You are making me want to build it to prove my point :-)

That second link shows a 290 HP 2.0 L B series engine. I recommend checking it out.

 

That guy claiming 290 hp out of that setup is so full of shit. You can't always believe everything you hear. If I don't see valid dyno graphs to prove his allegations, I will continue to doubt everything he says.

Edit: The 1/4 mile time says it all.

 

Yea, good point.

I think the guy with the business selling the 275 HP 2.1 L would be more credible. There would probably be some legal problems he could get hit with if he lied about his engine's performance.

To sum up the topic-even if the NA engine is limited to 275 HP, I think we have all agreed unless the final demands are above 350 HP, this situation would benefit staying with NA.

I'll keep looking for sources

 

You also have to consider that that 275 hp motor is rated at the crank, not the wheels. With tons of R&D, even AEBS could barely extract that kind of power and they had a much higher compression ratio that they were running.

If you can find me something credible that can prove outrageous horsepower claims, I will believe you. Otherwise, it still confirms my original statement.

 

that engine probably revs to hell and high ground too. which isnt economical for everyday driving...


but there are some NA beasts around... i'd take nightshades accord over shmoos teg... but only if i had a beater to drive around too.

 

No it isn't

 

nooooooooooo way... pushing a NA car past 10k is an amazing thing... the sound is just... crazy...

the turbo has got juice, and i must admit it does do a good job of making some cool sounds.. but the pure screaming that comes out of a high revving NA engine is just amazing

see:formula cars

 

my typeR goes up to 10K and yeah it is a good sound ....but seeing the light also . turbo is the only way to go

 

mad vatck yo hahahhaah

 

Yea, all motor is pretty damned hot, but turbo will always yield more power past a certain point.

That's why I'm going turbo