I did ride in that car though, well one of them. What I remember is the power that was early in the powerband was sick but tapered off. Then again that was a different problem entirely as we have discussed(VTEC?) I agree with Billy but getting to that point of driveability is harder than just getting a supercharger with the aftercooler. Tuning is a large part of it too. If you get a turbo and it isn't tuned right it will idle rough and run rich all the time.
Tuning is a large part regardless whether it's NA, Turbo or Supercharged. Poor tuning in ALL cases can result in a rough idle (which has nothing to do with turbo or supercharger), and can run rich in all cases whether its due to bad tuning or poor upkeep and location of wideband sensors.
If you are Billy Johnson any FI NSX is easy to race on a track. However, if you are Mr. trackmycar 4xperyear than I think it is different. I would be concerned tracking Bryan's car at Spring Mountain with the extreme amount of power/torque he has. It would take some getting used to over time.
Haha, thank you but not necessarily true. Any
well engineered turbo setup can be just as easy to drive as a supercharged car. You are comparing apples to oranges - a 350-450whp supercharger to a 500-600whp turbo.
A 350-450whp turbo (with VTEC working) can be extremely linear like a supercharger, and deliver more mid-range torque and horsepower, more area under the curve, and be easy to drive. However there aren't too many of these lower powered kits out there because everyone wants big numbers from a turbo (which are often not engineered to be very driveable on the track due to lack of attention to detail). I will restate that there is a big difference between a well engineered turbo system (not just tuning, but the engineering of the turbo
system) that affects response, driveability, and performance on the track. 2 turbo kits that make the same peak power can vary drastically in how they got the # (boost, response, etc...) and performance/driveability on the track. Again, this is what separates those who
design turbo systems, and those who
make turbo kits.
If you're looking for supercharger horsepower numbers, you can have the same driveability, and a larger area under the curve, and ***lower Intake Air Temps, and a more reliable setup that dosn't tax the motor as much as a SC.
We have made systems like this before, I have driven them, and have driven the turbocharged NSX-R GT which also had this theme of lower peak horsepower numbers, but extremely driveable, area under the curve, mid-range power that I felt was enough to launch the NSX back into modern supercar territory. Now if you're Vega$NSX (or most people bitten by the bug), you get use to the power level, get greedy, and max the turbo out, then go bigger, then max that turbo out, and its a never ending process.
For those who want to track their cars and aren't comfortable with their skillset to track a 5-600whp monster (can't blame them), then a well engineered lower HP turbo, while not a popular route, IMO is a great option and can be less expensive and more reliable than an intercooled SC.
Now if you're COZ, and have street driven and tracked your SC for years, and wake up to realize you've should have gone with a 500whp turbo years ago, then that may be your route. Stay tuned for his review on said turbo after his first track day.
For what its worth I like your current setup much, much more than the old turbo setup. I think most will agree you can put the power down better now.
Partly due to the better tune, revised turbo lines, and FXMD-tuned SUSPENSION
Billy
