Notices
Scion tC 1G Drivetrain & Power Engine and transmission discussions...

NEED MORE POWER.....

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 01:40 PM
  #61  
Ukno0003's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 694
From: North Carolina - 704
Default

Originally Posted by TJxxAZUL
Wats the pros n cons of having an auto tc turbo'd?..... N how hard is t maintain it? Anybody know?
Pros: like I have said a few times, you keep a consistent boost level in between shifts. You will not drop boost untill you take your foot off the pedal. Take a look at youtube, most of the 8-9 sec drag cars are auto. Though saying that, you drive a auto tC not a drag car.

Cons: well for one I am not a fan of Auto cars in general. You are also limited on how much power you make because of the weak auto tranny.

Maintenance: First you must get a quality tune. After that use gauges to monitor your engine so you know if something goes wrong. A turbod tc can be just as reliable as a stock tc with just the usual maintenance. It all starts with the tune though, if you have a sh** tune then your car will run like crap and be less reliable then ur stock tC. IF you get a good tune, then your car will run great. I suggest you do research on it in the F/I section or just on google in general. The search function will be your best friend, and by the time you have enough money to boost your car, you will also have learned alot about turbos and such.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 02:05 PM
  #62  
ecko04's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,243
From: Atlanta/Charlotte/Auburn
Default

Originally Posted by CarbonXe
Hate to break it to you, but a new Maxima weighs 800lbs MORE than the tC and they only put down around 250-260. So since the rule of thumb is 17lbs = 1 hp, that puts the Maxima at about 205-215 when compared to the weight of the tC.
BTW, I stated that hp was lost through the drivetrain, etc.

Note I was simply giving a comparison as to what car ran those type time. I could've used a compact car more similar to the weight of the tC but I could have said Subaru WRX....not STi.

The point I was going for is stock the tC is a 16.5 car, he put down 14.4/5 so 2 sec puts it in the range of 5.8L RX8, Cobalt SS, Crossfire, etc. What I was saying is it can easily walk these cars. On the juice a stock tC puts down roughly 268whp which I was trying to explain that the 75 shot does not yield 75hp but often times more.

I guess a full sized family sedan was a bad comparison but those are more comparable.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 02:31 PM
  #63  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by ecko04
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
Hate to break it to you, but a new Maxima weighs 800lbs MORE than the tC and they only put down around 250-260. So since the rule of thumb is 17lbs = 1 hp, that puts the Maxima at about 205-215 when compared to the weight of the tC.
Note I was simply giving a comparison as to what car ran those type speeds. I could've used a compact car more similar to the weight of the tC but I could have said Subaru WRX....not STi.

The point I was going for is stock the tC is a 16.5 car, he put down 14.4/5 so 2 sec puts it in the range of 5.8L RX8, Cobalt SS, Crossfire, etc. What I was saying is it can easily walk these cars.

I guess I full family sedan was a bad comparison but those are more comparable.
Why don't you just compare it to an auto turbo tC? One that's putting down roughly 220HP.

How about this one? His slips have him at a 14.223, his sig says 14.044. If his sig is correct, that makes his automatic turbo tC a full .5 seconds faster than the NO2 tC.

https://www.scionlife.com/forums/vie...asc&&start=160

Hmmm. Same car, less power, less torque (nitrous makes a lot more TQ than HP), but it's faster. A lot faster.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 04:56 PM
  #64  
ecko04's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,243
From: Atlanta/Charlotte/Auburn
Default

He should definitely have that dyno'd again, his whp should be higher than what he is reporting.

I misspoke, the auto tC running the nitrous that did 14.4 was using a 50 shot so yeah the tC with the 75 shot would walk the auto turbo'd tC, it could easily waltz into the 13's.

https://www.scionlife.com/forums/vie...asc&&start=100
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:04 PM
  #65  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by ecko04
I won't compare it to that because something is off on those numbers. 220whp just doesn't run 14.2. He should definitely have that dyno'd again, his whp should be higher than what he is reporting. Anyway to each his/her own, which is the same thing i've been saying.
LOL!
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:08 PM
  #66  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by ecko04
Originally Posted by CarbonXe


LOL!
I suppose you didn't check the edit....especially after I went back and reviewed the thread
Hahaha nice try. I like how you go from calling BS on a 220WHP auto turbo running a flat 14, but now you're trying to claim that a 75 shot (220-230WHP) will run easy 13's. hahaha.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:13 PM
  #67  
ecko04's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,243
From: Atlanta/Charlotte/Auburn
Default

Originally Posted by CarbonXe
Hahaha nice try. I like how you go from calling BS on a 220WHP auto turbo running a flat 14, but now you're trying to claim that a 75 shot (220-230WHP) will run easy 13's. hahaha.
The 50 shot on the auto was 14.4



"There's a kid here in town that ran a 14.4 @ 95mph his first time out in an automatic tC with exhaust with this same kit running 50hp jets."

https://www.scionlife.com/forums/vie...asc&&start=100

So...yeah...BS...right.....

