Mezmerize19
Active member
So does the Lamborghini but you dont see that looking like crap
The perfect car
- Thread starter Gavajabra2
- Start date
Mezmerize19
Active member
I like those rims...
zerospinskier
Active member
False, MY car is the perfect car!
ijibgoremtn
Active member
my new 1.8t is sick... jet black to
Wis_Skier_23
Active member
viper is where its at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIhEvNtH9Yg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu2uo66nP08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIhEvNtH9Yg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu2uo66nP08
ijibgoremtn
Active member
i think i see intercoolers so im gonna assume thats the new one with like 1100 hp and a twin turbo....epic
skiaspen17
New member
No Man The "Perfect Car is a 1975 dodge Dart! it is the most beautiful machinery that you will ever lay your eyes on! If that doesn't float your boat then try the 2000 Saab 900 turbo! Both amazing ass cars...if you don't believe me then just go test any of these sick ass cars! Trust me! The Jeep Grand Cherokee doesn't have shit on either of those dream machines! believe it!
4frntSkier
Active member
get an evo
Shpadoinkle
Active member
jesus dude.
Shpadoinkle
Active member
oh man. i can't believe i forgot about the bugatti veyron. w16. SWEET!
tronnnnnnn
Member
first of all, if you knew wrx's and sti's you would know you that all a bov is screw shit up by running lean......the stock one is the best.... second of all, the turbo in a wrx cannot handle more than 18pounds of pressure, an sti, no more than 21....a 20g green turbo cant even handle 70lbs
tronnnnnnn
Member
and you forgot engine management. you couldn't put any of those engine or exhaust parts on without em like cobb AccessPort V2.0......intake is pointless too, no performance gains,just better sound which can be accomplished by just taking off the stock snorkus silencer.....and what is this turbo piping your talking about??? an uppipe and downpipe??? i believe thats exhaust dummy......
Wis_Skier_23
Active member
good question.....haven't figured that out yet
doritos
Active member
Wait.. a Legacy or a WRX? You just named Subaru's best model and its worst model, why not the middle ones?
Dream car would definitely be an STi. Current car is a 96 Subaru Impreza Outback, I don't think I'll buy anything but Subaru ever again... love that car. Maybe a Volkswagen, but that's about it.
Dream car would definitely be an STi. Current car is a 96 Subaru Impreza Outback, I don't think I'll buy anything but Subaru ever again... love that car. Maybe a Volkswagen, but that's about it.
squeakywaffle
Active member
what does that mean?
The blower on a top fuel dragster allows that motor to produce ~8000 hp... and the turbo'd motor on a WRX puts out ~230 hp.
Both systems have advantages and drawbacks compared to each other, but if there was a clear solution then either turbochargers or superchargers would not exist today. I would lean towards turbos being the wave of the future (especially with all the crazy technology we have been seeing lately, like variable-vane turbos and exotic materials) but superchargers are out there and they do make a hell of a lot of power in some applications.
The blower on a top fuel dragster allows that motor to produce ~8000 hp... and the turbo'd motor on a WRX puts out ~230 hp.
Both systems have advantages and drawbacks compared to each other, but if there was a clear solution then either turbochargers or superchargers would not exist today. I would lean towards turbos being the wave of the future (especially with all the crazy technology we have been seeing lately, like variable-vane turbos and exotic materials) but superchargers are out there and they do make a hell of a lot of power in some applications.
Comparing a Top Fuel Dragster to a street setup turbo designed for response is as moronic as one could possibly get.
There are also turbochargers on ships, and locomotives, ya know trains, which create tens of thousands of horsepower.
A supercharger will allow a more broad range of availiable power, but it is not as capable as a well fitted turbocharger that is correctly mated with the engines flow and purpose.
Which brings me to my next point, Top Fuel Dragsters use superchargers because instant off the line low end power is required for an event with such a short distance covered and where response time is so important.
There are also turbochargers on ships, and locomotives, ya know trains, which create tens of thousands of horsepower.
A supercharger will allow a more broad range of availiable power, but it is not as capable as a well fitted turbocharger that is correctly mated with the engines flow and purpose.
Which brings me to my next point, Top Fuel Dragsters use superchargers because instant off the line low end power is required for an event with such a short distance covered and where response time is so important.
cab509
Member
WARNING: This post has educational information, skip to bottom if you don't care.
here;s what I know about Turbo's and superchargers and it's pretty correct to my knowledge.
Turbo's: will make more top end power and have a higher peak output than a supercharger because, since Turbo's are not in anyway linked to the engine revs they can spin faster than the engine actually is pushing more air into the engine and with proper tuning will create more TOP end power than a supercharger.
Superchargers: Being belt driven off of the crankshaft the supercharger has a rev limit equal to that of the engine. That being said, because of this belt drive they have more LOW end power than Turbo's produce because they do not need to wait to spool, but will not gain as much Top end power.
