how come people turbo or sc more gt then gt-s???

[chrisle7220]

it seems everyone in this forum with a turbo has a gt. i havent really seen any gt-s turbo'ed. whats the deal with this?? is the gt-s engine to big to fit a turbo??

[Oo DaRk StAr oO]

Nope! Both are 1.8 Liter the thing with the GT-S is finding a way to keep lift enabled with the turbo... something XS Engineering couldn't do, and dealing with its extremely high compression ratio. If you can keep lift and drop compression a turbo GTS will be likely but you'll need $3500+ turbo and $1000+ for Lower compression pistons to make it worth it. If you can't keep lift enabled then a non-lift GTS with turbo would be a few horses slower than a Turbo GT. I think there is a way to retard the lift problems with turbo and the 2ZZ but that will require more. We'll see what happens after the 1ZZ kit is released from WC. Its up to those guys.

[chrisle7220]

well does the rsx-s have the same problem since it has vtec??? i just went to clubrsx.com and it seems people are trying to turbo the base model rsx rather then the type-s. i also read in another thread they said the base model of any cars such as the:integra ls, celica gt, and rsx, will be more faster when you turbo it then when you turbo the top of the line model. i dont think this is true. what do ya'll think??

[CelicaLicious]

Originally posted by chrisle7220
well does the rsx-s have the same problem since it has vtec??? i just went to clubrsx.com and it seems people are trying to turbo the base model rsx rather then the type-s. i also read in another thread they said the base model of any cars such as the:integra ls, celica gt, and rsx, will be more faster when you turbo it then when you turbo the top of the line model. i dont think this is true. what do ya'll think??

generally i think its ture.. turboing an LS motor will produce more safe HP than with a GSR simply because of the CR..

i think i am correct when i say that all the "high end" motors were mainly meant to be modded NA.. hence the high CR, lift, and other features..

[majesty]

uhm you missed the turbo type s.....a member got it turboed from revhard and apparently is dynoing about 225hp to the wheels....




-majesty

[larryd]

i think its just generally more that most of the turbo GTs are straight show cars as well.. they didnt buy the car to go fast intentionally and they arent all about going fast either.. they do up everything for show including the turbo.. I know it sounds harsh but its true.. I have yet to see one all performance Celica that has a turbo for the true performance aspect of it..

[808QwkSlvr]

Oo DaRk StAr oO: XSeng did not disable the vvlt-i function at all. It remained 100% you can even see the lift working on the dyno charts at 6k. The turbo just changed the hp and torque curve alot but you can still see the lift occuring at 6k.

[Oo DaRk StAr oO]

Originally posted by 808QwkSlvr
Oo DaRk StAr oO: XSeng did not disable the vvlt-i function at all. It remained 100% you can even see the lift working on the dyno charts at 6k. The turbo just changed the hp and torque curve alot but you can still see the lift occuring at 6k.

I know they did because when me and my friend went there to Dyno his Supra they told me they did. They are only a 10 minute drive from me and I asked them a lot of questions. They said origianlly lift was enabled but towards the end of there project they played around with lift disabled. Also, VTEC is a lil different than VVTL-i and most turbo'd Honda's aren't the best i've seen.

[MSR27]

That is a good point. Why did XS disable the lift on the Celica with the turbo? The RSX-S seems to have I-VTEC enabled with a turbo system installed. Can anyone answer my question?

[Keyshawn]

Originally posted by MSR27
That is a good point. Why did XS disable the lift on the Celica with the turbo? The RSX-S seems to have I-VTEC enabled with a turbo system installed. Can anyone answer my question?

They did NOT disable lift.

[larryd]

i do not believe they did either, if they did then their dyno sheets they sent me are false info becuase you can see the lift kick in on the dyno sheet..

[celicauk]

Dragging this back OT, I think the main reason for FI going on the 1ZZ quicker is because the 2ZZ has a much higher compression and a more complex/fragile head setup. It was hard enough getting the compression down on my 1ZZ, its probably going to be a bit of a mare on the 2ZZ.

I'm not syaing its impossible, I think the 2ZZ could be made into quite a decent engine, its just going to cost more to do than the 1ZZ.

On another point, I didn't buy my car for show or for modifying, I bought it on impulse when I was looking for a new work car, and frankly I regretted it almost as soon as I took delivery. I wasn't even in to modifying then but now its gotten out of hand, I doubt I will come across either a 1ZZ or 2ZZ that can keep up with mine, assuming I ever get that damned EMS to work ;) At present the car is a bit of both, show and performance, come mid next year it will be all performance.

[larryd]

celicauk.. you arent allowed to talk about your setup anymore until I have a new post on this forum with lots of pics and dyno sheets and track times etc etc etc :)..

[celicauk]

Larry :) Tell me about it, I am driving a 15 year old piece of crap Volvo, I want this running more than anyone.

[chrisle7220]

so do you think turbo charging a regular rsx would be faster then turboing an rsx-s. since it seems the gt get more power from the turbo then the gt-s, isnt it the same with the acuras???

[krazyone]

Originally posted by chrisle7220
so do you think turbo charging a regular rsx would be faster then turboing an rsx-s. since it seems the gt get more power from the turbo then the gt-s, isnt it the same with the acuras???

