172
you have a point but the majority of people start these threads as conversation material and have no intention of forking out so much cash
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Supercharged or turbo??
- Thread starter ross261983
- Start date
-
- Tags
- turbo
- Status
ForceIndia
ClioSport Club Member
Gentlemans spec 200
I prefer the delivery of sc, so would be that for me.
I'm sure the turbo'd cars are capable of making a lot more power than they are doing but the cost would get silly. Wasn't Scoff's turbo'd F4R making 551bhp?
I'd hazard a guess that bigger injectors, different turbo housing, better spec O2 / MAP sensors, bigger intercooler and probably an even better spec fuel pump would be needed for a start. Then there'd be the mapping on top.
Plus the torque from a turbo is completely different to that of a supercharger. The superchargers' torque curve is more linear like the standard engine's, whereas with the turbo it all comes at once.
The supercharger would probably be more driveable and easier to get along with for most people. But when turbo'd it's a completely different feeling altogether.
Those who haven't driven a car with either configuration really should. Perhaps then they'd stop passing comment on the cars without an informed opinion.
I'd hazard a guess that bigger injectors, different turbo housing, better spec O2 / MAP sensors, bigger intercooler and probably an even better spec fuel pump would be needed for a start. Then there'd be the mapping on top.
Plus the torque from a turbo is completely different to that of a supercharger. The superchargers' torque curve is more linear like the standard engine's, whereas with the turbo it all comes at once.
The supercharger would probably be more driveable and easier to get along with for most people. But when turbo'd it's a completely different feeling altogether.
Those who haven't driven a car with either configuration really should. Perhaps then they'd stop passing comment on the cars without an informed opinion.
R26
I disagree. I have EVERY intention on getting the SC kit for my 182. And as stated above, I will be visiting KTEC to have a long chat about it all.
I would be going down now, but I'm currently in Saudi, then off to Tanzania next week
For the hassle of a well setup turbo running low comp and only hitting 280bhp I'd save a couple of grand and have a supercharger running stock internals and be happy with 250-260bhp
Darren, Scoffs car did indeed make 551bhp as I was standing next to it when it did, but even he admitted that the rollers were over reading.
Darren, Scoffs car did indeed make 551bhp as I was standing next to it when it did, but even he admitted that the rollers were over reading.
ITB BG 182
Absolute rubbish. I had every intension of coughing up the cash for an SC, but after talking to the ktec lot down at autosport over the weekend i decided not to part with my money.
As when if i got another renault without aircon i would definatly stump up the £££ for it.
Most people hum an arr about it as there is so many questions to be answered, yes its good asking on here for every member is a technical boffin that knows how it all works. I left my questions to Andy and my decision was made.
R26
^May I ask why you decided against it?
Coming from another who is very seriously considering it.
Coming from another who is very seriously considering it.
ITB BG 182
I wanted to keep my aircon was being one of them, i dont think these have been tested for long enough and maybe in a year or so when no one has had any problems with them then i might go for it.
I for one dont want to cough up 4 thousand pounds of my hard earned money for some thing to go wrong in 6 months which will cost me alot to repair. Sods law says it would happen to me.
So ill look at playing with ITB's or a low boost kit and if or when i get bored of them and feel that the SC kit is safe to do so i might go for it.
Apart from that i dont want to be a sheep and follow everyone elses foot steps, in 6months to a years time it might be cheaper too.
Also the kit is 4k and fitment is about 500 or so.
Iceberg 172
Having just sold a silly powerful FWD hatch (a Polo GTI mk5 with a 1.8 20vt conversion running over 280bhp) I simply wouldn't bother.
The power is un-usable on most roads and on all roads when slightly damp.
Now I've only had the Clio for 3 days. But it's just a joy to drive when all the power is usable! It makes you feel like Lewis Hamilton!
If you want BIG power then go RWD or 4wd. I had a TT running 270bhp and it was perfectly usable (boring in that car but usable!).
I'd go for ITB's if you can put up with the noise on a daily basis. Oh and the fuel consumption.
The power is un-usable on most roads and on all roads when slightly damp.
Now I've only had the Clio for 3 days. But it's just a joy to drive when all the power is usable! It makes you feel like Lewis Hamilton!
If you want BIG power then go RWD or 4wd. I had a TT running 270bhp and it was perfectly usable (boring in that car but usable!).
