Whats more fun to drive a stock turbo'd car with lets say 8psi vs. turbo'd car also at 8psi?

it really depends on the cars, and the persons personal prefrence.
the 5sfte is best down low, and the 3s shines where the 5s falls off.

you think the 3s shines because of the smaller displacement and its reaching its efficiency range, where as the 5s is a little larger and pushing past that range?

But no matter what a turbo car is going to be fun...you just notice the difference more in a kitted car because the difference in the way it runs is night and day, where as with an OEM turbo car you don't have the NA version to compare it to

There are always people who can build a turbo kit to mimic an OEM turbo car. So the comparison will be difficult.

It also matters on how the turbo kit car is built. Has the owner lowered compression?

But a basic bolt on turbo with minimum tuning vs a OEM turbo car, the OEM turbo car will be more fun. You wont need to deal with all the hassel of a aftermarket turbo. You wont have to deal with lag from runing over rich/lean.

and player, the 3s shines where the 5s block leaves off because of the more square engine design and higher flowing head. We can go on about this, but lets keep on topic.

point being this is NOT a comparison people should be making....
you can't compare a OEM turbo car (say my Jetta) to a 7afte celica...
its a night/day difference on a celica but on a jetta...yea its the same thing cause there is no NA version....

plus "the fun factor" isn't a measurable quantity of a static scale and varies from person to person...a 3s swap celica isn't as fun to me anymore because i've been in higher hp higher end cars a lot more....

its a scale with no constant full of variables....to each their own

and if you wanna make claim ya gotta say more then square motor

I have yet to drive a car that was n/a to turbo. I have driven factory turbo'd cas which was the evo and it wasn't as fun as I thought. I mean its an EVO for Pete's sake.

EVOs aren't all that F&F make them out to be...

the only even i've drive made 400whp on the dyno....was nice but all it did was go fast in a straight line...so i guess it was fun, but nothing amazing

The EVO VII I drove had full suspension upgrades and a very low drop with [I wanna say approx] 40 series tires and it handled much betterr than the STI I drove with similar mods but was nothing spectacular. The acceleration was very impressive but even with the upgraded sway bars, braces, struts etc it still had some pretty nasty body roll. Basically felt like a turbo corolla tho the STi was much worse. If I have to pay someone to do it i really crave driving a real ST-205. Just looking at the engineering of it I can see where it would handle soooo much better. I have driven ST-165 and ST-185 and they werre very impressive. ST-165 seemed very slow tho - even in the late '90's when I drove it.

This post has been edited by Negative: Apr 13, 2007 - 10:40 AM

>


thats like saying the ae86 corolla isn't a fun car because a supra makes more power. any 5sfTe, 7afte or 3sgte is going to turn your celica into a VERY fun car to drive. sometimes its not about making things the fastest, especially in a fwd car. you want to strike a balance between traction, hp, handling and stoping power to make for a fun car. regardless of how you turbo it, 200-300hp/tq in a celica is a blast.

getting back to the original question... i would buy a factory turbo car over something thats had a turbo kit installed. simply for the fact that its going to be more reliable, have better aftermarket support, and a clear a simple upgrade path to make two or three times the power it came with stock.

This post has been edited by lagos: Apr 13, 2007 - 11:17 AM

>

werd

>

X3

7afe-->3sgte =a pants wetting,unforgettable,orgasmic experience.

The difference from having a stock celica to turboed is NOT night and day... its HELL AND HEAVEN.
and thats the god honest troof!!