Supercharged V8 , Twin Turbo V6 or highly modded 6 potter??

master m · Post by **master m** » 02 Jul 2005, 20:40

@Focer: You'll have to change your sig-pic. It much too high. max size is 550x120

nfsdriver · Post by **nfsdriver** » 02 Jul 2005, 20:58

twin turbo v6.

brightlightsbigspoiler · Post by **brightlightsbigspoiler** » 25 Jul 2005, 02:42

twin turbo v6. i love that turbo wastegate valve sound

xHaZxMaTx · Post by **xHaZxMaTx** » 25 Jul 2005, 07:26

No option for rotary engines? I love the twin turbo RX-7's.

baadmw · Post by **baadmw** » 25 Jul 2005, 16:42

inline 6 is obvious for me, in a bmw of course.... most other cars i would prefer a V6 TT over a V8 s/c (nothing against V8's though, especially the 4,4 and 5 litre ones bmw has), simply for mother natures sake... besides the turbo lag could be pretty much taken away with 1small turbo and 1 bigger...

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 28 Aug 2005, 18:42

Charged 8. In fact, a supercharged 5.0 BMW Motorsport V8 to be precise.

Kid Cro · Post by **Kid Cro** » 03 Sep 2005, 13:29

Twin Turbo V6 for me! I love turbo! BITURBO yeah!Tunned Golf 4 R32 Biturbo.462hp

Li1_aZn_k1d · Post by **Li1_aZn_k1d** » 04 Sep 2005, 21:38

Inline 6 for me cuz its lighter and v8 is heavyand ill put a quad turbo like the veyron 16/4 and superchargers duntmake the sound ppppssss when it shifts
i mean blow off valve

Focer · Post by **Focer** » 04 Sep 2005, 22:45

Turbo doesn't make that sound too, thats the BOV (blow off valve)

PSZeTa · Post by **PSZeTa** » 04 Sep 2005, 23:50

It does make a whistle that gets louder when it starts boosting.

boganbusman · Post by **boganbusman** » 05 Sep 2005, 06:08

PSZeTa wrote:It does make a whistle that gets louder when it starts boosting.

And so does a supercharger

WhereIsTheNsx · Post by **WhereIsTheNsx** » 06 Sep 2005, 00:03

i'm dtown on the twin turbo

bashderq · Post by **bashderq** » 06 Sep 2005, 09:37

xHaZxMaTx wrote:No option for rotary engines? I love the twin turbo RX-7's.

yeah sorry about that, i totally forgot about them

Sweet-16 · Post by **Sweet-16** » 19 Oct 2005, 20:19

supercharged v8 for me. gives you power all through the revs, it may rob a little but it gives you quite a bit back. the only reason rice-boy's perform so well with inline 6's and v6s is because they odn't weigh a lot. but you take a tt 3.9L v6 mustang lx and a 5.7L s/c v8 mustang gt and race them, the gt will beat the lx's ass bad!

so i'm for the s/c v8

James31278 · Post by **James31278** » 20 Oct 2005, 23:07

xHaZxMaTx wrote:No option for rotary engines? I love the twin turbo RX-7's.

They always leave out the unique cool engine. Turbocharged Inline4 Mazdaspeed6.

Grez~Supra_RZ-S · Post by **Grez~Supra_RZ-S** » 21 Oct 2005, 00:27

Sweet-16 wrote:supercharged v8 for me. gives you power all through the revs, it may rob a little but it gives you quite a bit back. the only reason rice-boy's perform so well with inline 6's and v6s is because they odn't weigh a lot. but you take a tt 3.9L v6 mustang lx and a 5.7L s/c v8 mustang gt and race them, the gt will beat the lx's ass bad!

so i'm for the s/c v8

Worst cause for argument ever?

Those ''rice boys'' with their V6s, you wouldnt happen to be referring to the likes of the Skyline/Supra/3000GT etc, would you?

Lets look at a big, manly V8.

1993 Chevrolet Camaro Z28

-5700cc V8
-A whopping 275bhp (bahahahahahaha)
-An awesome quarter mile of 14.7 seconds at 97mph (BWAHAHAHAHAHA)

Another car from 1993

1993 Toyota Supra RZ

2998cc ''rice boy'' straight 6, twin sequential turbochargers
-326bhp
-13.6 @ 106mph

That, ladies and gentleman, concludes our discussion on broad sweeping statements for today. If you too would like to avoid being made to look like a jackass, then remove your head from your anus now, and receive instant enlightenment!

