Turboes?

[joeyjoe367]

Okay, here's the deal

I'm 18, and I'd like to save up for a car, and I'm currently looking at a 2002 WRX. Yeah, it's a 2-3 year plan :)

anyway, I like just about everything about it, looks, the fact that it's got good handling (4wd), etc.. etc.. especially the 227 HP :) I've yet to hop into one, but I'm pretty sure I'll enjoy it.

Unfortunatly, the WRX model is limited to a 2.0 L engine, due to Rally Limits, I believe, so they get around this with turbo-charging.

I was told that turbo-charging a car most likely only lasts a few years, and then the turboes need to be re-built, or you gotta live without it.

On the other hand, my friend's aunt has a Nissan Skyline (in japan) that has been running for 15 or so years without touching the turboes ever.

Anyone have any insight on this?

[Blennidae]

I drive a '87 ford T-bird Turbo Coupe. I bought it when it had 67k on it. It now has 200K+ miles on it and has never had a turbo problem. It has had its share of other problems, but its to be expected for an old car with a lot of miles.

[Mossman]

WRX is sweet.
Since you dont seem to know that much (not a insult, just want to help you out), I wanna point out a couple other options in the same price/performance area.

You say 2-3 year plan, does this mean you are gonna finance over 3 years or you're not gonna be ready to purchace for 2-3 years. If the latter the car industry is gonna be really different in 3 years, there will be hybrids of every car that may actually be decent performers by then, and there will be tons of new models. The rumored new WRX front end looks so sweet, a lot cooler than the current bug eyes. Also, Mitsubishi should be coming out with the lancer evolution on this side of the pond (WRX and EVO's have battled for years in japan and europe, kinda like 'stangs vs. camaros over here from what I hear). I dunno which will be a better drive, but the lancer evo is supposed to have 270 some odd horses, (to compete with the upcoming WRX sti) and I like the lancer's look :D

OK, numero dos, other cars that are similar. I've gotta say i cant wait til the new neon (SRT i think) comes out. Decent styling (still american wanna be rice tacky though :(), and a nice little turbo engine cranking 215hp i believe. Dodge claims sub 6 second 0-60 times, which if true is very impressive. Bust out a car magazine and check out the 0-60 on a s2000, which is a 240 horse power teenie tiny 2 seated monster. Yep, just under 6 seconds. I think its impressive a 20,000ish neon can do it in the same.

OH ya, and the turbo question, while running a high pressure racing turbo will definately lower the life of your engine, especially without excessive care, the turbos manufacturers use are lower pressure and the engines are built to take em. With the 5,7, and 10 year warrantees car manufacturers are offering they cant put anything that will kill a car in a few years on it.

Enjoy your new ride, i'm currently shopping for a 84 monte carlo SS or a '80 Camaro :)

[RetroEclipseMan]

Definately nice choice on the WRX if you decide to get one. I'd like to get one but insurance on once since it has the turbo is insane for me. I really wouldn't worry about the turbo in those things too much. As long as you have a decent inter-cooler on it you should be fine. Also the stock turbo on those only put out around 10psi i believe so it's not much at all. Enough to give you a little kick but it's not gonna give you boost like a huge stage 4 turbo or anything. I may be getting rid of my GTi and getting a normal impreza and building another car for auto-x'ing later on but not sure.

[warpfeedmod]

Originally posted by Mossman


OK, numero dos, other cars that are similar. I've gotta say i cant wait til the new neon (SRT i think) comes out. Decent styling (still american wanna be rice tacky though :(), and a nice little turbo engine cranking 215hp i believe. Dodge claims sub 6 second 0-60 times, which if true is very impressive. Bust out a car magazine and check out the 0-60 on a s2000, which is a 240 horse power teenie tiny 2 seated monster. Yep, just under 6 seconds. I think its impressive a 20,000ish neon can do it in the same.


edit: My bad it's a 2.4L engine.

http://www.dodge.com/srt-4/experience/flash.html





just a note Mossman, it's the same 2.0 turbo engine that's in the new PT Turbo that they're putting in the new Neons. I read somewhere that they had 6.9sec 0-60 in the PT Turbo, so i'd expect the same/similar in the neon. After all, the PT is the same wheelbase as the new neons, just a different body.

I do like the neon and might be getting one of the new turbo ones when it comes out heh 215hp from a turbo 2.0L 4 vs the 200hp from the 3.8L 6 in the Grand Prix. hehe alot better if you ask me.

[Mango]

What are "turboes"?

