• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-

Why is it Turbo systems are still in the dark?

  • Thread starter Thread starter OinkAodeOink
  • Start date Start date May 12, 2005
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • …
  • 8
Next
First Prev 2 of 8 Next Last

OinkAodeOink

Founding Member
Jun 5, 2002
3,026
1
0
Daytona bch, Florida
May 13, 2005
#21
  • May 13, 2005
  • #21
But I have a feeling they are catching on more so now then ever ( atleast with the Mustang crowd)

I do kinda miss the bird chirps of the S trim, and the funny questions on what the heck is making that noise under the hood, but not when I had to cruise through a subdivision at 2am coming home with the loud exhaust and S-trim.
And I'll admit, the cammed blower setup sounded just sick, where as the turbo setups just sound like a normal car or a mac truck, lol.

BTW zach, im sure your car was alot faster feeling then mine was with the blower.. I was only making 316rwhp at the time, where as your car was probably in the high 400 if not low 500 h/p range.
 

Sleepy McNastee

New Member
Feb 5, 2004
491
0
0
Lawrence, KS
May 13, 2005
#22
  • May 13, 2005
  • #22
I think people like to just slap on the s/c or nitrous, and call it good.
You are not going to make insane power on a stock block(not for long anyway), so I guess its just easy to settle for less power( supercharger). I do, however,realize you can make more power, safer, with a turbo on a stock block.

When I buy a real block I'll go turbo.


I think alot of it has to do with advertising also. Tons of people read the mustang rags, including myself, and there is almost never any turbo companies advertising. Turbo companies are notorious for taking a long time to deliver a kit. Not to mention how many have gone under.

All else being equal,

TURBO > SUPERCHARGER by a longshot.
 

91LX_5L

Founding Member
May 13, 2002
1,943
0
36
British Columbia
May 13, 2005
#23
  • May 13, 2005
  • #23
I would wayyyy rather have a turbo then SC. Its just that its easier to find parts, install, and get info on SCs for stangs.

I was planning on a SC down the road but now im leaning towards a turbo, how is the install, price, etc. Install and all the custom work is the only thing that worrys me.
 

Venom351R

Founding Member
Apr 27, 2002
4,548
41
98
MAINE
May 13, 2005
#24
  • May 13, 2005
  • #24
Oink....

I think most people seem "In the dark" when it comes to turbos is b/c of the reputation. Not that turbos suck but b/c its hard to find anyone that makes good kits and alot of people dont have the paitence/know how to fab one togethter. When you think of Supercharges who pops in your head ?? Vortech and Paxton pretty much 95% of the time. Thats b/c they have been time tested and been proven to be solid reputable companies where as its hard to find a good turbo company. Alot of turbo companies have gone to the wayside TDC, Turboconetics, exc exc.... and even ones that have had great reps such as HP Performance out of New Mexico are now having problems b/c they grew so big so quick that they can no longer keep up w/ orders while still trying to develop turbo systems for other cars.

When it comes to boost and someone wants to have it they usually want it quick. I placed the order for my Paxton and it was at my door step 1 week later and its really hard to find a good turbo company that wont keep having your order delayed and still end up shipping you a quality product.

Just my .02
 

1105

I AM the random post master...bow down
May 3, 2003
3,841
0
0
Daytona Bch, FL
May 13, 2005
#25
  • May 13, 2005
  • #25
Another big thing why people dont go with turbos is because there is a VERY long waiting period to receive their kit after they order it. Most dont want to spend the 4-5k dollars on a kit they arent going to get for at least 6 months.
 

pleasehelp

New Member
Mar 11, 2003
686
0
0
Poplar Grove, Il
May 13, 2005
#26
  • May 13, 2005
  • #26
Not only that, when people get their kit, it always missing some parts or they receive the wrong parts after waiting all that time.

I have a friend who bought a turbo kit for his V6 Mustang about a month and a half ago and hasn't heard a word about his kit yet.
 

WhiteStallionGT

Member
Aug 19, 2004
465
0
17
Northern VA / VT
May 13, 2005
#27
  • May 13, 2005
  • #27
I think people associate blowers with Mustangs because most Muscle cars made by companies come with a blower out of the factory. I've yet to see a american muscle car equipt with a turbo right out of the factory. That's the main reason for me, it's just that people aren't educated about turbos enough. They think a blower is the best and only way to make a Mustang fast, they just aren't educated on the subject.

I'm sure later down the road, once people realize the advantages of a turbo after seeing more people with them, you'll start seeing more turbos in mustangs than blowers.
 

91LX_5L

Founding Member
May 13, 2002
1,943
0
36
British Columbia
May 13, 2005
#28
  • May 13, 2005
  • #28
turbos for ever...I might have to settle for a SC though
 

WhiteStallionGT

Member
Aug 19, 2004
465
0
17
Northern VA / VT
May 13, 2005
#29
  • May 13, 2005
  • #29
I'm going with a 2.2 KB when I get my 04 Cobra.
 

94gts

Member
Jul 4, 2004
873
0
16
Carmel, New York
May 13, 2005
#30
  • May 13, 2005
  • #30
WhiteStallionGT said:
I think people associate blowers with Mustangs because most Muscle cars made by companies come with a blower out of the factory.

They think a blower is the best and only way to make a Mustang fast, they just aren't educated on the subject.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. i had some freinds today be like, "why you gonna turbo your car. thats for imports. american cars should be supercharged" im like um ok, if you say so. i explain to some of them but others are hopeless .










