I am only 31!
Whats wrong with carrying a handbag round? I need somewhere to put my purse otherwise I will lose it.
I am straight aswell, I just like the feeling of a c**k up my arse every once in a while.
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.
I am only 31!
Whats wrong with carrying a handbag round? I need somewhere to put my purse otherwise I will lose it.
I am straight aswell, I just like the feeling of a c**k up my arse every once in a while.
182
hmm un driveable 350bhp car?? mapping a turbo car is a art!and turbo cars chav? have u seen how many chavs own N/A cars? with v-tec yo.? i think you will find all the FASTEST cars are turbos. id rather have alittle lag with a turbo then never ending lag with N/A lol.
there is nothing wrong with N/A. it justs cost alot of money to not go that fast.but yes a high reving car sounds nice.
Oh really??
Mclaren F1, fastest road production car for many years was NA.
yes that makes N/A better doesnt it? for £500k i think it would be fast.and its only a car people will dream about. n/a is good with V8 , V10 AND V12.a flat 4 is just a toy to them engines.
if u want to mod a N/A well it should be a v8. 100 bhp just from a cam and headers.thats good N/A power gains. now someone put a LS1 v8 in a clio.
You no where mentioned price.
You simply said as i have highlighted the fastest cars are turbos.
I then then simply reminded you of what was the fastest production car in the world for around 10years iirc was NA...
Just accept i prved you wrong there eh?
You simply said as i have highlighted the fastest cars are turbos.
I then then simply reminded you of what was the fastest production car in the world for around 10years iirc was NA...
Just accept i prved you wrong there eh?
182
it was the fastest supercar yes. but was it the fastest car? nope there was probly faster cars out what was tuned andcars road legal. so the F1 was the fastest production car.but not the fastest car.
but you know the fastest road cars are what people tune and win things like jap fest and TOTB are turbo.
EDIT: and i dont think u will see a N/A car being the fastest car for a long time now with the veyron be top of the tree now.
you must know forced vs N/A in a turners would forced wins hands down every time?
but you know the fastest road cars are what people tune and win things like jap fest and TOTB are turbo.
EDIT: and i dont think u will see a N/A car being the fastest car for a long time now with the veyron be top of the tree now.
you must know forced vs N/A in a turners would forced wins hands down every time?
Last edited:
The caparo T1 is NA. Quote from Pistonheads
"that means the T1 can do to a Veyron what a Veyron can do to a Porsche 911. Namely, blow it clean into the far side of the undergrowth."
lol!
"0-60mph time is around 2.5sec while 0-100mph takes less than five seconds"
182
a veyron does 0-60 in 2.6 secs and to 100mph in 5secs and can go 249mph.? so how is that blown away? i doubt the T1 is geared to do 250mph ether.nice looking F1 style car tho.
this car has just beat the veyron also.
https://www.shelbysupercars.com/
but this thread is for TUNING n/a cars also.where in a tuners world FORCED owns N/A in a 4 banger form!? you know that tho
this car has just beat the veyron also.
https://www.shelbysupercars.com/
but this thread is for TUNING n/a cars also.where in a tuners world FORCED owns N/A in a 4 banger form!? you know that tho
a veyron does 0-60 in 2.6 secs and to 100mph in 5secs and can go 249mph.? so how is that blown away? i doubt the T1 is geared to do 250mph ether.nice looking F1 style car tho.
this car has just beat the veyron also.
https://www.shelbysupercars.com/
but this thread is for TUNING n/a cars also.where in a tuners world FORCED owns N/A in a 4 banger form!? you know that tho
True enough a turbo is always going to make more power. For delivery and sound however I would prefer I high revving ITB'd car over a turbo any day.