Do they teach grammer in schools anymore, I seriously doubt it.:p :confused:

[Rmarks]

Originally posted by joeyjoe367
Okay, here's the deal

I was told that turbo-charging a car most likely only lasts a few years, and then the turboes need to be re-built, or you gotta live without it.



Whoever told you that doesn't know what they're talking about. Look at Supras and other Japanese sports cars imported here in the 90s with a Twin Turbo layout. A lot of those cars are over 100k and still running strong on their original turbos. And a lot of them are nicely modified.




On the other hand, my friend's aunt has a Nissan Skyline (in japan) that has been running for 15 or so years without touching the turboes ever.


Not all Skylines are turbocharged.

[joeyjoe367]

Oh, well the Skyline my friend's aunt drives is turbo-charged. I'm pretty sure of it.

anyway, is the Neon SRT 4-wheel drive? That was one thing I thought was cool about the WRX..

...that and I like the 'bug-eyes' :)

oh, and that about being a 2-3 year plan, I meant saving for 2-3 years, and then buying something maybe used for a year or so, if I can find a good deal.

A friend of mine got to see the 2004 WRX when he was in Vancouver BC, they were shooting a commercial or something there. Heard they look GREAT.

Anyway, so answer me this: How long should I expect a stock Turbo to last? This is assuming it's driven like a daily-driver and only having "fun" :) once in a while?

[Gotenks]

dodge neon is front wheel drive....

It is one rad car for $19,000, though, but hey it comes down to this....

Do you want better handling, and probably a more quality car? WRX.

You want a straight-line racer? Dodge Neon srt-4

[xtremexnyc]

http://www.wrxforum.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi

[joeyjoe367]

Originally posted by Gotenks
dodge neon is front wheel drive....

It is one rad car for $19,000, though, but hey it comes down to this....

Do you want better handling, and probably a more quality car? WRX.

You want a straight-line racer? Dodge Neon srt-4

Deff. better handling. I rode in an Audi S-4 going 75 on a 270* turn on highway onramp, and loved it. want to go for a simmilar experience :)

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by Blennidae
I drive a '87 ford T-bird Turbo Coupe. I bought it when it had 67k on it. It now has 200K+ miles on it and has never had a turbo problem. It has had its share of other problems, but its to be expected for an old car with a lot of miles.

Blen,

bud I had the SAME car for 8 years! I bought mine new though and put 155K on it. Auto and loaded. Man that was one of Ford's better efforts.

Biggest piece of advice for any turbo car, CHANGE THE OIL ON SCHEDULE!!!

And don't use no name crap oil either. Thnk about the speeds a turbo spins at, a few hundred thousand RPM, and the needs for clean quality oil is obvious.

[Mossman]

Originally posted by warpfeedmod


edit: My bad it's a 2.4L engine.

http://www.dodge.com/srt-4/experience/flash.html





just a note Mossman, it's the same 2.0 turbo engine that's in the new PT Turbo that they're putting in the new Neons. I read somewhere that they had 6.9sec 0-60 in the PT Turbo, so i'd expect the same/similar in the neon. After all, the PT is the same wheelbase as the new neons, just a different body.

I do like the neon and might be getting one of the new turbo ones when it comes out heh 215hp from a turbo 2.0L 4 vs the 200hp from the 3.8L 6 in the Grand Prix. hehe alot better if you ask me.

Yup. In a recent motor trend (i think) review, they said it handled OK, but it was still a neon. Bummer. As far as the 0-60 times, i see Dodge advertising 5.9 seconds all over town and havent seen any Dodge specs for the PT turbo. Also, the PT is a substantially larger car, and do you know if they're offering the same tranny on em both?

Anyhow, i cant wait to see kids in their off the show room floor neons beating all the ricers around town. :). I love it when car manufacturers do a good job and make a statement with a very unlikely car. Ick...neon :( :) :D

[rhetor22]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife


Blen,

bud I had the SAME car for 8 years! I bought mine new though and put 155K on it. Auto and loaded. Man that was one of Ford's better efforts.

Biggest piece of advice for any turbo car, CHANGE THE OIL ON SCHEDULE!!!

And don't use no name crap oil either. Thnk about the speeds a turbo spins at, a few hundred thousand RPM, and the needs for clean quality oil is obvious.


I'm no expert on turbos, but i don't think that they will be using oil from the engine's oil pan. They spin much too fast and have much too tight tolerances to be using that.

I do agree though that quality oil is a must.

[Blennidae]

FoL:

I have had the car for years. Its the 5 speed and is a lot of fun to drive, yet is quite comfortable. I do change the oil religiously at 3K miles and have done so since I have owned the car.

rhetor:

I am also not an expert on all turbos. However on my car, the oil for the turbo is the same for the engine.

