advantages vs. disadvantages

DSMpilot · 02-03-2003, 05:53 PM

what are the advantages and disadvantages of putting a turbo in to a non turbo?

Kirby · 02-03-2003, 08:59 PM

Advantages: speed, power, disadvantages: gas prices for premium fuel, more things to pay attention to.

DSMpilot · 02-03-2003, 09:41 PM

i should have been clearer on what i was asking. what are the dis/advantages of turboing a non turbo compared to buying a gst?

Kirby · 02-06-2003, 08:27 PM

None.

qwall · 02-06-2003, 09:11 PM

it's gonna cost you a lot more in the long run to put a turbo in than buy a factory turbocharged car........you'll be only able to run so much psi unless you redo your bottom end ( more money)
q

jUiCeD MiTsU93 · 02-06-2003, 09:42 PM

well depends on what year of gs-t because the 2ng gen 4g63t isn't built exactly the same and some of these cars expierence a problem called crankwalk(if im correct i think about 30%) so if your going to get a 2nd gen i would just say take ## chance at turboing your car.

jUcIeDMiTsU93

silvereclipse · 02-07-2003, 04:05 PM

it's gonna cost you a lot more in the long run to put a turbo in than buy a factory turbocharged car........you'll be only able to run so much psi unless you redo your bottom end ( more money)

I disagree, Buy a turbo kit for about $2500 and some supporting mods for ~$500(dont even NEED many) then you dont have to pay insurance on the turbo, that is the main reason i didnt get a GS-T

mdre21 · 02-07-2003, 04:09 PM

crankwalk is only about 9%-10%. Both engines are good and the 420A seems to be responding to boost well, so i would say if you already have a 420A turbo it but if you are looking to buy a car I would buy the 4g63.

GO420AGO · 02-07-2003, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mdre21
crankwalk is only about 9%-10%. Both engines are good and the 420A seems to be responding to boost well, so i would say if you already have a 420A turbo it but if you are looking to buy a car I would buy the 4g63.

well said.

Kirby · 02-07-2003, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by qwall
it's gonna cost you a lot more in the long run to put a turbo in than buy a factory turbocharged car........you'll be only able to run so much psi unless you redo your bottom end ( more money)
q

You are full of crap!!! for the same money it would cost you to switch to a gst, you could bolt a turbo kit on your car and already be a little faster than the stock gst.

qwall · 02-07-2003, 08:01 PM

so Kirby, if he slaps a factory turbo on a non turbo car then he'll be faster than a gsx right?.......also considering the cost of a n/t and parts and labor to make it a turbo and comparing it to a factory turbocharged car you can't tell me that it comes out cheaper to buy a n/t and turbo it..........as far as insurance goes , both my dsm and my vette are insured in my brother's name so turbo or no turbo doesn't really make any difference to me in terms of money
q

98Turbbo420A · 02-07-2003, 08:32 PM

Accually...............Ok here I go!!!

Lets use me as an example. I bought my car in 1999 (it's a 98 GS). I bought the car for 14000 out the door. In california mind you! Anyways back on topic, now at that time the same year GS-T's were in the 20000 dollar range, way out of my reach, I was 19. Now, lets do come math:
Star Stage 2: 2700
Eagle Rods: 350
Je Pistons: 350
RC 550cc: 300
Centerforce Clutch: 300
Apex'i SAFC: 300 or if you want to go standalone (crazy) Accel DFI 1200
Ignition Amp: 400
Thermal CatBack 500

Grand Total: 19200
Sure there are little odds and ends like bearings, rings, and what not, I'm just stating major items. Not to mention that I did most of the work myself, so therefore it saved me a ton on labor. Some arn't so lucky. However, back on topic!

Still less than a STOCK GS-T. At this point I would be running around 15-18psi on a T3/T4 which in my professional opinion is good for around 325 wheel HP. That's nothing to sneeze at either. Now I must add that this is MY route, that dosen't mean that others have got the parts used and cheaper then I. The point I'm trying to make is that things arn't always what they seem. It depends on when one bought the car. I've had my turbo kit on for 3+ years now, and at the time it was cheaper for me to buy a GS and turbo it. That's why I got my car. I hope that helps a little!

qwall · 02-07-2003, 08:47 PM

that's good info 98turbo......you did the work yourself so you saved a lot of money there, prices here aren't that big between turbo and n/t , at most 3k for the same year, relatively similar miles, and 1g are even closer in price than 2g
q

jimmy169 · 02-07-2003, 10:55 PM

the huge advantage is no CRANKWALK. It's not 10%, it's more like past 60%!!! Seriously, search around the internate, ask around, crank walk is almost common aspecially now that the cars are hitting past 70k. Some get it early, some get it late, but it's a HUGE problem and people have changed their engines and gotten it again.

