master blaster

1014 RWHP 877 RWTQ was my last build..YSI 6spd manual....
thinking of a change to a turbo set up...
maybe 1200rwhp+...
what are some differences i will notice?

4DRUSH

Turbo lag, 200 more hp, less money in bank, just to name a few

robert miller

Jay is always to the point in the remarks. For sure the truth in this one. To the OP here be happy with what the car is at now & just have some fun until you break what ever part is you weak link in her.

skull

Empty bank account for some time

Milan

a **** load of torque and a **** load of problems like all the other turbo cars on here

turbo on this platform without traction control/stand alone is a bad idea IMO

Dunn

Less boosts, moar powa.

zbc51

no more broken belts

robert miller

The only way on this much power in a c5 would be a 100% race car only. Track car only 1/4 mile at a time.

stevieturbo

Possibly more power, much quieter, less exciting, but if done correctly probably faster under most circumstances....and no belt worries.

Rkreigh

engine doesn't care where the CFM comes from but I like the easy boost control and mid range torq.

at that level, I'm honestly not sure why you'd swap.

are you having problems with the blower?

turbos are nice to interface with a sophisticated traction control and at 1200 hp, you will need it!

stevieturbo

Wont matter whether it's turbo or supercharged as far as traction control goes, it's a completely independent system.

But as above, it will be an expensive change if your current setup is working well and doing what you need.

I did make the change a couple of years ago, and perhaps for all the reasons I outlined.

ie I wanted more power, I wanted it to be quieter, and I wanted to never worry about belt issues again.

2 years on it has done all those things

Milan

So you don't think a turbo car, which makes substantially more torque, that comes on instantly, much sooner and for more of the power band is going to have the same traction issues as a supercharged car?

My buddies TTiX car with noticeably less HP than me makes the same TQ as I do and traction is a joke in that car.

You ever wonder why the turbo corvettes almost never perform? It's because they don't have standalone/traction control.

If you want turbo and big power the only way it works is with boost by gear and traction control. Otherwise be prepared to get beat up by all the supercharged guys making way less HP than you...spinning aint winning my friend

How many turbo Corvettes we got in the 8s?

stevieturbo

NO turbo car will ever have the instant hit a supercharger offers. Some might come close, but it will never be as sharp. That's just a simple fact.

As for where any power is delivered, or amounts of torque, both are huge variables, so you simply cannot say one method of FI will have more than another on generic terms

As to why they never perform ? Do they, dont they ? What is your definition of performance ? seemingly it must only be drag racing ?

How many turbo cars are out there who's sole aim is drag racing ? Maybe there just arent very many ?

Hardly a true test of all round abilities anyway ?

And if you choose to build a very powerful turbo car and dont take into account boost control, then it's a pretty dumb build from the outset.
Likewise if you choose to build a lower powered car aimed more towards torque, little sense doing that unless it suits your driving style. And if comparing it to something very different....really, is it a fair comparison in the first place ?

If some feel they also need traction control, then just install it. Some may want it whether turbo or blower, some may not. Some people can drive, some can not.
And even with TCS systems...some are good, some are bad so even that is another variable.


It's easy to build a bad setup, it's much harder to build a good one....that applies to any type of boost.

BLOWNBLUEZ06@RKT Performance

For people that change elevation and gain or lose boost (like the OP does), you will have compensation for that.

Some people seem to forget there are a multitude of pedal positions between 0 and 100% to aid with the midrange torque if you choose to not get a boost controller to help set your boost curve the way you like.
The parasitic loss from a turned-up YSi has to be over 200hp. Done right a turbo kit will put that extra power at your disposal.

You can do boost by speed, by gear, by RPM, by time or by any input you wish with a AMS-2000. You will be able to make as much boost as your tires can hold in any given gear and if the road conditions change, you won't be so far off that you'll be blowing tires.

Yes, to do it right will be expensive and you won't get much of that money spent back if you grow tired of it. It's a hobby, not an investment.

Milan

How do you figure a centri hits harder than a turbo car when it comes to torque? Not only does it make WAY less torque but it's RPM based as well.

A turbo LSx based car is going to make more TQ at every HP level compared to a centri supercharged car, and depending on the turbo(s) it could be WAY more.

