Arent turbos sluggish when trying to drive off boost??

[Chris \'aka rustboy\' Amm]

well how about you go back to school , and get taught the alphabet again, then you can put a few letters together, make some words and understand from that what ive wrote

some people!

Poor Dale , do as i do, walk all over em

This topics going no where tbh, especially when people dont or just dont want to listen! we are just going around in circles and tbh its not even that difficult to understand...

who said that?

[Lauren]

Wheel out the mighty N/A's at the IMOC trackday and I will see if I can keep up. The deal is that if I manage to keep up with them, can we stop this stupid argument once and for all please? I would also offer the same deal for the MkI's - lets face it, MkI's and N/A's just arnt as fast on circuit as a Turbo, why do we waste so much time arguing about it?

Pointless.

Yep of course a tubby is going to be able to use its power advantage on a circuit. The advantage dissapears to an extent once its wet of course simply for the reason that the tubby cannot make use of its extra power.

I must say though that the engine and chassis don't go together brilliantly well IME and this is highlighted when driving on a soaking wet track. In this situation i think an NA has better balance, though an NA will always have a better throttle response to an extent too.

I suspect Dale is talking about Craig. I see what you have said Dale, but its hardly a good comparison is it? IMO its always 80% driver 20% car. I'm talking about driving on track here btw.

[Goto10]

not really I will have you on any set of twistys, guaranteed and thats what makes it fun =D>

That's a rather bold statement Dale - how can you possibly know this?

[Vindezal]

Wow who unlocked this post????!!!

Also, on the subject of turbos, a N.A would be more efficient up a hill than a turbo (if not on boost) having to change down a gear to compensate.

N/A can pretty much stay in the same gear.

I ask lots of questions if trying/possible buy in the future

[jimGTS]

Wow who unlocked this post????!!!

Also, on the subject of turbos, a N.A would be more efficient up a hill than a turbo (if not on boost) having to change down a gear to compensate.

N/A can pretty much stay in the same gear.

I ask lots of questions if trying/possible buy in the future

ay?? doesnt make sense?? surely your NAs revs would rise, and so would a tubbys, so as soon as the tubby hits spool, it will overtake.


if your talking about a constant 60mph up a hill, then yeh, they prob be the same (if tubby wernt on boost).

[Rowland]

Wow who unlocked this post????!!!

Also, on the subject of turbos, a N.A would be more efficient up a hill than a turbo (if not on boost) having to change down a gear to compensate.

N/A can pretty much stay in the same gear.

I ask lots of questions if trying/possible buy in the future

Horses for courses.

Uphill the n/a would have to rev high to develop the torque to pull it up the hill.
The turbo would simply dial required boost to get up the hill in a breeze without the need to change gear with the masses of turbo torque 'potentially' available.
I wouldn't call that efficiency with regards to the n/a?

[RichardPON]

erm, re read my first post! Its talking about my car (as it is) against the blokes i quoted (as I see it in his pic!) I suppose the wide track of my car counts for nothing? The wheels touch the arch FFS, they go no wider! Where as his are burried in the arch both front and rear and 17"

and his pic seems to have vanished

Sorry - you didn't exactly make that particularly clear.

From the way it reads, your post seems to insinuate that all N/As are faster than turbos through the bends, further backed up by your "I'll beat any turbo" statement.

I've got no problem with that - bring your car to a trackday, and we'll see how well it does against my nearly standard engined tubby on standard suspension, brakes, and wheels etc. I think you'd be unpleasantly surprised.

[Dale_V]

"I'll beat any turbo" statement.

where did i say this????? another that cant read

[Lauren]

Just to add another 2p

For general road driving turbos are nice in that you can just waft along on the torque and you have mega mid-range power which is great for road driving.

For track NA is defo better from a driver perspective. Better adjustability on the limit, more linear power delivery, for example mid-corner you are varying throttle inputs all the time as you balance the car. Much harder to do on a turbo as you have to compensate for lag. You can get used to it but the response will never match that of an NA.

That said turbos have come a long way since the 70s and the gap is narrowed, but there is something ultimately that bit special (and thus difficult to describe) of revving the nuts off an NA, balancing the throttle at 6K+ and just snatching the next gear at 7.5K on the exit..

[Chris \'aka rustboy\' Amm]

Wow who unlocked this post????!!!

Also, on the subject of turbos, a N.A would be more efficient up a hill than a turbo (if not on boost) having to change down a gear to compensate.

N/A can pretty much stay in the same gear.

I ask lots of questions if trying/possible buy in the future

look mate sell you're NA and buy a REAL MR2 MK2! the turbo develops so much more torque lower down that it too doesn't need to change down and if it did change down and so did the NA then the turbo would be first to the top as it has higher torque!

now i know why this rubbish got locked

[Rowland]

Just to add another 2p

For general road driving turbos are nice in that you can just waft along on the torque and you have mega mid-range power which is great for road driving.

For track NA is defo better from a driver perspective. Better adjustability on the limit, more linear power delivery, for example mid-corner you are varying throttle inputs all the time as you balance the car. Much harder to do on a turbo as you have to compensate for lag. You can get used to it but the response will never match that of an NA.

That said turbos have come a long way since the 70s and the gap is narrowed, but there is something ultimately that bit special (and thus difficult to describe) of revving the nuts off an NA, balancing the throttle at 6K+ and just snatching the next gear at 7.5K on the exit..

In the real world though track time equates to probably 1% of all miles clocked up in *most* MR2's on imoc?!
General road driving is where we are at, not on the race track with 'adjustability on the limit' nobodys even mentioned n/a Vs turbo 'on the track!