BTW-go with the 2.4 L
 

WhiteStallionGT

Member
Aug 19, 2004
465
0
17
Northern VA / VT
May 13, 2005
#31
  • May 13, 2005
  • #31
Yeah, I'd go with the 2.4 if I wanted to make some crazy ass power. But I'll be perfectly happy with 15psi on 94 octane. But only 200 dollar diff., hard choice.
 

OrangeMustangGt

Founding Member
Mar 7, 2002
1,976
0
36
Cape Cod, MA
May 13, 2005
#32
  • May 13, 2005
  • #32
i think for me, the most important thing is emmissions. A supercharger dosent mess with the exhaust side, and you can still put your stock cats on.
 

91LX_5L

Founding Member
May 13, 2002
1,943
0
36
British Columbia
May 13, 2005
#33
  • May 13, 2005
  • #33
WhiteStallionGT said:
Yeah, I'd go with the 2.4 if I wanted to make some crazy ass power. But I'll be perfectly happy with 15psi on 94 octane. But only 200 dollar diff., hard choice.
Click to expand...

go with 2.4
 

JJ95GTID

Active Member
Sep 22, 2003
1,141
4
49
Phoenix, AZ
May 13, 2005
#34
  • May 13, 2005
  • #34
Are there any smog legal turbo kits? I have to be 100% smog legal. They do visual and tail pipe test here.
 

94yellowsleeper

New Member
Mar 30, 2005
45
0
0
Bloomington, MN
May 13, 2005
#35
  • May 13, 2005
  • #35
there was a really good artical in MM&FF a few months ago. they did a comparison test between 3 different SC systems and 1 turbo system. the numbers were impressive and it had a lot of really good advantage/disadvantege info.
 

1994Vib.RedGT

Member
Aug 19, 2004
585
0
16
Denver, CO
May 14, 2005
#36
  • May 14, 2005
  • #36
WhiteStallionGT said:
I think people associate blowers with Mustangs because most Muscle cars made by companies come with a blower out of the factory. I've yet to see a american muscle car equipt with a turbo right out of the factory. That's the main reason for me, it's just that people aren't educated about turbos enough. They think a blower is the best and only way to make a Mustang fast, they just aren't educated on the subject.

I'm sure later down the road, once people realize the advantages of a turbo after seeing more people with them, you'll start seeing more turbos in mustangs than blowers.
Click to expand...

There is always the muscular SRT-4 w/ a factory turbo hahahaha.

In reality though, I love the sound of the blowoff valve when a turbo car shifts, especially when it's coming from a v-8 powered car.
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
May 14, 2005
#37
  • May 14, 2005
  • #37
if all goes as planned, i'll be turbo'd by the end of the summer for about $1500. if you include the 42# injectors and the tweecer (i already had both), then it is more like $2000. still a good bit less than a typical supercharger.

i am somewhat worried about the emissions thing, but i have 2 years before having to go thru it again. they don't do visual inspections here, just the rollers with the exhaust sniffer.

but turbos are so much more efficient ... superchargers can easily eat up 50hp because the engine has to turn them. and then there is the full boost by 3000 rpms that is hard to beat.
 

94gts

Member
Jul 4, 2004
873
0
16
Carmel, New York
May 15, 2005
#38
  • May 15, 2005
  • #38
BlackVert said:
if all goes as planned, i'll be turbo'd by the end of the summer for about $1500. if you include the 42# injectors and the tweecer (i already had both), then it is more like $2000. still a good bit less than a typical supercharger.
Click to expand...


hopefully i will be too. and this is exactly my resoning for going with a do it yourself turbo. starting to aquire parts now......should start the build after my vacation in july
 

91LX_5L

Founding Member
May 13, 2002
1,943
0
36
British Columbia
May 15, 2005
#39
  • May 15, 2005
  • #39
hows it under $2000 with all the goodies? you making your own kit? do u think it would be really hard to put on a tubro with not much motor wise skills?
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
May 15, 2005
#40
  • May 15, 2005
  • #40
91LX_5L said:
hows it under $2000 with all the goodies? you making your own kit? do u think it would be really hard to put on a tubro with not much motor wise skills?
Click to expand...
oink is making the hot side that is the hard part ...

the rest is replacing the headers and injectors, and making intake piping. the only other worry is the oil feed for the turbo and the tune. seems doable to me.

it is not like replacing heads or a cam or gears or anything like that. those things are alot harder.

here's my thread for how i hope/plan to keep it under $1500 ... it does not have "all the goodies":

http://eleanor.pro3i.com/showthread.php?t=538882
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • …
  • 8
Next
First Prev 2 of 8 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
“Doing stuff the wrong way for the right reasons”: A related stupid story.
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • Apr 26, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 27, 2020
a91what
Install Daytona Sensors CD-1 Ignition Mustang Fox SN95
  • revhead347
  • Sep 21, 2019
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
3K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 11, 2026
AeroCoupe
95 gt build
  • Texas_Made
  • Nov 10, 2018
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
47
Views
5K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jan 31, 2019
02 281 GT
M
I really wasn't expecting this....... First time Mustang owner.......
  • Mikedd969
  • Nov 27, 2019
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
3K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Nov 28, 2019
Mikedd969
M
Turbo Build Questions?
  • Chris98Stang
  • Sep 10, 2017
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
1K
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Sep 11, 2017
Sluggie24
S
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?