RE: throttlebodies versus turbo

["BHonnold" <bhonnold@pac-cap.com>]

Scott,

While I agree with the majority of what you say let me point out a couple
things.

My $1500 thrown together 16v Turbo estimate is right on the money.  Figure
$450 for the manifold, $150 for the turbo, $250 for plumbing of
oil/water/intercooler, $100 intercooler, $100 clutch upgrade, $250
miscellaneous.  Use stock CIS-E injectors and engine management along with
an AIC $250 and your ready to Roc with right around 200HP......this is
figuring a nice 5-7lb boost system on a 2.0 16v motor.

>1. The t-bodies are a *much* simpler system. Rather than lots of
proprietary
>and expensive components all over the place, more parts are deleted than
>dded. In fact, installing the system is essentially as simple as replacing
>the stock intake manifold. (Of course, the EMS is another story...)

Let me point out that this is not a sijmple bolt on due to the fact that you
lose the vacuum port necessary for our cars vaccum assisted brake system.
Therefore you have to drill and tap 4 ports into the Badger5 setup and run
those 4ports to a central vacuum cylinder and then to the brake
booster.........how comfortable are YOU drilling and tapping your $1000
individual TB setup?

>2. The car's weight is reduced rather than increased -probably by 70lbs or
>more. That weight is up high in the engine bay, too. The end result is a
>better balanced car that handles and brakes better. The weight advantage
>also negates a wee bit of the power deficit.

The individual TB setup will not save anywhere near 70lbs.  The 16v Roc
intake manifold upper and lower including TB barely weighs about 30lbs and I
bet the Badger5 setup is the same.

>3. It will be difficult to stick the 300hp that the turbo may eventually
>make. Unless dragracing is a primary interest, the turbo advantage not even
>be apparent.

Agreed, sticking even 200HP at the wheels requires a clutch upgrade and
probably a quaiff.  But, you have one and so do I. :-P~

>4. We all know that making the throttlebodies work requires tuning with a
>programmable engine management system. If done properly, this will be a
>helluva lot more reliable than a CIS-based turbo system. It will probably
>exceed the properly managed turbo car's reliability, too. In one case we're
>increasing power by improving the efficiency (t-bodies). In the latter
we're
>doing it by forcing it to work harder (turbo).

Did we all know this? My point is simply that a cis-e based turbo system can
make 200HP.  As for reliability most aftermarket systems win out over 20
year old stock systems. By the same token add the same aftermarket setup to
our homebrew turbo along with, a fuel rail and 5500cc injectors.....and pick
up another 50+ wheel HP.

>5. Nitrous Oxide can be safely added and controlled with such a management
>system. Throw a 50 shot on there and you're just a few ponies short of what
>is available from the turbo. At this point you're paying *less* money. Yes,
>you could always squeeze juice on top of the turbo, but now you're really
>defying the laws of nature. :^)

NOS....silly wabbit NOS is for Dentists. Even the most basic 50 shot setup
on an Individual TB system will cost at least $500 to buy and set up.

>6. NO TURBO LAG.

A low boost 16v setup using the smaller/newer t-25 turbo or the .42 AR T-3
with .48 exhaust will start delivering boost around 2500 RPMS and be fully
blowing by 5000.  Drive the new 1.8t stock outta the box and feel the
lag.......if you pick the turbo and engine managment right for a street
setup, there won't be any lag.  However, the turbo will reach peak
efficiency at like 6000 rpms and that's just not a whole lotta fun on a 16v.

Just for the record, the sound of a BOV venting at 10psi between shifts is
THE coolest sound ever to come from a 16v Roc.

BcH




--
Email LIST problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org.
To unsubscibe send "unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to majordomo@scirocco.org