NC: Who here is interested in a NC RHD Turbo Kit???

[neilhr]

hey mate, I took some photos and measurements for Jay today. He is confident

[NC_Hammer]

yep, made a video for him on youtube too and some photos.

Could even build the manifold here, something topmount will fit imo. Lets wait and see what he comes up with.

[d-mag]

Thread revival.

Did this ever get off the ground? Any working here in Aus?
I see Supercharged NCs all over the forum but I'm a turbo guy and would prefer an NC turbo than SC.

[NitroDann]

We have been ready to build a few times but no one has ever gone through with it.

Dann

[d-mag]

I'm still deciding which way to go, car wise. Honestly, lack of RHD turbo options has put me off getting an NC.
If I do go NC I'll hit you up, I'm sure we could work something out..

[Custardtart]

I hadn't really though about a turbo, I've been set for an SC kit for my 2.5 engine. Given that the 2.5 benefits (for track use mainly) from a cam swap to move the torque higher up the rev range the costs seem to be about $6k for the SC kit, $1.5k for cams and another $1k for the ECU tune. This lot seems to net about 300whp give or take and rom what I've read, the 2.5 can handle this fine with the fairly progressive nature of the SC.

So $8.5k probably does put it squarely in turbo cost, maybe a bit more if you have to go standalone ECU and rolling road sessions?

I'd be interested in a kit as I'd like to fit it myself. If I was after huge HP and building something for WTAC I'd be all in with a 2.5 turbo kit and E85 On a built 2.5 with cams you'd probably get close to 500whp but you'd need to upgrade the drivetrain.

[MrTurkey]

I am interested. Will depend on cost and timing.

[Regie]

TDR was working with Chris at MX5parts.com.au.

nothing eventuated of it from what I can recall

Chris sent a whole front subframe and rack assembly to Jay for the mock up of the RHD kits.

Correct me if I'm wrong but thats about how far it got.

Someone should get Dann to throw a kit together

[david_syd_au]

I am in the position of being keen and able to get my NC2 PRHT road car either turbocharged or supercharged. It is predominately a road car which will eventually have occasional track use.

Supercharging is my preference for:
- better driveability, although at the expense of lower max power/torque, which is ok for a 99% road car,
- less packaging compromises or side-effects (eg moving stuff around in engine bay to make space for TC or piping)
- less heat dissipation issues
- supercharger install has been through engineering approval process (done by Chris Gough in 2012ish),
- supercharge whine is better than turbocharger whistle ... a personal preference :-)

Please convince me I am wrong!

[NitroDann]

Supercharging is my preference for:
- better driveability, although at the expense of lower max power/torque, which is ok for a 99% road car,
- less packaging compromises or side-effects (eg moving stuff around in engine bay to make space for TC or piping)
- less heat dissipation issues
- supercharger install has been through engineering approval process (done by Chris Gough in 2012ish),
- supercharge whine is better than turbocharger whistle ... a personal preference :-)

Please convince me I am wrong!

I'll give it a go.

- better driveability, although at the expense of lower max power/torque, which is ok for a 99% road car,

I don't agree with this in any way and I am not sure why this gets parroted so often, just about every new car you buy is turbocharged and almost nothing new uses a crankshaft dríven forced induction of any variety. Turbochargers are capable of both higher torque and power than blowers along with giving power and torque curves of practically any shape with boost control via ecu.

- less packaging compromises or side-effects (eg moving stuff around in engine bay to make space for TC or piping)

Compared to an old fashioned positive displacement blower like the "Cosworth" one that is true, its similar for a rotrex.

- less heat dissipation issues

The engine bay will be cooler with a blower in most cases, fortunately only the coolant temp really matters and engine bay temp affects nothing.

- supercharger install has been through engineering approval process (done by Chris Gough in 2012ish)

Engineering a turbo conversion is easy. We do it all of the time, it's a non issue.



Here is my list of Pro's and cons for turbo vs blower in this application.

BLOWER:

PRO:

Kit is available
Minimal physical changes to car

CON:

No upgrade path
Belts belts belts
Drivability and delivery is fixed


TURBO:

PRO:

Power, 200 or 600 are both easy and have been done PLENTY of times on the NC engine
Upgrade path, start on 200 and go from there as you see fit
Economy
Any power curve you want
Will beat a Honda Odyssey at the lights

CON:

There is no easy budget bolt on solution thats done right, unlike the cosworth blower.
'Turning it up' is easy and addictive.




I don't see the point in spending 10k on a blower and still getting hosed by family cars and VTEC people movers and I can't stand spending big dollars with no way ahead once it's done. So you have 10k and 200whp and now what? Where do you go from there? We have so many 200rwkw TwistMount NA and NB packages getting around and to get whipped in the equal fastest street NC in the country (Cosworth blower powered) by yet another 'bolt on NB' would frustrate me.