Both Turbo's and Supercharger's have there places and certain engines lean towards certain types of forced induction. Superchargers will produce more LOW end power can allow you to have quicker 0-60 times because of an increase in torque in the lower powerband, while turbo's will give you more TOP end power and a higher Top speed along with improved 0-60's
Now as technology progresses and Turbo's implement things like VVT (variable vain technology), lighter alloy's, ball bearings, etc, the spool time is getting less and less the larger the turbo gets, but as said before the engine and application of what you want to do can be the deciding factor in if you want to turbo or supercharge your car in the forced induction route.
then there is also the dying art of N/A engines.
And my perfect car would have to be about 5 different cars because you can't create one car that satisfies every need.
the list would look something like this
DD - B5 RS4 (modified)
race - Dahlback Quattro
OFF Road- Hummer H1 Alpha (moded by Banks)
Fun - Lamborghini Murcielago LP640 be Hamann
Fun (2) - 1970 Hemi 'Cuda
Fun (3) - Ferrari F40
Fun (4) - McLaren F1 LM
there are a Few of my favs
Sorry for the long post.
here;s what I know about Turbo's and superchargers and it's pretty correct to my knowledge.
Turbo's: will make more top end power and have a higher peak output than a supercharger because, since Turbo's are not in anyway linked to the engine revs they can spin faster than the engine actually is pushing more air into the engine and with proper tuning will create more TOP end power than a supercharger.
Superchargers: Being belt driven off of the crankshaft the supercharger has a rev limit equal to that of the engine. That being said, because of this belt drive they have more LOW end power than Turbo's produce because they do not need to wait to spool, but will not gain as much Top end power.
Both Turbo's and Supercharger's have there places and certain engines lean towards certain types of forced induction. Superchargers will produce more LOW end power can allow you to have quicker 0-60 times because of an increase in torque in the lower powerband, while turbo's will give you more TOP end power and a higher Top speed along with improved 0-60's
Now as technology progresses and Turbo's implement things like VVT (variable vain technology), lighter alloy's, ball bearings, etc, the spool time is getting less and less the larger the turbo gets, but as said before the engine and application of what you want to do can be the deciding factor in if you want to turbo or supercharge your car in the forced induction route.
then there is also the dying art of N/A engines.
And my perfect car would have to be about 5 different cars because you can't create one car that satisfies every need.
the list would look something like this
DD - B5 RS4 (modified)
race - Dahlback Quattro
OFF Road- Hummer H1 Alpha (moded by Banks)
Fun - Lamborghini Murcielago LP640 be Hamann
Fun (2) - 1970 Hemi 'Cuda
Fun (3) - Ferrari F40
Fun (4) - McLaren F1 LM
there are a Few of my favs
Sorry for the long post.
squeakywaffle
Active member
Do you understand why I made that comparison? Please say you do.
My point (because you were apparently too moronic to figure it out) was that comparing 'a turbocharger' to 'a supercharger' gives me total license to pick whichever one I want from either category. If you want to sound smart, then try making a specific statement that actually contains information next time, buddy.
WHICH TURBO AND WHICH BLOWER WERE YOU COMPARING?
Turbochargers (like you said) are more efficient than blowers, and are used to great effect on large engines also- but in these cases, such as trains (where large diesels drive an alternator) and ships, the engine is run at a constant RPM for a long time. These engines, though, suffer from insane turbo lag because the mass of the turbine and compressor means they don't spin up fast. There is no way current turbo technology could come anywhere close to performing as well as a blower in an application like top fuel dragster racing.
You seem to understand at least the basic differences between turbos and blowers (maybe you took a quick trip to wikipedia) but your first post was idiotic. The debate between turbos and blowers is far from black and white, and you'd have to be a fucking retard not to understand why.
My point (because you were apparently too moronic to figure it out) was that comparing 'a turbocharger' to 'a supercharger' gives me total license to pick whichever one I want from either category. If you want to sound smart, then try making a specific statement that actually contains information next time, buddy.
WHICH TURBO AND WHICH BLOWER WERE YOU COMPARING?
Turbochargers (like you said) are more efficient than blowers, and are used to great effect on large engines also- but in these cases, such as trains (where large diesels drive an alternator) and ships, the engine is run at a constant RPM for a long time. These engines, though, suffer from insane turbo lag because the mass of the turbine and compressor means they don't spin up fast. There is no way current turbo technology could come anywhere close to performing as well as a blower in an application like top fuel dragster racing.
You seem to understand at least the basic differences between turbos and blowers (maybe you took a quick trip to wikipedia) but your first post was idiotic. The debate between turbos and blowers is far from black and white, and you'd have to be a fucking retard not to understand why.
thenakedcellist
Active member
comon guys gota go with this...
think about how much sex you could have in the back of this badboy
think about how much sex you could have in the back of this badboy
I highly disagree. I have a Jeep GC, and I fucking hate the shitty gas mileage.
Get an old subaru dude... seriously.
Get an old subaru dude... seriously.
kickerlicker
Member
WORD
Shpadoinkle
Active member
ya. too bad she almost killed 5 people today in my old high schools parking lot with it. that car's in the wrong hands. oh the things i could do with that car.