James31278 · Post by **James31278** » 21 Oct 2005, 01:14

I'll take the R34 Skyline in this arguement.

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 24 Oct 2005, 23:45

Ill take a s/charged E39 M5 with 800RwHp
AND its more comfortable than the skyline.

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 24 Oct 2005, 23:47

Ill take a s/charged E39 M5 with 800RwHp
AND its more comfortable than the skyline.

Hecubus · Post by **Hecubus** » 25 Oct 2005, 06:58

Grez~Supra_RZ-S wrote:
Sweet-16 wrote:supercharged v8 for me. gives you power all through the revs, it may rob a little but it gives you quite a bit back. the only reason rice-boy's perform so well with inline 6's and v6s is because they odn't weigh a lot. but you take a tt 3.9L v6 mustang lx and a 5.7L s/c v8 mustang gt and race them, the gt will beat the lx's ass bad!

so i'm for the s/c v8
Worst cause for argument ever?

Those ''rice boys'' with their V6s, you wouldnt happen to be referring to the likes of the Skyline/Supra/3000GT etc, would you?

Lets look at a big, manly V8.

1993 Chevrolet Camaro Z28

-5700cc V8
-A whopping 275bhp (bahahahahahaha)
-An awesome quarter mile of 14.7 seconds at 97mph (BWAHAHAHAHAHA)

Another car from 1993

1993 Toyota Supra RZ

2998cc ''rice boy'' straight 6, twin sequential turbochargers
-326bhp
-13.6 @ 106mph

That, ladies and gentleman, concludes our discussion on broad sweeping statements for today. If you too would like to avoid being made to look like a jackass, then remove your head from your anus now, and receive instant enlightenment!

Wow, you must've read Jeremy Clarkson's review of the '05 Mustang or something like that, seems to take the same tone towards traditional muscle cars.

Let's start off with the most basic fact; the Supra is expensive. Over twice as expensive as the Camaro was (at least in North America). And you clearly got what you paid for, in a faster, better handling, more refined car. However, say you took that Camaro, and put in the money it would've taken to upgrade to the Supra, and where are you? Suddenly, you've got yourself a faster car with a worse interior (not gonna lie, from what I've heard, it's pretty cheap inside).

Furthermore, how is the Camaro geared in comparison to the Supra? I wouldn't doubt it if Chevy deliberately geared the Camaro so that it got acceptable fuel economy, which slows it up a bit.

Then there's the issue of power curves, which sweet-16 almost touched on. Yes, the small-block Chev is inefficient, but think of how the power is distributed. It's a very easy-going motor. As far as I'm concerned, that's the true meaning behind the phrase "there's no replacement for displacement." Technology and forced induction can do some fantastic things, but think of the occational cost to regular use (I think back to that Top Gear drag race between the Evo FQ400 and the Fiat). If you're driving so that you're always in the car's power band anyways, it doesn't matter so much. But then with a larger engine, you're more likely to have a wider power band.

And, for what little it's worth, the EPA claims that the Camaro and Supra have roughly the same fuel economy (17/26 for the Camaro and 19/23 for the Supra), although I imagine that the Camaro will run fine on the cheapest swill you can shove in its tank.

Kid Cro · Post by **Kid Cro** » 25 Oct 2005, 15:05

Looks like you are a pro.Nice arguments.

Grez~Supra_RZ-S · Post by **Grez~Supra_RZ-S** » 25 Oct 2005, 17:00

The point wasnt really a comparison between the Supra and the Camaro, more to prove a point about sweeping statements.

Hecubus · Post by **Hecubus** » 26 Oct 2005, 00:22

Ah, well, my apologies then, I just happen to want a fourth-gen Z28 (among so many other cars), so, uhh, yeah.

Grez~Supra_RZ-S · Post by **Grez~Supra_RZ-S** » 26 Oct 2005, 04:27

Thats alright, I happen to want a gen1 camaro.

D-O2G · Post by **D-O2G** » 26 Oct 2005, 06:31

i'll go with................. twin turbo! v6!

NFSUnlimited.net

Supercharged V8 , Twin Turbo V6 or highly modded 6 potter??

Supercharged V8, Twin Turbo V6 or Highly modded 6 Cylinder?