Each to their own. At the end of the day an NC only needs a set of rods and a turbo kit to run around at 300rwkw reliably and it's the best platform of all of the MX5's to do it, it sucks to see so many NC owners shy away from the solution that the entire automotive world is using, OEM and aftermarket, just doesn't make sense to me.

Dann

[david_syd_au]

Gday Dann,
While I agree that a turbo setup can produce more torque and power than a supercharger on an MX-5, I ask the question, how much is too much?
At what point do you have to consider the effect on the reliability of the clutch, gearbox and drive shafts.
Anyway, I will contact you to learn about the details of the pros and cons, and the process for producing a road-legal turbo NC.

[ManiacLachy]

200whp isn't enough. I think 350whp is about the sweet spot. Where tyres can spin if you're aggressive but if you're smooth they'll grip.

That might need an upgraded clutch, I don't know what the stock NC clutch will hold. I'm not sure about cooling either, but that's just a decent radiator away. But upgrades like that need to be considered when installing power at any level, and a builder like Dann will consider them in his build.

[StillIC]

As an Engineer spending the last decade of my life working in the general area of energy and energy conversion, the mere thought of a decrease in efficiency from a belt dríven blower versus the increased efficiency of a waste heat exhaust dríven compressor, gives me shudders. For the same boost pressure the turbo wins every time in power output, and for quite reasonable power levels, drive-ability too. For the same power output, the belt dríven blower is less efficient than a normally aspirated engine. The turbo, as or more efficient than NA.

[Custardtart]

- better driveability, although at the expense of lower max power/torque, which is ok for a 99% road car,

I don't agree with this in any way and I am not sure why this gets parroted so often, just about every new car you buy is turbocharged and almost nothing new uses a crankshaft dríven forced induction of any variety. Turbochargers are capable of both higher torque and power than blowers along with giving power and torque curves of practically any shape with boost control via ecu.

I'd agree, if it's a predominantly road car then a turbo will give you exactly the driveability you want cos you can tune it. The SC kits give you what they give you which is usually more power for more revs - great for track. So if you like low down torque for easy overtaking and good pick up you can have it, if you want power higher up you can have it. You could probably run custom maps for different moods if you're a bit of a skitso?

Hadn't really considered the upgraditis a turbo allows, it's tempting. Looks like RX8 driveshafts and a stronger diff are easy enough to source but anyone know what gearbox would fit an NC with 500whp?

[NitroDann]

Gday Dann,
While I agree that a turbo setup can produce more torque and power than a supercharger on an MX-5, I ask the question, how much is too much?

In my opinion, about 400rwhp/tonne. A veyron has about 300whp/tonne or maybe 350 on an icy cold winter morning. I know it sounds like a lot but it's EASY to build a nice driveable 400rwhp/tonne NA even. An NC with 400rwhp can easily be built reliably and with boost starting at 2500rpm, and not be an animal. A sensible teenager could daily Ken's 450rwhp time attack NA. Honestly.

At what point do you have to consider the effect on the reliability of the clutch, gearbox and drive shafts.

It comes down to peak torque, just like an an NA or NB. Kens 450rwhp NA retains a 6 speed (which everyone said you can't do) and so far hasn't smashed it after 150 dyno pulls and 3 or 4 events including WTAC, and the NC is even stronger.

Anyway, I will contact you to learn about the details of the pros and cons, and the process for producing a road-legal turbo NC.

200whp isn't enough. I think 350whp is about the sweet spot. Where tyres can spin if you're aggressive but if you're smooth they'll grip.

That might need an upgraded clutch, I don't know what the stock NC clutch will hold. I'm not sure about cooling either, but that's just a decent radiator away. But upgrades like that need to be considered when installing power at any level, and a builder like Dann will consider them in his build.

Lachlan is absolutely right, 200whp is what a Honda Odyssey makes. The 200rwkw package we run in NAs and NBs all the time is WELL within the limits of the chassis, the chassis is UNDERWHELMED by 200rwkw.

As an Engineer spending the last decade of my life working in the general area of energy and energy conversion, the mere thought of a decrease in efficiency from a belt dríven blower versus the increased efficiency of a waste heat exhaust dríven compressor, gives me shudders. For the same boost pressure the turbo wins every time in power output, and for quite reasonable power levels, drive-ability too. For the same power output, the belt dríven blower is less efficient than a normally aspirated engine. The turbo, as or more efficient than NA.

I didn't add this because the average potential customer doesn't care, but this here is genuinely what it is all about. Not only do turbos make more power and torque, they also put less stress on the engine. Your 200rwhp blown NC is really dealing with 230+rwhp worth of engine stresses and using 230rwhp worth of fuel because the engine makes 230hp, but the blower absorbs 30 of it (numbers are made up, but you get the idea).

We have prepared an NC racecar for a customer which is soon receiving a 2.5L and soon after that we intend to turbocharge it. Then when an extremely typical and simple NC track car thats also happens to have a bolt on kit starts taking the records we will be in a position to 'I told you so" the whole community.

Dann

The NC we prepared earlier..