[rhetor22]

eek. That sort of scares me.

I don't like turbos at all. I don't like blowers either. NOS just pisses me off.

The only time i could justify a turbo/blower is when all the other options for NA power have been made.

I'm not bashing your car, i'm just don't trust them things with my engines. In my opinion, diesels are the only blocks that are made strong enough to justify the use of a turbo.

[Mossman]

Originally posted by rhetor22
eek. That sort of scares me.

I don't like turbos at all. I don't like blowers either. NOS just pisses me off.

The only time i could justify a turbo/blower is when all the other options for NA power have been made.

I'm not bashing your car, i'm just don't trust them things with my engines. In my opinion, diesels are the only blocks that are made strong enough to justify the use of a turbo.

While i share your anti-rise sentiments i think you're kind of a fool for writing these great things off.

this is what you sound like:
"OMG! ARE YOU TELLING ME YOU CAN BOLT ON A FORCED INDUCTION UNIT FOR THE PRICE OF FANCY RIMS, AND INSTEAD OF JUST LOOKS YOU'LL GET GET MUCH MORE POWER THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE POWER BAND WITHOUT SACRIFICING HARDLY ANY RELIABILITY OR GAS MILEAGE? SORRY, IT SCARES ME, THEREFORE IT SUCKS! STAY AWAY AT ALL COSTS!"


The only time i could justify a turbo/blower is when all the other options for NA power have been made. What? Like intake, exhaust, higher compression? Well, that isnt nearly everything you can do, but for the price of those 3 things you can get yourself a turbo that will do a lot more good.

[zads27]

friend's 1990 300zx twinturbo: changed quality oil every 2500 miles, mildly driven, replaced turbos at 60,000 mile mark. though he replaced them due to the problem of 'need for speed', rather than 'blown turbo.'

as for my 1991, same oil regimen, still running on stock turbos at 45k miles. when i punch it, its still got all the horses there.

[masterninja]

Very fun car. Lots of great features even in stock trim. Look into getting some strut towers, sway bars, etc...helps a great deal with the handling. Oh, and get yourself a good turbo timer.

Check out www.cobbtuning.com

[rhetor22]

Originally posted by Mossman


While i share your anti-rise sentiments i think you're kind of a fool for writing these great things off.

this is what you sound like:
"OMG! ARE YOU TELLING ME YOU CAN BOLT ON A FORCED INDUCTION UNIT FOR THE PRICE OF FANCY RIMS, AND INSTEAD OF JUST LOOKS YOU'LL GET GET MUCH MORE POWER THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE POWER BAND WITHOUT SACRIFICING HARDLY ANY RELIABILITY OR GAS MILEAGE? SORRY, IT SCARES ME, THEREFORE IT SUCKS! STAY AWAY AT ALL COSTS!"

What? Like intake, exhaust, higher compression? Well, that isnt nearly everything you can do, but for the price of those 3 things you can get yourself a turbo that will do a lot more good.



I think you took that the wrong way. What i said scares me is that his turbo used the same oil that the engine used.

If you think i don't like the ricers and thats why i said that i don't like turbos, you are wrong. I don't like turbos or blowers on big blocks. I just think that its a very bad for the engine and too much stress on the block, crank, rods, etc.

NOS to me is like steroids. Just about anyone can get a lot of power from it, but its almost like cheating to me.

Please understand i'm not puting down imports, if you think that, then you're obviously reading this wrong. I don't like boost in all cases. I'd rather not see turbos in diesels, but i think that of all the engine designs, they are the most capable of taking the stress.

"YOU'LL GET GET MUCH MORE POWER THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE POWER BAND WITHOUT SACRIFICING HARDLY ANY RELIABILITY OR GAS MILEAGE?"

without sacrificing reliability? I think not.

[krafty]

Cars like the WRX that come stock with turbochargers from the factory will generally not have any more problems than any other car that rolls off a factory floor. They engineer the entire system to have the same lifespan as the car, with proper maintenance.

A single turbo cannot give you added power throughout the entire RPM range. There's a tradeoff at either the high end or low end, depending on the design (unless it's a really wimpy turbo, in which case you'll only see mild improvements through the band). If the blades of the turbo are light, you'll get better low-end boost and less lag, but reduced high end effectiveness. If they're big and heavy, you'll have some lag at the low end, but good power the higher the engine revs. The WRX turbo is generally very effective, provided they're tuned correctly for the engine (like the WRX is). Generally I prefer to see twin-turbo setups to reduce turbo-lag, but you probably won't notice much with a factory turbo.

Personally, I prefer superchargers... :) They just sound cool.