how far will NA go??

[crx_16x]

In regards to the original question of this post.

Put simply HP = torque multiplied by R.P.M. / 5252.

Therefore to increase the horsepower of your engine your either need to increase its torque or increase its R.P.M. or both.

Forced induction (Turbo's, superchargers or Nitrous) creates H.P. by increasing the torque.
Thoretically increasing the displacement of the engine.
Hence the aphorism "There is no replacement for displacement".
Yes there is and that's R.P.M.

To increase the R.P.M. of an engine (reliably) and get it to start making power higher in the rev range there is a lot more work needed to be done.
Which is were the extra cost is.

Dollar per H.P. F.I. will always be cheaper than N.A.
However your choice on which route you chose to follow should come down to what you want your car to do and why you bought it.

The power curve of a Naturally Aspirated engine is much more linear than that of a large Turbocharged vehicle hence why N.A. cars are better suited for circuit/track racing.
If you have ever tried to push a rear/front wheel drive car with a large turbo charger fast around corners you will know what i mean.

As McChook and DynoDave previously stated it is also important to build a complete package i.e. engine/transmission/sussy e.t.c.
It is no good having all the power in the world if you can't get it to the ground and keep it to the grouund through corners.

There is more to driving than straight lines, and most nice roads i know off go for longer than 400 metres.

On the subject of efficiency Honda produes THE most efficient engines in the world.
They are also the single largest manufacturer of Internal Combustion engines in the world.

As for how far you can go with N/A......
All the way, here's an example.

http://www.ericksracing.com/racecar.htm

Regards,
James.

[SPEEDCORE]

A close friend of mine's Dad had a torry that ran 9s. It was NA with NOS,

Sorry dude but if it had NOS it is FI not N/A.

[ts0nda]

Posts like crx_16x's and ginganggooly's, just make me so motivated about my car. boys i thank you!

if only i could remember all this when other people bag out hondas :\

[ginganggooly]

Posts like crx_16x's and ginganggooly's, just make me so motivated about my car. boys i thank you!

if only i could remember all this when other people bag out hondas :\

four years in denial and still going strong

[euGeR]

It's all about budget too

How many people buy a car for it's "potential to have x amount of hp" but never actually get there - plan for this this and this, but end up selling the car before they've made some noise?

I have a fairly competitive rivlary with my mate with an S15 fortunately he's ran out of money and not willing to run more than 10psi without further mods, so I'm faster at the moment both straightline and track - it kills him to see a lil honda pull away from him.

Just take'm for a touge battle for pink slips mate!!! that will separate the men from the boys.

[pornstar]

I disagree, around the track, turbos will still own NA. Its just that NA is more linear in poewr delivery, but Turbos CAN be too, the only disadvantage that Turbo has on the track before NA can be worked out, and in the case of the Hondas, the only reason NA is better is because they are FF layout.

[kiddoDC2]

and in the case of the Hondas, the only reason NA is better is because they are FF layout.

care to further explain this point?
i always thought that FF is almost always a disadvantage

[**Ghost**]

he means NA is only good on hondas cos its suitable for the FF layout... not that FF is good

if u had a turbo FF, ur going to get torque steer every time u get boost... and u'll just go straight... understear would be in funni amounts

[crx_16x]

Yes yes,

Touge battle .

[pornstar]

yeah FF is always disadvantagoues comapred to the FR layout. Why do u think all professional Race cars choose FR?

The argument is that torque steer comes into play with turbos on FF layout cars, however in my experience it is a disadvantage cos of torque steer, but more so that in the differnt layouts, around the track, the FF is very different to FR.

FF goes into a corner much harder and faster than FR, but past the apex, and u cant power out as hard as the FR. Hence having a massive increase in torque is not that advantagous as the inherent way that FF drives around the track means that u cant use the acceleration advantage of the turbo.

In reality, a turbo in this day and age has so many advantages over NA, but hey, as much as i support turbos etc, i still love the sound of high revving NA motors that really can do some damage on the track.

[ginganggooly]

yeah FF is always disadvantagoues comapred to the FR layout. Why do u think all professional Race cars choose FR?

just because i feel like being a pedantic **** ...

there are plenty of ff racers around, ever seen btcc?
the more hardcore race cars i.e. race cars designed from the ground up tend to be MR.

[Setanta]

and in the case of the Hondas, the only reason NA is better is because they are FF layout.

care to further explain this point?
i always thought that FF is almost always a disadvantage

I give you the ice-racers in the US and Canada. Made up mostly of early highly modified Hondas, they had to create a FF class because the RWDs were totally owned by them.

If FF is not that good with forced induction, why do manufacturers make so many good ones?

Traction is an issue yes with the weight transfer being a big issue. Thats about it though.