Turbo and V6 compared to stock 1.8 and 2.0 - Page 2 - First Generation Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Re: Turbo and V6 compared to stock 1.8 and 2.0
Friday, June 15, 2012 5:39 AM
There was a road test in either 1985 or 1986 of a turbo Sunbird vs a V6 Cavalier and in the drag testing the V6 was faster. Now granted, that was a 1.8 turbo Sunbird so a 2.0 should have fared a bit better but I've not seen a test of a turbo 2.0 vs a 2.8. I've been trying to find that test to post a link here but I haven't been able to. It was in Motor Trend, Car and Driver or one of those type mags as far as I remember.

I haven't driven a V6 J body in a long time but I recall they had better low end response than the turbo 4 so on the street they felt a lot stronger, at least until the 4 banger got into boost anyway. I think history has proven the V6 was the more reliable of the two but in the end the preference of which engine to go with is a personal thing. I guess it depends what you're looking for really.


Tony
1987 Sunbird GT turbo convert
Ported intake, Fiero 53 MM TB, 52 lb inj, ported and flowed head, tube header, Mitsu TD06, ARP rod
bolts/head studs, adj cam sprocket, 4" x 12" x 31" FMIC, Paxton AFPR, modified 125 trans/LSD
unit/3.42's, custom chip tuning, Alky Control Methanol injection
13.61 ET at 101.44 mph, 262 WHP/350WTQ

2009 Pontiac Solstice GXP roadster, 2.0 turbo w/GMPP exh, CAI and turbo upgrade, 290 hp/325 ft lbs

1969 Olds 442 convert
400 Eng, 200-4R trans, 3.73 posi, power everything, OAI



Re: Turbo and V6 compared to stock 1.8 and 2.0
Friday, June 15, 2012 9:48 AM
I remember back in the day, I raced my 1987 z-24 against my buddies XR4Ti, which had a 2.3 turbocharged 4 cylinder.

I easily handled him to 80 mph when he gave up.

Just need to get my '85 running now that it has the 3.5 liter. 200 hp and 2500 lbs...That should be quick




Re: Turbo and V6 compared to stock 1.8 and 2.0
Friday, June 15, 2012 1:42 PM
It should be a lot of fun! I had an XR4Ti and it was pretty quick. Kind of a bitch to get parts for but it was really quick after a few mods!


Tony
1987 Sunbird GT turbo convert
Ported intake, Fiero 53 MM TB, 52 lb inj, ported and flowed head, tube header, Mitsu TD06, ARP rod
bolts/head studs, adj cam sprocket, 4" x 12" x 31" FMIC, Paxton AFPR, modified 125 trans/LSD
unit/3.42's, custom chip tuning, Alky Control Methanol injection
13.61 ET at 101.44 mph, 262 WHP/350WTQ

2009 Pontiac Solstice GXP roadster, 2.0 turbo w/GMPP exh, CAI and turbo upgrade, 290 hp/325 ft lbs

1969 Olds 442 convert
400 Eng, 200-4R trans, 3.73 posi, power everything, OAI


Re: Turbo and V6 compared to stock 1.8 and 2.0
Saturday, June 16, 2012 10:09 PM
Breachwood297 I hope its more than 200hp. I believe you should be around 250hp if not more at the wheel. 3400 untuned get between 180-190 with stock 2.8 injectors.




On the inside my car looks like a fighter jet.
Re: Turbo and V6 compared to stock 1.8 and 2.0
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:01 AM
Waay back in the day (1991 or so) I had a buddy who bought an 84 Mustang 5.0. My Sunbird actually beat him to 65, then he owned me. I never let him forget that I had 1/2 the engine he did. Of course we were both putting out about 150 HP - Ha Ha...




Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search