I'd go for ITB's if you can put up with the noise on a daily basis. Oh and the fuel consumption.
172 - 249bhp @ the wheels
Putting down 260 of my finest charged horses has been absolutely no problem whatsoever, I'm sure the people who have been out in it and driven it will vouch for this too.
How and where the power is made is half the issue, a charger follows the same albeit exagerated power curve as the standard car. People will only ever look at peak number on this site though, which is the reason these threads are pointless.
How and where the power is made is half the issue, a charger follows the same albeit exagerated power curve as the standard car. People will only ever look at peak number on this site though, which is the reason these threads are pointless.
Iceberg 172
That is SPOT ON!
The power in my Polo would come in at around 3000rpm, so the car was hardly moving when all of a sudden the boost would come in and light the front wheels up.
Power delivery is key.
I'd love to be a passenger in yours, cos I'll probably be tempted to do mine! :lol: (even know I've vowed to my mrs to keep this one relatively std!)
S3, Polo
A close friend of mine (Jug-Jug on civictype-r) had a JRSC conversion on his EP3 CTR with IRO 380bhp. On anything other than a bone-dry road it was a wheel-spinning mess. Given the weather in this country, it was unuseable 60-70% of the time.
First gear was useless, it ate clutches and IMO it was a nightmare if you wanted to attack a twisty road.
He loved it, but it wasn't for me.
Though I have to say: The CTR in stock form has crap traction in damp conditions (I hated mine) that don't seem such an issue on the Clio - it'd be interesting to have a go in a SC/ Turbo'd one by way of a comparison!
First gear was useless, it ate clutches and IMO it was a nightmare if you wanted to attack a twisty road.
He loved it, but it wasn't for me.
Though I have to say: The CTR in stock form has crap traction in damp conditions (I hated mine) that don't seem such an issue on the Clio - it'd be interesting to have a go in a SC/ Turbo'd one by way of a comparison!
Last edited:
If you think even bolting a highly tested component kit or part etc safe guards against any engine failure / fault full stop then you'll be waiting a very long time..
Stock engines have been tried and tested but still things go wrong at unexpected times from one car to the next.
Qashcow
i knew someone's GDI SC'd clio had millions of miles on it, hadnt realised it was yours kungfuspagbol!
everything you have said in this thread makes more sense than any other SC v turbo thread ever started on this subject.
to the OP, if your going to spend £4k on the engine, all i can say is speak to 2 people who have had it done already, then go to a tuner and drive there 2 demo cars. its the only way you will ever know what you want.
and when i have finished saving the reddies, i shall be straight to ktec to drive both and see which i want. however, i already know it will be a supercharger, just because it sounds cooler than owning a turbo IMO
everything you have said in this thread makes more sense than any other SC v turbo thread ever started on this subject.
to the OP, if your going to spend £4k on the engine, all i can say is speak to 2 people who have had it done already, then go to a tuner and drive there 2 demo cars. its the only way you will ever know what you want.
and when i have finished saving the reddies, i shall be straight to ktec to drive both and see which i want. however, i already know it will be a supercharger, just because it sounds cooler than owning a turbo IMO
ITB BG 182
I know things will go wrong without warning but i mean a company can only test a kit the best they can, everyone drives differently and i know that most engines are different from one to the next but give it a year when every tom dick and harry on here has a SC kit and youll soon see all the problems popping up, then from this people can read on it if they can use the search button and know what the crack is and hopfully be prepared for whats to come.
Ok the people with serious money on them wont give a flying monkies as they might just go here broken car and 3 grand fix it.
Theres been a number of turbo'd 172 / 182's kicking about for years now without serious issues and theres far more stresses with a turbo'd unit than a SC one.
Tuners will pretty much know what parts of the F4r are weak and whats not and as a result set the boost levels accordingly.
Waste of money yet you quote the least cost effective £££ vs bhp package way of extracting power for these :S
SC or Turbo'd Clio would rape a 225.
Coupe/Defender V8
I chose itbs over both, but I prefer the way they drive over the low boost setup (personally).
That is not to say I wouldn't do either or..the SC kits are coming along nicely.
That is not to say I wouldn't do either or..the SC kits are coming along nicely.
ITB BG 182
Maybe so but power gains would be easier still from modding a 225 or the new 250.