As for the performance numbers....are you aware that even the Honda guys are now going faster than basically every Corvette (with the exception of Sinister) in the 1/2 mile?

With the exception of Mark Carlyle we are behind the Honda, Supra and Viper guys in 1/4 mile racing. We are also behind ALL of those guys in every form of roll racing that I know about (shift sector, half mile, texas mile, TI)

You guys are always giving me **** for not going to the track, well if turbo is so awesome how come that trust fund kid with the two huge turbos hanging out of his hood hasn't done **** with his c6? He makes all the power in the world and the only thing I have seen him do is drive down the road with a bag hanging off of his car

Edit: I'm not arguing it's ability to make power. Turbo is definitely the way to go. But 1200+ whp turbo and RWD (like the OP is asking for) is not going to be optimal without some kind of boost by gear and traction control. My argument is that his Ysi setup will perform better in ANY type of racing without those things

stevieturbo

You're confusing different things.

Yes the turbo may have an ability to make more torque, but that isnt what I said. I said the supercharger gives an instant hit with the throttle, which has an easy ability to break traction. Turbos no matter how good, never hit as sharp so in some respects gives the tyres some breathing space to retain grip.

But of course it's always a balancing act.

Having just gone from a YSI to twins in my car, I can say for 100% fact in my case the YSi car was far more exciting to drive because of the throttle response, and it was also far more lively as to breaking traction because of it, especially in the lower gears.
So in some respects a centri car might have more traction...in others I can say it has less. But yes they are awesome, they are great fun and they can go fast.

But going turbo also gives such easy access to multiple boost levels everywhere, so as already said, despite having an ability to make more power and torque, you can make the power much more usable, much easier.

And if people cannot build a car that will perform well in 1/2 mile, 1km or even 1 mile and they were actually trying to do so, something is badly wrong.

But again, you're making a lot of comparisons against 1/4 mile use only...is that really what Corvette's were built for ?

You say you're behind all sorts of other marques in various types of racing....have the cars entered in those events built cars with the intentions of actually winning ? Or are they just building cars within their budgets to go out and enjoy themselves ?

There's a huge difference there.

Milan

Well I don't think most people (except for maybe Nick Yoskin) build 1200 whp turbo Corvettes just for *****. I think we can both agree that they aren't using these cars for road racing, so that leaves straight line racing, which in America is now mostly comprised of 1/4 mile and 1/2 mile.

So Stevie are you saying that the reason other platforms are outperforming us is because we simply aren't trying to be competitive?

stevieturbo

Well if they're building cars, with the power levels being claimed, and racing against cars of similar power levels...then performance at 1/2 or 1 mile should also be similar.

If they're all getting beat, then either something is badly wrong, or they simply cannot be trying to be competitive.

If it isnt either of the above, they maybe they just cant drive for **** if they're always getting beat but claiming big power numbers ??

If the power is there, the car will be able to go fast over distance.

Obviously some platforms will have advantages over others.

eg 4wd will help the GTR's, Lambo's etc via traction at such events. But then the Vette should also have very good traction, and they're a good bit lighter.

Likewise the Ford GT's also have an advantage there.

But if Hondas are beating them at 1/2 mile etc....they should be embarrassed.

junk c5

adjustable ramp rate for my A4 triggered on the brake light switch. It's set on " Hook". 😃

Rkreigh

turbos hit pretty hard in my book and the ttix with the 58 mm turbos could use "more lag" IMHO

I agree that boost by speed and even better traction control are great mods for any high HP car and turbos make that a bit easier

(not that it can't be done with super charger, it's just a bit more rare)

a big centri comes on a bit more linear and is rpm rathe rthan load based so it's often easier to control the power and hook the car up.

no doubt the results speak volumes. the centri cars that are setup for drag racing produce some low 9's that are difficult to replicate for most of us normal street rats.

I'll still take the turbos. I like the "torq swell" feeling and have an integrated engine management, boost controller, traction, ect....

very compelling advantages but not for the faint of heart or light of wallet. I got a good deal on my haltech and 8 channel EGT with flex fuel sytem and it was still pretty pricey, as is the installation and tuning. make sure you budget the $$$ going in!