660 N.a Or 660 Turbo Kit

NightRaider

Known Member
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
111
Points
3,016
Location
KK, Sabah
If this topic has been post before sorry to ask again. Just want know which is better?
Are these all the item needed for the turbo kit say its a L2?
1. Intake Plenum (donno hot they spell it)
2. Intercooler
3. Turbine
4. Exaust manifold
5. L2 head carb turbo 6v

p/s: Those sifu's and Pro's plz give advice. Thx in advance ;)
 
660 na vs. 660 turbo which one is better? Better in what sense? The answer you get would be the same as asking Proton vs Ferrarri which one is better.
 
Originally posted by Danny@Apr 16 2005, 12:33
660 na vs. 660 turbo which one is better? Better in what sense? The answer you get would be the same as asking Proton vs Ferrarri which one is better.
[snapback]902499[/snapback]​
After like 36 review you're the 1st to ask :P
Well i've never use nor got to know about turbo parts..one day my friend brought out this topic and i got interested. So since i'm in this forum with lots of knowledgeable people. I might as well ask something ;)

My question is base on performance of the car once you change either to NA or using "turbo kits" as what they say as super charges (correct me if i'm wrong) not turbo engine. So would the car be bad, good or better once you do this convertion...cheers ;)
 
whether it's a turbo engine or turbo kit, they are both better in performance compared to stock n/a, you will notice at least a 20% improvement in power.
 
Surely turbo engine is much better than turbo kits right? :ph34r:
Well in terms of time and money consume for maintaining the 2 items. Which is more worth it in long run i mean ;) I know turbot kit is just like plug & play. But turbo engine you need inspection and etc..etc.. <_<
 
660 can bolt on? I heard people said its not recommended. Why, sifus?
 
of coz turbo-ing is better

is not really recommanded coz the internals or the pistons are too weak...they might not even take low boost levels..
 
Originally posted by sam1741@Apr 16 2005, 23:01
660 n.a.
modified until can rev until 12k rpm
https://www.zerotohundred.com/forums/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif alt='biggrin.gif' />
[snapback]903529[/snapback]​
a turbocharged engine is always better than stock, in terms of performance and fuel consumption. A friend of mine already extracted 100% xtra ponies from an original l2 engine.

www.keiconcept.net is a place where we discuss more on k-car 660 cc
 
Originally posted by sam1741@Apr 17 2005, 09:30
er.. what i mean is
a high rev NA engine
(NA, non turbo)
[snapback]904141[/snapback]​
whats the purpose of revving up to 12k rpm?? the car wont go....
 
hmm depends on what kind of driving you are doing...

if you plan to do long distance then definately the NA

if you wanna zoom around town then the turbo might work for you...but jams then die lar...

it really depends on what kind of driving ur doing
 
Originally posted by sam1741@Apr 18 2005, 08:13
higher rev = more hp
(if no other factor restrict it)
[snapback]906183[/snapback]​

higher rev sure give you more hp, cuz hp figures are calculated based on the torque of your engine measured on the dyno machines.

example group a 4age, a whoopin 240-255hp (info from club4ag.com), but they still produce less than 20kg-m of torque. but the gze, at only 165hp in the ae92, already have 21kg-m.

so hp isn't everything ler... it just show how much work your engine can do, probably can be good in track racing. but if you wanna talk about raw power of the engine, you gotta check the torque figure, the higher it is the more pulling power it got.

well, easy way to test is, take those two engine, the turbo one.. ermm maybe launch at 4k-5krpm range, an the na launch at its peak torque or 11krpm if you wan... see which one make a longer tire mark on the tarmac, the longer one is the stronger one :lol:

just my 2 cent, read from somewhere, makes perfect sense so just wanna share.
 

Similar threads

Posts refresh every 5 minutes




Search

Online now

Enjoying Zerotohundred?

Log-in for an ad-less experience