Nitrous 14.4 50 shot.....full turbo 14.2

75 shot = whips the turbo.

Just to add, a manual running a 75 shot, which would be SickleCell since he tried both turbo and nitrous put down 268whp and 298wtq with no power mods.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:19 PM
  #68  
ecko04's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,243
From: Atlanta/Charlotte/Auburn
Default

TJxxAZUL let me know what type turbo you get, I would like to follow your build, it should be good....GL!!

Here is what SickleCell said about both nitrous and turbo

"In comparison, I will give my input

For the daily driving experience:
- I preferred the nitrous. I always ran with the bottle ready for use, but I liked the convenience of having the power when I wanted it. In the beginning I was using it daily, but after the excitement went away and the hassle of driving 30 minutes to get bottles filled, I only used it when a situation came up.

-The daily driving experience with Turbo resulted in developing more of a lead foot. I was more tempted to drive like a maniac and found myself trying to initiate roll races on the interstate. The obvious downside is that this makes the driving experience irresponsible and dangerous of course.

For the Track:
-I was torn between the two, but if I had to choose, I would choose the turbo. I feel I maxed out how much nitrous could be put through the scion engine with stock internals on nitrous, but I felt that I had more room for performance with the turbo by doing some tuning and adding more boost. One thing to remember though is that our TC's have an open differential, therefore, only so much power is making it to the ground before axles snap or wheels spin. I ran drag radials on the car and never snapped an axle, but traction was always difficult. I could never get the most out of the turbo until third gear. The nitrous started becoming controlled in second gear.

For the bench racers:
-The spray was definitely a great surprise to many who wanted to sh*t talk the TC and it's "limited" power. On nitrous, I removed the spare tire, put two 10 pound bottles in the spare wheel area and ran the lines through the interior of the car. All lines in the engine bay were covered with fuel hose, therefore the car appeared to be stock.

-The turbo on the other hand had the obvious intercooler and loud blow off valve. This caught the attention of many ricers and cops. I for one hated that attention. "
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:22 PM
  #69  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

Okay, since you said a 50 shot is more than 50HP, that means it's around 210WHP (he also had an exhaust). So 210WHP NO2 = 14.4 (even though I'm seeing a 14.591 on the time slip) vs 220WHP turbo = 14.044.

Since all that is pretty much correct, then yes, a 75 shot would be faster than Krdshrk's tC, but you're also missing the fact that he only made 220WHP and is running the very inefficient Greddy kit. With a Dezod S1, he'd easily hit 240WHP (auto threshold), which would put him faster than the 75shot.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:25 PM
  #70  
ecko04's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,243
From: Atlanta/Charlotte/Auburn
Default

Time sheet says 14.473. The time sheet I saw for the turbo said 14.2 not 14.044.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:26 PM
  #71  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

And I'm also seeing the posts right in between, where Agent says he's getting his best times at 14.7 with a 70shot, plus I/H/E/P.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:28 PM
  #72  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by ecko04
Time sheet says 14.473. The time sheet I saw for the turbo said 14.2 not 14.044.
Okay so comparing the two time sheets shown, the turbo ran a .25 second faster 1/4 mile, with only about 10 more WHP.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:29 PM
  #73  
ecko04's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,243
From: Atlanta/Charlotte/Auburn
Default

Originally Posted by CarbonXe
Okay, since you said a 50 shot is more than 50HP, that means it's around 210WHP (he also had an exhaust). So 210WHP NO2 = 14.4 (even though I'm seeing a 14.591 on the time slip) vs 220WHP turbo = 14.044.

Since all that is pretty much correct, then yes, a 75 shot would be faster than Krdshrk's tC, but you're also missing the fact that he only made 220WHP and is running the very inefficient Greddy kit. With a Dezod S1, he'd easily hit 240WHP (auto threshold), which would put him faster than the 75shot.
I don't have an auto so I can't go that much into the internals and how it works. That's why I said I believe it should be dyno'd again. Not saying it is wrong but we've seen how depending 'how the car feels' for the most part, varying dyno results that can be pretty wide. With the 75 shot I just don't see a turbo running 240whp beating it especially with the torque that it'll put down. I do see what you're saying but i'm saying I disagree, it isn't necessarily about who is right and who is wrong, that debate can go on for a while. Then we can get into building motors and strengthening transmissions to run a even larger shot of nitrous as well as larger, more efficient, less conservative turbo's, etc.