From what ive seen around here ( so. cal ) MOST turbo cars have been the base models due to the motor. IMO i think u can get the best output from a lower compression motor by adding a turbo, not to mention safer. a base model rsx has a compression of only 9.8:1 , i think this is a good candidate for a turbo. like the mr2 stock is 8.5:1 i THINK. while the rsx-s has 11.0:1 - much higher and more dangerous to turbo. then again ive seen a turbo/nos b18c5 down here, so u never kno...i guess it all comes down to whether or not u have the money to rebuild or buy a new engine when/if it blows.

[beeseries]

well with my experience with turbo'd hondas, vtec kind of gets in the way, a dyno comparison of my ls hybrid, and my lsvtec hybrid showed when the vtec kicked in there was a little dip in power when vtec kicked in, where as the ls was more of a straight line. It just goes to show that cars enabled with a secondary lift, need alot more tuning to get them to run right. Also the lower the compression alows you turn up the boost safely.

[morexviit]

why would it cost more or be any harder to lower the compression on a gts than a gt?if you're gonna use lower compression pistons, shouldn't it be the same?

[chrisle7220]

does the same thing happen to the new eclipses??? cuz my friend has a 2001 gt and he wants to turbo it. do you think putting a turbo would be kinda dangerous also?? i mean those cars are 6 cylinders, so i would think they have more compression then us 4 bangers.

[larryd]

compression has nothing to do with the amount of cylinders you haev

[chrisle7220]

well then do you think the eclipse gt will be kinda dangerous with a turbo??

[larryd]

dangerous as in what?

[chrisle7220]

well im not talking about the old model eclipse like yours, cuz yours comes with 210hp stock, but what about the new 3g eclipses. my friend has a 2001 gt eclipse and wants to put a turbo in it. since it already ahs 205hp stock, adding a turbo could give him close to 300hp. do the eclipses have as high as compression as the gt-s and rsx-s???? could he run his boost higher then 5psi??? would a turbo on the eclipse hurt his engine?? thanks!!!!!!

[larryd]

actually the compression ratio on the new Eclipse isnt nearly as high as the RSX-S or the GTS.. not sure what it is off the top of my head but yes it should be able to run more boost then a GTS would be able to on stock internals. a Turbo on any car hurts the engine... The car would be a reckon to be dealt with, a turbo 3g eclipse that is but dont forget it also weighs a ton

[Griffin]

Originally posted by chrisle7220
it seems everyone in this forum with a turbo has a gt. i havent really seen any gt-s turbo'ed. whats the deal with this?? is the gt-s engine to big to fit a turbo??

A big part of the problem is compression. Even if you get an aftermarket ECM to dial in the VVTi and VVTLi for you, the 2ZZ-GE runs like 11.5:1 compression. You start tossing massive amounts of air in there and its gonna get DAMN hard to keep it from detonating without dumping HUGE quantities of like 103 ocatane or something else rediculous like that. Lower compression engines are much better suited to forced induction, because one of the the things you do when you cram more air into a cylinder than it would normally suck is you raise the amount of pressure when the piston gets to TDC - essentially the same as raising compression.

DOH - someone already said this. That'l learn me to read the whole post before replying :)

Griffin

[khmer_VVTLi]

if my numbers are correct the last two supra turbos had about the same compression ratio. the latest supra can handle way more boost than the MKIII supra. its not just compression ratio that really hinders a motor to be FI, although compression ratio does play a role in it

[Griffin]

Originally posted by khmer_VVTLi
if my numbers are correct the last two supra turbos had about the same compression ratio. the latest supra can handle way more boost than the MKIII supra. its not just compression ratio that really hinders a motor to be FI, although compression ratio does play a role in it

Supra TT was like 9.5:1 or 10:1 - the NA version had much higher compression though. You CAN do FI at high compression, but you have to have keep cylinder temperatures down and have some crazy advance on the ignition. Its just a big pain in the ass and you can make power with a lot less hastle using FI on a slightly lower compression engine - at least if your running pump gas...

Griffin

[chrisle7220]

how much hp would a turbo approximately add to my gt???

[EndlessShock]

Originally posted by chrisle7220
how much hp would a turbo approximately add to my gt???

From what I have been reading about 50 or so...

[chrisle7220]

50hp??? thats it!! at how much boost??? someone told me the WCT turbo, it gives you like 80hp more or something.

[larryd]

how much hp it gives is dependant on ALOT of factors..

how much boost
how well tuned
what type of turbo (cfm)
what supporting mods are done

etc etc , the list goes on.. I really suggest to most of you guys that you learn alot more about how a turbo works before you even think about buying a kit..

[chrisle7220]

so do ya'll think i should trade in my gt and get a gt-s and turbo that??? or should i keep my gt and turbo that?? i think since you can put the boost higher on the gt, it could easily make up for the hp difference. but i just wanna know what ya'll think??

[larryd]

i would just turbo the GT.. becuase eventually if you do build the block which youll have to do in either to run more boost you can do other things as well as change the rev limiter and rev higher which would almost make the GT a GTS if the lift is disabled which its rumored to be