182
lovely car that.more like a track car .and for the prices.i dont see many touching it.they would rather have a enzo or somthing with more then 1 seat lol
yes ive read it. and it has the same time 0-60 and 0-100 as a veyron. so it wont blow it away with near anuff the same times so the review isnt that honest.it has power to weight on its side.but power to weight isnt everything when you get to higher speeds.and the other car has 1000bhp. even tho its a 1 seater . i doubt it will beat the veyron or aero scc in top speed or 100-200mph times.
time for a aero ssc:
0-60 mph:
2.78 seconds
1/4 Mile:
9.90 seconds at 144 mph
Top Speed:
257.41 MPH / Official Average: 256.15 MPH
Skidpad:
1.05 g
0-100mph-0:
11.66
60mph-0 (braking):
103 feet
now a tuned evo 4 banger what you can do with a flat 4 car with turbo tuning.
Norris evo times
0-10mph 0.565sec
0-20mph 1.056sec
0-30mph 1.551sec
0-40mph 1.952sec
0-50mph 2.650sec
0-60mph 3.022sec
0-70mph 3.425sec
0-80mph 3.847sec
0-90mph 4.477sec
0-100mph 4.967sec
0-110mph 5.525sec
0-120mph 6.147sec
0-130mph 6.948sec
0-140mph 7.797sec
0-150mph 8.821sec
I'm sure there a member on here with a Cup racer or works for a tea and they should be quicker even without T/bs thanks to there gearbox particulay round a track.
Whats the point in even having a discusiion about whats best for power N/A or forced induction? Forced induction is always easier to make big power from and will pretty much always rule the roost for high powered cars.
Thats precisely why this topic was called whats the fastest NA clio, because they want to look at the non turbo ones and make a comparisson between them without considering the turbos. All this shite has ruined a good thread imo.
Thats precisely why this topic was called whats the fastest NA clio, because they want to look at the non turbo ones and make a comparisson between them without considering the turbos. All this shite has ruined a good thread imo.
GTTuning, you seemed to have taken the thread and completed mis-interpreted the original question.
Turbos have no place in this discussion. If the question was what is the cheapest way of getting big power, then yes, turbos would be a relevent topic.
I would never spend big money on tuning a NA designed engine. Cost for reward, its just not worth it IMO. Sure they sound good and drive brilliantly, but its something I'm happy for someone else to pay for tbh.
What happened to the V8 clio that was being built?
Turbos have no place in this discussion. If the question was what is the cheapest way of getting big power, then yes, turbos would be a relevent topic.
I would never spend big money on tuning a NA designed engine. Cost for reward, its just not worth it IMO. Sure they sound good and drive brilliantly, but its something I'm happy for someone else to pay for tbh.
What happened to the V8 clio that was being built?
FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
I agree with that,theres not a lot of point.
no its not garlic bread now thats the future.
cost on the website is £3750 iirc for drive in drive out with ITB's, but that doesn't include cams. There's the possibility of a group buy on these on Williams Clio which can probably include 1*2's if people are really interested I'd have thought. Depends on interest though, but the idea was to offer a DIY kit and one that's done in the workshop. Prices TBC lol
yep, but "oust the boost" is easier than creating a proper NA engine
Building a higher powered naturally aspirated engine is ALWAYS going to be more expensive, MORE INVOLVING, yield least bhp/£, but IMO the most satisfying.
Its far too easy to just whack the boost up, do bit of fuel correction, and hey presto your seeing an extra 30odd bhp. TOO EASY.
Theres FAR more skill involved in tuning with only atmospheric pressure to help you.
Cosequently its not really a far comparison. Typically a turbo engined car will be quicker simply because theres more torque available. But when you factor in a bit of traction/handling loss, then the playing field may be evened when comparing to a decently tuned NA version.
Its far too easy to just whack the boost up, do bit of fuel correction, and hey presto your seeing an extra 30odd bhp. TOO EASY.
Theres FAR more skill involved in tuning with only atmospheric pressure to help you.
Cosequently its not really a far comparison. Typically a turbo engined car will be quicker simply because theres more torque available. But when you factor in a bit of traction/handling loss, then the playing field may be evened when comparing to a decently tuned NA version.