Just to quote from the original post.


>one of the reasons I didnt go for this model as the N/a drives better as a daily drive i.e on pick up<

RUBBISH!

[Vindezal]

seems mixed views. Not to worry.

Cheers all

[DaMonsta]

Hi:

I like the fact that this thread was unlocked because I too believe that quite a few of the turbo owners are mere straight-line addicts. They think they can make it up on the straights but tracks are twisty and curvy and keeping a high corner-speed is essential. You may well "be able" to overtake, if only the "road" went on for another 200 yards or so. BUT IT DOESN'T. And that is the thing about a track... you can set your car up for the prevailing conditions.

But, of course, a knowlegeable turbo owner can do the same thing.

I think what could well be the most satisfying situation for a track-knowing NA owner is taking the non track-knowing turbo owners. In this case, these drivers believe they can run a low corner-speed and simply make it up on the straight. Hmm, decades of track-sense would be against them in that case.

Reminds me of my late 1990s track-days at Donnington and the MKIV Supras. The more powerful ones could "just" get past me on the entrance to Redgates. And then I would be met with a mini wall of Supra brake lights with me looking for a way through. Inside or outside I didn't care. Anything just to get past these ego-driven lumps. Ahead in the Esses then ahead on the track, all things considered.

Regards,
Jim

[Lauren]

Just to add another 2p

For general road driving turbos are nice in that you can just waft along on the torque and you have mega mid-range power which is great for road driving.

For track NA is defo better from a driver perspective. Better adjustability on the limit, more linear power delivery, for example mid-corner you are varying throttle inputs all the time as you balance the car. Much harder to do on a turbo as you have to compensate for lag. You can get used to it but the response will never match that of an NA.

That said turbos have come a long way since the 70s and the gap is narrowed, but there is something ultimately that bit special (and thus difficult to describe) of revving the nuts off an NA, balancing the throttle at 6K+ and just snatching the next gear at 7.5K on the exit..

In the real world though track time equates to probably 1% of all miles clocked up in *most* MR2's on imoc?!
General road driving is where we are at, not on the race track with 'adjustability on the limit' nobodys even mentioned n/a Vs turbo 'on the track!

Well for me it does. This also holds true for road driving for me too. I can still make more than reasonable progress, yes sure in my old SC i could overtake a bit easier, but for me with the lower power of the NA i see that as a good thing and a step in the right direction where my licence is concerned.

I've actually got a bit bored with forced induction, i do quite enjoy working the engine to get the best out of it which means high revs in the NA.

People want different things etc.

[Goto10]

People want different things etc.

I want it all, I want it now, then I want another 25% on top and I want to pay half.

[BenF]

I've lost the thread of the topic here, but my own experience of cars on trackdays:

Its not how many gazillion horses your car has, it is down to the driver. At the Bruntingthorpe TOC trackday, I was catching and overtaking Supra's in my Trackday Mk1 which has a bog standard 120hp.

For straight line speed - Mk2s, NA and Turbo are about even from a rolling start @ 30mph all the way to 80-90mph, with only a couple of car lengths in it - after which the extra power from the turbo means the turbo pulls away at higher speeds.

Bentwaters would show this I found this at a Bentwaters Bookatrack trackday with another Mk2 owner - I was following him coming out of a slow left hand bend, and pulled out to overtake - it took longer than I expected !

[Chris \'aka rustboy\' Amm]

i loved my NA MK1 in the bends but always felt it lacked power on exit. i love the MK2 because i can go into the bend almost as quick, probably just 2-3mph difference on corner speed but even on a short straight it makes up loads more if you drive it right, just off boost in the bend and on the boost on exit plus the brakes are 1000 times better than my NA MK1 so it'll knock that speed off. depending on circuit though it's hard to say which would win as there's to many factors.

car set up, engine power ect ect as well as the driver! it would have to be a real twisty circuit for an NA to get a good advantage!

[Goto10]

Reminds me of my late 1990s track-days at Donnington and the MKIV Supras. The more powerful ones could "just" get past me on the entrance to Redgates. And then I would be met with a mini wall of Supra brake lights with me looking for a way through. Inside or outside I didn't care. Anything just to get past these ego-driven lumps. Ahead in the Esses then ahead on the track, all things considered.

Regards,
Jim

Valid points, as I've said before the main factor in track driving is retaining speed rather than acquiring it - e.g. the handling - your points are valid with different car types but you have to remember that we are talking about the same car (stock-for-stock) with the same layout, brakes, suspension - (ignoring the driver element as this is far too variable), put the driver in a 1996 NA MR2 for 5 laps and then in a 1996 Turbo MR2 for 5 laps and the NA will *not* be faster! I'm not saying the turbo will put in lap times that are substantially different (again, down to the fact that track driving is about retaining speed rather than acquiring it) but I get the impression that some people on here believe the NA is faster around a track for no logical reason! Yes the MR2 turbo is popular with SLJs (Straight Line Junkies) but just because the tubby is good in a straight line it doesn't mean it's any worse than an NA on track.

[Mark Mailer]

DING!

Mike Hailwood I beleive is quoted as saying "When you can leave black lines from the exit of one to the enterance of the next, then you have enough power"

You can never have enough power! After that it's just about control

[Goto10]

"I'll beat any turbo" statement.

where did i say this????? another that cant read

I'm guessing he gleaned this through implication of what you've said within this very thread, granted, using quotes was misguided.
For example, your "guarantee" that you "will have" me "on any set of twistys" strongly implies this, as the only information you know about me is that I own an MR2 Turbo.