Im still dubious about 2 of the 3 kits so therefor till i feel happier i will not be coughing up any cash for either of the two.
Never driven a clio with ITB's and other than videos i dont know what the noise level from inside the car would be like? Not bothered about outside as i wont hear it. Either way i would go for the ITB's more than owt for now.
I can vouch for this ^
172 - 249bhp @ the wheels
i knew someone's GDI SC'd clio had millions of miles on it, hadnt realised it was yours kungfuspagbol!
everything you have said in this thread makes more sense than any other SC v turbo thread ever started on this subject.
to the OP, if your going to spend £4k on the engine, all i can say is speak to 2 people who have had it done already, then go to a tuner and drive there 2 demo cars. its the only way you will ever know what you want.
and when i have finished saving the reddies, i shall be straight to ktec to drive both and see which i want. however, i already know it will be a supercharger, just because it sounds cooler than owning a turbo IMO
Cheers, but people on here dont listen to reason, they listen to rhetoric sadly. I notice it's always the same people popping up on these threads giving their opinion on something they know absolutely nothing about. Maybe a new thread with a list of forum members who have had cams, ITB's, turbo's and chargers is an idea, at least then people will know who's actually talking from experience and who's talking out of their backside lol
As for whoever said modding a 225 being a better idea... well, the turbo is the size of a peanut, so there's one major part of the expense straight away if you want any decent power out of it lol
ITB BG 182
Yea but comparing a high power performance modification to a standard car ie clio turbo to a 225 megane i would say is not a fair comparison it would be like asking a blind man to read a book with no brail in a race with another who has full sight.
The 6k+ spent on the clio to turbo, but also the 6k spent on getting more power from a meggy 225 im sure the clio would not "rape" a 225 with equal modification.
ITB BG 182
At the end of this whole which modification is better, who knows more or who is talking out of their backside lol.
It all comes down what that one individual wants to do, if they want to cough up the cash then nothing will stop them. The only reason some one needs or not need to do some thing is for them to decided and not every nik nak paddy wack on here to do it for them.
It all comes down what that one individual wants to do, if they want to cough up the cash then nothing will stop them. The only reason some one needs or not need to do some thing is for them to decided and not every nik nak paddy wack on here to do it for them.
R26
Bomber - Im planning on going down to KTEC soon. Fancy a trip down there together sometime soon?
PM me or you can text me, Im back in the UK on Thursday.
PM me or you can text me, Im back in the UK on Thursday.
172 - 249bhp @ the wheels
Blind men and brail... WTF? Do you drink a lot in the mornings?
We can all get into this silly discussion, but I'm not comparing them, there is no comparison so it's pointless even going there unless he has a Megane to blow £4k+ on. The thread isn't about justifying the expense anyway...
Yes but when someone sticks a topic up on a forum called ''Supercharged or turbo??'' it kind of lends itself open to folks advice and opinions
ITB BG 182
Bingo!Yes but when someone sticks a topic up on a forum called ''Supercharged or turbo??'' it kind of lends itself open to folks advice and opinions
172 - 249bhp @ the wheels
Well either is better than standard... which is just dull once you get used to the power and delivery.
Vauxhall Astra VXR
I don't own a 182 anymore, I haven't owned one for a few years now, but every few months, I come on here to check out whats happening. And there is never anything new, this thread for example, its all been talked about before, time and time again for like 5 years now. The problem with clio owners is that they are dreamers, and this thread proves it. They all want more power because deep down, they know the clio lacks power. I suggest, don't pay £5k for a turbo, you won't be able to use the power at all. You should all change your cars.
That's funny. I'm pretty sure I just used all my horsepowers and torques flying down the A610. I think I used them on the way to work this afternoon too. Obviously you know more about this than me though, I only drive one about every day and that's nothing compared to the word of a forum warrior.
SQ5
Get out! FFS what a prick! So sell your £2-3k clio, use the £4k to then get an Astra VXR for £6-7k! The 1*2's do lack power yes, but thats not what they're about, they're more about the complete package, they go well and around corners. I've spoke to people from all kinds of backgrounds and ages at trackdays and they all love the clios because of how good they are out of the box.
My Clio raped a standard Astra VXR in a straight line, round the track it would be almost laughable! Now go back to VXROnline please....
- Status
