more reliable?

[nismofly]

ok, for a full day at the track (road course, auto-x, etc. that is) what would be more reliable...

ka-t with a small turbo, low boost (200 whp)

or full build n/a ka (also around 200 whp)

[slide240slide]

I would suspect the NA version, but let's face it id much rather have a KA-T cause turbo car's are just so fun to drive! they put a big ole **** on your face!

[Structure240sx]

either one, just depends how well its built

the smal turbo ka-t can be done much cheaper and be as if not more effective.

[nismofly]

thats what i thought, about the same if fully built, but the turbo would be cheaper to build

w1ngzer0 says na is better because a day at the track would cause a turbo failure...i said no, but ill show him this thread

[WDRacing]

If your racing in a class, you'll get beat up pretty badly with a power adder and only 200WHP. If your just screwing around, then a T3 with a .63 AR Exhaust housing will work well. You can use water injection at full boost to keep the EGT's way down and you'll stay very safe.

WD

[sensibleS13driver]

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

that's my opinion

[klattr1]

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

that's my opinion

i still have yet to see a DOHC making 200 rwhp on a NA setup without nitrous.

[nissanfanatic]

i still have yet to see a DOHC making 200 rwhp on a NA setup without nitrous.

Me either.

[hysteria]

let me make sure i'm reading this correctly... you're asking whether a fully built na engine will hold up better than a non built turbo engine.... what do you think?

as above making 200 whp without a turbo will be a task and will probably cost more than the turbo setup. plus if you blow up a kat, you can just get another ka for pretty cheap usually.

if in fact you are talking about building either engine whether turbo or not, then i think the turbo option is definitely the obvious choice. but then again i would think the turbo is the obvious choice no matter what...