98RedGs · 02-08-2003, 03:59 AM

Quote:

It's not 10%, it's more like past 60%!!!

Take into consideration how many people bought the 4G63 (gst/gsx) and then get that number. Once you get that number divide it by how many cases you know have crankwalk or have had it. Then add about 10k-30 thousand people and divide that number by the total number of people that bought those cars...

It aint 60%, 50%, 40%... More like under 30% i bet!

96esi · 02-08-2003, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by qwall
so Kirby, if he slaps a factory turbo on a non turbo car then he'll be faster than a gsx right

wrong...you can't just slap a factory turbo on a non-turbo car. It is a custom job, even tho they have kits for it, the 420a was not designed for boost originally. These are completely different engines where almost zero (probably zero) parts are interchangeable. So you aren't just putting a factory turbo (ie: turbo that comes stock with a 4g63t) on a non-turbo.

This discussion could go on for ages. I am all for the 420a turbo side though

mdre21 · 02-08-2003, 11:08 AM

the last official numbers I saw on crank walk were something like this:

95-9%
96-9%
97-17%
98-9%
99-9%

even without the number of actual vehicles sold if you set all five years equal in numbers sold that averages out to be 10.6%, now i don't remember if those were exact numbers but it was pretty close.

kamakazy59 · 02-08-2003, 12:07 PM

Dont forget that the 420A as an engine is designed better, I mean come on the 4g63 is 10 older than the 420A. and a bedplate lower case design (no main caps, the entire engine splits in two along the crankshaft centerline), simplification of design (about 20% less parts count than the 4G6), all O-ring and rubber gasket sealing construction, knife-edge crank counterweights and an oil / water-cooled cylinder head.

Initial DSM · 02-08-2003, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mdre21
the last official numbers I saw on crank walk were something like this:

95-9%
96-9%
97-17%
98-9%
99-9%

even without the number of actual vehicles sold if you set all five years equal in numbers sold that averages out to be 10.6%, now i don't remember if those were exact numbers but it was pretty close.

Wow! So dont get a 97' turbo! I wonder why that year model sucked so much...

mdre21 · 02-08-2003, 01:09 PM

I wouldn't say that the 420A was designed "better" with what engineers had to work with 10 years ago I would say the 4g63 is a pretty damn good engine. There aren't many engines that have lasted as long as it has. You are right though the 420A is simplified and obviously is a newer engine, but both are pretty competent engines.

CleanGS97 · 02-08-2003, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by silvereclipse
I disagree, Buy a turbo kit for about $2500 and some supporting mods for ~$500(dont even NEED many) then you dont have to pay insurance on the turbo, that is the main reason i didnt get a GS-T

That may not be true.. if you modify your car in that fashon and wreck it the insurance can choose not to honor your contract because your car is not what you are paying them to insure.... Just a thought.

and regarding the crankwalk, there was a saying I like that was going around DSMtalk..

"Crankwalk is the V-tec of the DSM world, everyone says they've got it"

-Aaron

Initial DSM · 02-08-2003, 03:24 PM

420a engine is said to be a strong sturdy engine. Its found in alot of cars besides the eclipse, so why not? I 'd say be safe and uprgade the internals to strengthen the motor. On another note, does the evo engines suffer the same crankwalk issues as the 2g 4g63 engines? I've posted 2 pics of these engines, although the red car at the show stated it was a evo VII engine on the bumper. Bute the cam gears are on the opposite side so...

Initial DSM · 02-08-2003, 03:27 PM

Here's the other pic. A guy I know that works at Mitsubishi says yes they suffer crankwalk. but he's also been wrong on some other dsm questions ive asked him. Turbotrix says no they dont suffer crankwalk.
A used evo VII engine runs 5k from what ive seen...

mdre21 · 02-08-2003, 04:21 PM

just a quick note, any motor can suffer from crankwalk, some are just more suseceptable than others, I'm pretty sure my brother's 4g64 engine in his galant did, from what he was telling me and miatas crankwalk a lot more than dsms do, and 420A's could crankwalk too. 420A's tend to spin rod bearings instead and that sucks just as much if not more.