There are a lot of variables and I believe we agree there. The same as it is with a turbo the install, kit, temp, etc. all play a role.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:33 PM
  #74  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

It was dyno'd on a Dyno Dynamics, they're the most accurate dynos on the market, this is widely known. It reads accurately, not low.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:36 PM
  #75  
ecko04's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,243
From: Atlanta/Charlotte/Auburn
Default

Originally Posted by CarbonXe
It was dyno'd on a Dyno Dynamics, they're the most accurate dynos on the market, this is widely known. It reads accurately, not low.
I find it funny how such a statement can be made. Even the 'most' accurate dyno's have 'brain farts'. It never hurts to have it dyno'd again or a few more times for that matter. I do like how all the information here is coming from respectable members and have actual sheets if they're not so well known. Lots of good information here. If anything the OP should be pleased and others who read later.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 05:44 PM
  #76  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

Yeah, when they have those 'brain farts' it's for one or two pulls. I ran into this for my first dyno pull, 12PSI 218WHP, next pull - 291WHP. Even when I was getting dyno tuned, the dyno read high for one of my pulls, I was only running 7PSI and hit 306WHP, next pull I was back to the realistic 270. From there the dyno read consistently. Krdshrk was dyno tuned, meaning his car probably made about 40-60 pulls. So you're going to say that the dyno just magically read incredibly low for the exact number of pulls? Sorry, but no.

From the looks of everything, there is barely any difference between the turbo and No2 routes for the auto tC. And don't try to bring in the 5-spd, we all know No2 is a waste for that route, especially when turbo + stock internals can reach 350-400WHP and Sickle claims he was reaching the internals threshold at 270WHP. Plus, let's not forget that a turbo is capable of achieving much better gas mileage than N/A. I get 34-36MPG HWY with 18's and a wing.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 07:19 PM
  #77  
ecko04's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,243
From: Atlanta/Charlotte/Auburn
Default

Worth a mention, svencarlson07 has a auto tC that he is parting out....his was also a auto turbo running the Dezod S1 Auto Turbo that put down 231whp : 240tq @ 5psi.

OP you can PM svencarlson07 to ask him questions you may have about going turbo on an auto. He sold me the nitrous kit I have, it was brand new, he opted to go turbo instead of nitrous so I picked the nitrous kit up from him. I have a bunch of nitrous contacts that ran on tC's and a few that run 100 shot daily if you want to talk to them too.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 07:20 PM
  #78  
Joyride's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fail, INC
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,972
From: A dumpster
Default

I like to type alot! Doesnt waste my time or anything nope.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 07:26 PM
  #79  
ecko04's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fresh Crew
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,243
From: Atlanta/Charlotte/Auburn
Default

Certainly doesn't waste mine. I type all day, every day working on my research, thesis proposal and grant writing. I take typing on these forums as a type of euphoria to get away from it all.
Old Apr 23, 2009 | 09:18 PM
  #80  
Ukno0003's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 694
From: North Carolina - 704
Default

Originally Posted by ecko04
Worth a mention, svencarlson07 has a auto tC that he is parting out....his was also a auto turbo running the Dezod S1 Auto Turbo that put down 231whp : 240tq @ 5psi.

OP you can PM svencarlson07 to ask him questions you may have about going turbo on an auto. He sold me the nitrous kit I have, it was brand new, he opted to go turbo instead of nitrous so I picked the nitrous kit up from him. I have a bunch of nitrous contacts that ran on tC's and a few that run 100 shot daily if you want to talk to them too.



.... I wonder why he chose turbo over the nitrous.....


Ecko, dude just let it go. You are sitting here trying to sell the nitrous route and how good it is when the OP has already said he wants to go turbo. I personally dont give a crap about how much you love your nitrous setup or how better you think nitrous is. And how nitrous will walk on a boosted tC any day. If you really wanna open a debate about it, make a new thread so people can tell you how retarded you are for thinking nitrous is more useful/safe then boost. And why your at it, why dont you tell all the car companies that come with stock turbos that they are unreliable because they are boosted and try to convince them that nitrous stock is the way to go. Theres a reason 10 sec supras and skylines are running large turbos and not a 400 shot of nitrous or something ridiculous like that. If he really wanted there are ways to build auto trannys so that they can hold huge power and are actually better for a drag setup then manuals. So dude just let your nitrous high go because obviously you arent convincing anyone that a nitrous setup is better then a turbo setup and it doesnt seem like you are going to.


And if typing on a forum is your way of getting away from it all man. I suggest you go out and get yourself a girl mate or do something more productive and social with your life to get away from things.But to each is his own i guess.



All times are GMT. The time now is 07:51 AM.