Poll: Normally aspirated or forced induction?

What do you prefer?

  • Normally aspirated

    Votes: 129 39.2%

  • Forced induction

    Votes: 141 42.9%

  • No preference

    Votes: 59 17.9%
  • Total voters
    329
I can't make up my mind! I love the power the Focus ST makes being a turbo but if I had a choice I'd love a large displacement v8 or v12 even :D Seeing as I can't afford the fuel for either I'll have to say no preference.
 
Thats some insane driving like, from the escort to the last one of that rally driver, very good drivers like ha. I'd be crapping myself incase I crashed, must be some rush though.
 
If we're talking about exotic N/A engines then I like these best. Like Ferrari V8's, v12's etc.

If we're talking about everyday 4 pot cars, then turbo'd for the win.
 
Wim wim wim wim wim

not

Wimmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

That is what makes a great NA engine special, that and the noise which is

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarm

not

Barrppppppppp Barpppppppppp

I think that sums it up.
 
Nice SFX Housey!

I must admit, I love the power delivery of my NA, the sheer torque and noise is just so much fun. However, I have a soft spot for turbo subaru's and actually love the sound of a dump valve (CHAV!) :)
 
for a daily, then generally FI for the torque you get offset by the amount it costs to run, in my case TDI power.

Or you could saunter round in a 5.0 v12 7 series in more comfort but pay £200 a week in fuel, depending how far you go.

For weekend warrior, both, nothing like a 500hp+ turbo charged car, but then a 200hp N/A can be fun too!
 
i haven't driven a decent N/A car, but i love the kick i get off the turbo in the Audi, i must go out and test drive a nice V6 N/A at some point.

Therefore, i reserve my judgement until i can compare :D
 
having driven a turboed car for 4 months now i am starting to see the real benefit. it gives the same or better performance than many v6s would but with genreally better fuel consumption, with the hughly wide torque band its perfect for a day to day car.

but sports cars should still be N/A
 
Dogbreath said:
That's exactly his point. Mine starts working at 2.5k as well, and below that it has all the pulling power of a 1.0 Litre Micra, at ~2.5k it's like a switch being flipped. Turbos don't have smooth torque characteristics.
Click to expand...

Mine has enough pulling power when off boost (2 litre straight 6), and the lag is virtually nothing since it revs freely enough. The lag is less than the lag you'd get waiting for the kickdown on an automatic gearbox that you'd likely find mated to a big V6/8 on a luxobarge.
 
Lum said:
Mine has enough pulling power when off boost (2 litre straight 6), and the lag is virtually nothing since it revs freely enough. The lag is less than the lag you'd get waiting for the kickdown on an automatic gearbox that you'd likely find mated to a big V6/8 on a luxobarge.
Click to expand...

Virtually nothing differs from actually nothing though doesnt it. And yes most autoboxes are comical when you want to press on.

This thread is about engines not powertrains though.
 
If the pathetically small amount of lag on a sensible turbo setup makes such a difference that it actually causes you a problem then you aren't planning your manoeuvre far enough ahead and shouldn't be allowed to be in charge of anything bigger than a 1 litre Corsa.
 
Lum said:
If the pathetically small amount of lag on a sensible turbo setup makes such a difference that it actually causes you a problem then you aren't planning your manoeuvre far enough ahead and shouldn't be allowed to be in charge of anything bigger than a 1 litre Corsa.
Click to expand...

Thats okay then cos I have a 67bhp power machine.

Back in the world where driving a car isnt on a straight road and involves corners delicate balance of the throttle and predictable engine transients so you as the driver can totally learn the torque delivery to the wheels so you can push towards the tyre grip limits and make small throttle adjustment to adjust the balance of the car this like small amounts of lag can actually make quite a difference to how the car drives, the feedback you get from this and ultimately how the car compliments the driver.

Most 'lag' is resolved by dropping a gear and properly citing your engine rpm well in the boost threshold.
 
Jonnycoupe said:
Most 'lag' is resolved by dropping a gear and properly citing your engine rpm well in the boost threshold.
Click to expand...
If I need to get some instant grunt I just kick the clutch pedal to let the revs rise and spin up the turbo (a bit like 'clutching' a 2 stroke bike to get into the power band), but then they aren't my cars and I'm not paying for the clutches :D
 
I'm a turbo man I have to say. Naturally aspirated with a big engine is great low down, but lacks that punch - a bit too smooth if that's the right way of putting it, but maybe that's just the engines in the cars I've drove. I think the smaller sized engines, like VTEC style are very addictive to thrash, but sometimes it can get a bit tedious if you're outside the rev range and you just want to go.
The explosive delivery and noise that turbos make really tick the boxes for me though..
 
Lum said:
Mine has enough pulling power when off boost (2 litre straight 6),
Click to expand...

Mine clearly has "enough", as in you can pull away and keep up with average moving traffic without problems, but then you hit 2.5k and enough can very quickly become "too much for the available traction", and backing off slightly unspools the turbo and you start again. On a performance engine a turbo is almost like an amplifier on the throttle, it really exaggerates throttle inputs in a very non-linear manner. Fly-by-wire throttles are now used to work around these bad manners, but add more problems themselves.

In day to day driving when you aren't really exploring the limits of a car, it makes less difference, but ultimately a normally aspirated engine will give you more control and allow you to drive closer to the limits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom