Question on Natural Aspiration

[Moppie]

Sadly the floor pans of the 4WD and FWD models are TOTALY differnt.

Iv seen it done on a Lancer in Ausie, but the guy was a panel beater and had to buy a GSR Lancer, and weld the floor from it into his FWD Lancer coupe.
Far to much work for any normal person to even think about.


I dont know what models were avlaible in the US but in Japan there were non-Turbo 4WD models, which will easily take a Turbo swap.
However you dont get the bigger brakes and stiffer suspension of the GT-X or GT-R models.




A Rotary engine could be possibly. Theres a 13b powered Mini running in many local races here at the moment and doing quite well.

You would need totaly custom engine mounts. A suitable FWD G/box capable of handling the power (for the mini its a Toyota Corona 5sp), with custom axles to suit. And a custom adaptor plate between the engine and Box.

Then you have to worry about making the engine work. This means basicly a custom engine bay wiring loom. as well as a suitable fuel supply.

Its not really a back yard swap.

[Gonthrax]

Originally posted by Moppie
A Rotary engine could be possibly. Theres a 13b powered Mini running in many local races here at the moment and doing quite well.

Not to mention a green 323 with a 20B I beleave?

Anywho, about the thread. Some mentioned the concern about gas consumption with a turbo. Just because you have a turbo doesn't mean you have to drive around on boost all the time. I think that considering the base engine forced induction would be the best way to go. I'm sure given the time and money one could hit your target HP figures leaving it N/A, but it would be less costly to turbo it. And once you add a hairdrier, there is a whole new field of tuning to get into... Hybrid turbos, remapping boost, all that good stuff :licker:

[cadet]

Originally posted by Gonthrax


Not to mention a green 323 with a 20B I beleave?

that's a good example of what can be done if you really want to. this car started out as a FWD 323. it now has a non turbo 20B driving the rear wheels, sounds cool and goes hard. as i understand it this guy's brother started making a FWD rotary 323 but it didn't get finished.

from what i understand the BP is pretty similar to a miata/mx5 motor, surely some of these have been worked as atmo's?

[Moppie]

Originally posted by cadet



from what i understand the BP is pretty similar to a miata/mx5 motor, surely some of these have been worked as atmo's?

I dont know, they will be similar since both are Mazda engines, but visualy they look very differnt.

However that said, there are plenty of Turbo kits avliable for the MX5 (miata for the yanks) and Im sure it wouldnt be hard to make one fit a 323.

[wight]

Us and Canada got some awd protegés. with the sohc 1.8 engine. a pretty rare car. as they are mated with the fm15-r tranny, a bpt swap isnt a good idea.

[pimpin4profits]

Theres a guy running around where I live with a 323 with a Probe/Mx6 V6 swap. Thats a pretty damn quick little car...the guy has no interior save for two racing seats and mabye some speakers, im not sure. But regardless, its an amazing car.

[AquaDave]

Here's the real deal
It takes X amount of gas to move X amount of wieght at X speed.
no ifs, ands or buts about it
when hopping HP you must plan on
1- the engine will not run as smooth
2- you will use more gas
3- maintance quadruples
HP is no fun if you don't use it
A super or turbo charger is the quickest and cheapest major HP gain.
Either on a stock engine gives the biggest boost for the buck.

[Ryan_310]

For anyone out that that has ever thought about using a turbo no matter how big it is may be it is not a fix to make your car fast and you cannot just avoid doing other work. There have been tests from two of the same cars on was stock and the other had a huge turbo on it. The car that ran the fastest believe it or not was the one with no turbo. Without doing other mods to an engine and just putting a turbo on will cost the same amount of money in the end if not even more because of things breaking and you could have to get rid of the whole engine by braking a rod. So in the sum of things you are better off to have other things done to your engine first and the last thing you should think of is forced induction.

[jhillyer]

Originally Posted by SaabJohan

Why spend a lot of work and money on NA when you can get twice the power at the same price with a turbocharger.

Show me.

I can't get twice the power with turbo without twice the cost in fuel -- race fuel. Otherwise, it's whopping intercooler, water injector, and pump crap 91 octane, and maybe 20% power improvement at low RPM or mid-rpm high load, and finally 40 to 60% improvement at high rpm. I'm presently at 80hp/liter NA at 6200rpm, no gadgets, leisure maintenance intervals, and I get to hear my 5 valves per cylinder chop the intake air. A turbo obscures that beautiful sound. Anyway, I've a turbo on the other _broken_ car. <<< get it?

[SaabJohan]

Originally Posted by jhillyer

Show me.

I can't get twice the power with turbo without twice the cost in fuel -- race fuel. Otherwise, it's whopping intercooler, water injector, and pump crap 91 octane, and maybe 20% power improvement at low RPM or mid-rpm high load, and finally 40 to 60% improvement at high rpm. I'm presently at 80hp/liter NA at 6200rpm, no gadgets, leisure maintenance intervals, and I get to hear my 5 valves per cylinder chop the intake air. A turbo obscures that beautiful sound. Anyway, I've a turbo on the other _broken_ car. <<< get it?

Add a turbocharger, lower the compression ratio a bit and modify the fuelsystem. With 1 bar of boost you should now have twice the power compared to the stock engine. How much would it cost to make the same power increase when keeping the engine NA? It wouldn't be cheap.

Most stock NA engines can handle boost pressures up to around .5 bar with stock compression ratio when an efficienct intercooler is used (the fuel system must of course be modified). A small drop in compression ratio would easily increase it up to 1 bar without the need for any racingfuel.

Spending the same money on a NA and a turbo engine the turbocharged one will easily have more than twice the power.

"There have been tests from two of the same cars on was stock and the other had a huge turbo on it. The car that ran the fastest believe it or not was the one with no turbo. Without doing other mods to an engine and just putting a turbo on will cost the same amount of money in the end if not even more because of things breaking and you could have to get rid of the whole engine by braking a rod."

Those guys that did that test have probably not made anything right, if there is any test at all. I know of engines which are turbocharged and the only thing that is modified is the engine management, fueling, compression ratio is decreased and a better head gasket is used, then a turbocharger and intercooler is added, with this the power output is more than doubled - on pump gas. Among others I can mention a BMW M5 engine (the old 3.8 inline 6) developing more than 700 hp with those modifications. What that will do for a cars performance needs no explaining.

[Steel]

Originally Posted by jhillyer

Show me.

I can't get twice the power with turbo without twice the cost in fuel -- race fuel. Otherwise, it's whopping intercooler, water injector, and pump crap 91 octane, and maybe 20% power improvement at low RPM or mid-rpm high load, and finally 40 to 60% improvement at high rpm. I'm presently at 80hp/liter NA at 6200rpm, no gadgets, leisure maintenance intervals, and I get to hear my 5 valves per cylinder chop the intake air. A turbo obscures that beautiful sound. Anyway, I've a turbo on the other _broken_ car. <<< get it?

Don't forget that that the power of the engine is directly proportional to the amount of fuel (air/fuel if you want to be technical) you're stuffing into it. Sure on an N/A you can port and polish the cylinder heads, stroke it, get in lumpier cams and all that. All you're really doing is getting more gas into those cylinders. A turbo does the same thing: stuffs more air in there so you can mix more gas with it and have a bigger boom.

And the reason that turbo's produce more power (generally) is becasue quite simply, it can stuff more air into the engine than the engine would be able to suck in itself. An N/A engine would be hard pressed to get positive pressure in the cylinders at BDC.