You dont take a turn at 2.5k rpm when you could be at 4k with near max trq (ITB) and have plenty of HP compared to the stock manifold etc.

Maybe i just like the sound of ITB's too much, or the work put into it.

How long is the spool on the GT358? Now if you have LOTS of money....you can run ITB's for a turbo. or IET
s (individual exhaust turbo's) and run an anti-lag system.

This would obviously cost like 300k but it would be the coolest thing ever. Now in your case, you can still take advantage of ITB's with a turbo. How long your engine will last is another story, unless you use water/meth mix (windshield wiper fluid .

goin for 550 eh? sounds like fuuun

DeiselFuel2o2

What does it matter what my DD is? Maybe im interested in TC's?

Oh wait I think I realized whats going on. You have no life and you feel like bashing people because of what they drive. your soo coooooooooool DUDE!?!!!! omfg

lol

BlackKnight

Everyone thinks because it is a GT35R it takes forever to spool and it doesn't. I start hitting 5 lbs around 2600-2700 on the stock engine once built and stroked it will be faster. I think I was already at 10lbs around 2900. I am having a twin scroll manifold built for it.

I am not going to say anything about you wanting to stay N/A you will be in a different class and if that is what you want then go for it. It does cost more but then again if you build your engine like I build mine I would still have more money into it because of the extra parts with the turbo.

davedavetC

iTrader: (4)

i understand that, but from what it sounds like your research was mostly on hondas which are much different then our engine.

we have a larger engine that produces more tq then those engines.

take for example our 2.4 liter with its stock specs makes 160 hp (not whp) and 163 tq.

but the honda 2.0 makes 197 hp and 137 tq

if you were to do ITB on a honda you would gain a lot more hp but not as much tq. just like if you turbod it.

take my buddy for example. he has a fully built b18c with a gt42 turbo on it and at 33 lbs of boost he made 702 whp and 3xx wtq

if you were to get 702 whp on your tC you would have about the same if not more tq as whp. its how our engines are displaced.

from what im assuming (thats right assuming, i have nothing to back it up that set in stone. and guess what neither do you or anyone else except for the girl with the ITBs on her xB2 and Leslie durst) a built NA motor with hi compression pistons and a higher redline (and everything else needed to support this) with ITBs and a full exhaust (probably 2.5") would get about 210-220 whp and thats MY GUESS with around 190 or so wtq again just my guess. from people showing dynos with 160ishwhp and 155ish wtq from just I/H/E

DeiselFuel2o2

I was not assuming it takes forever. You have a 2.4 litre engine so your gonna spool quick. I was just wondering.

I am just waiting to finish college and getting my CFII to teach people how to fly helicopters. Once I get that job I can guarante you that I will have picked what car to ITB hehe.

I was thinking about a TC because its different than a honda and eventually the 2.4 will be like a b16 parts and money wise. Not super cheap but cheaper than building a beamer.

Gl on the build man.

yellowxhoodie

iTrader: (16)

you have no idea whats going on...
clearly.
because everyone is telling you about ITB.
but your not listening.

and you think im bashing you? lol
i have to be nice cuz im a mod.
you have no idea what me "bashing" is.

BlackKnight

At first it was Honda research but a lot of the same applies just in different number and I have been doing research on tC's since early 05.

DeiselFuel2o2

Yea thanks for the assumption. I need a good realistic goal and that sounds perfect.

220 hp and 180 trq on a gutted TC would be sweet.
Its not all about show, its about practicality.

Now the only thing that not many people might know about is this. What if you could ram air into ITB's? How would that affect the tune?

Once you hit 60+ mph you would think it would add alot more velocity. There would be alot of factors etc.

My build will not be for DD, I want a fun track car that I can drive around town a few week-ends and take to the track.

I am stil debating if I should build the Xa, a TC, rsx, or my AW11 lol.

they all have their advatnages (weight, power, center of gravity, weigh distribution, etc)

But the TC seems to be a good candidate.

in good regards,

Regis

yellowxhoodie

iTrader: (16)

your talking about practicality, yet you want to spend alot of money to do an NA setup when you could spend just as much on a turbo kit and get better results...

DeiselFuel2o2

Ok well over with the hostility. I dont even want to finish/ prolong it.

yellowxhoodie

iTrader: (16)

im not hostile at all.
all of these people are trying to tell you that its not worth the time/money/frustration for minimal gains but you still want to do it.

theres a reason why some things are never done...

BlackKnight

I say go all out on a N/A build but get a spare set of low CR pistons incase you change your mind! I wouldn't mind seeing a N/A BC Stroked tC to compared to my BC Stroked Turbo setup.

DeiselFuel2o2

there's a different between practicality and budgeting.

I dont care about the money man, get that through your head. The money example needs to be eliminated in any other post, Takes money to build a cage, stiffen the chassis, get a good set of coils.

You HAVE to PAY to PLAY.

Sure I could be more "efficient" and get a turbo. but why put a turbo on a NA? because it can be done? Because it can handle the power? sure. Why do i want to spend money and go ITB? because once its all said and done my stacks wont overheat, wear out like turbo's do etc. thats what I mean by practical.

they dont put small turbo'd engines in helicopters...they get big as 360 H4's and underate them to 140 hp at 2650 rpm so that when im flying up there my engine dosnt quit. Sure it can glide (autorotation) but why risk that? Either get a turbine engine or a big NA reciprocal engine.

That example was a little extreme, but this thread is about NA only. I did NOT ask is turbo better. i said i want NA that is all.

DeiselFuel2o2

Now for a car like the Xa I would have to go turbo. no point having 100whp for 6k LOL.

I see where you guys are comming from. I'll have my turbo beast eventually but I just like NA.

Its like some people like chevy over ford. I like NA you guys seem to like FI better. It makes sense and Im a lil crazy anyways haha so if anyone hurts its me.

Bore and stoke kit for this would be fun I agree. And dont worry the turbo will be in my garage waiting to be used once i dont have to push myself to push the car anymore.

See, bulding the engine NA can still lead to boredom but turn out with a 500hp turbo setup if all i do is change the compression and get a new tune hehe.

TCpete

just FYI... to make decent power on any NA - ITB set up you'd have to rev high... something tc's dont normally do.. we top out at 6 and change..the motor wasnt designed for that kind of abuse. yes if you build the block and head for a good 7k bucks in propper parts and EMS ad another 2k for the ITBS you just spent 10k for what... FOR WHAT!!! a 3k lb car with maybe a take over 200 whp... not in my book thats not fast...and its not very fun... especially screaming at high rpms on an ITB set up but only being able to what? get another .5 to 1. second faster in your 1/4...daily driving along because of the location of the velocity stacks would be prone for over heating and probably air starvation... not to mention clearence for the runners.. because lets face it.. long runners is the only way get decent power.. short runner are ment for boost set ups by design. lets also not forget a filter design like IPS has or the newer mugen covers for ITB setup which also require some room the tc DOES NOT have back there with out possibly cutting into the fire wall...

and seriously.. if you build a shroud to protect the sacks from foreign objects you might as well kiss the purpose of the stack to begin with because your still causing an increase in free air induction.

your taking a TQy long stroke, big Liter, low revving car and making it run like a high revving short stroke car... it can be done but at what logical cost?? ..lol.... remember at those high revs and stress your just as prone to valve float or valve failure or ring failure as you would be with a turbo set up...

and dude.. with as much as u have a hard on for ITBs blah blah blah... from yoru above post the logical choice would be the RSX or the AW... both already have a full aftermarket support for ITB setups... why you would debate the tc as an option if thats the route you want is not smart and very green on your part.

stop watching initial d... its rotting your chi