Trackspeed Engineering Turbo Kit installed: first impressions. *Real update in post*
05-21-2012, 05:48 AM
#82
Ouch! That's an expensive kit then!
It's not as cheap as $800 but I see where you are going.
Equally, if I was spending nearly $7000 on top of my existing NA6 then perhaps I should sell it and put all that money towards a later model turbo and upgrade it... Or even consider a whole range of alternate options.
G
Equally, if I was spending nearly $7000 on top of my existing NA6 then perhaps I should sell it and put all that money towards a later model turbo and upgrade it... Or even consider a whole range of alternate options.
G
0
05-21-2012, 02:07 PM
#84
I would have said the same thing 3 years ago but after building a kit from scratch that is safe to put down the kind of power we're talking its not a bad deal at all. (especially considering that 1400 of it is going into the turbo..) i'm at almost double that price currently.
0
05-21-2012, 02:14 PM
#86
Newb
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 9
Total Cats: 0
Yeah I noticed this is where the price increases for the base kit as well. They atleast recommend the studs, hard lines, and stage 8 locking for a budget build.
0
05-21-2012, 05:01 PM
#87
If the kit is that top end, then a 2nd hand 1.8 isnt the right option either, a rebuilt 1.6 or 1.8 with stronger internals is.
Hey, if you're happy to disregard a global market of 1.6 customers (cause outside the USA the 1.6 was sold for longer periods) and content with the volume of sales you'll get in the local domestic market then all is good. Happy to move on.
G
Hey, if you're happy to disregard a global market of 1.6 customers (cause outside the USA the 1.6 was sold for longer periods) and content with the volume of sales you'll get in the local domestic market then all is good. Happy to move on.
G
0
05-21-2012, 05:22 PM
#88
For sentimental value, sure, for cost, nah.
I could understand it if you were after the smaller displacement for classing reasons. Or if you want to play with a "1.6 VVT"...
0
05-21-2012, 05:41 PM
#90
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,022
Total Cats: 6,590
Recognizing the inherent sarcasm here, I just realized that rouhgly half of the Admin / Supermod crew are rocking 1.6 engines, which is statistically improbable given the known distribution of Miata engines.
What does this say about us as a group?
What does this say about us as a group?
0
05-21-2012, 05:59 PM
#92
Elite Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 2,826
Total Cats: 67
Gslender, 1.8s in perfectly good condition ARE 800 or less. Even in australia.
Dann
Dann
0
05-21-2012, 06:23 PM
#96
If the kit is that top end, then a 2nd hand 1.8 isnt the right option either, a rebuilt 1.6 or 1.8 with stronger internals is.
Hey, if you're happy to disregard a global market of 1.6 customers (cause outside the USA the 1.6 was sold for longer periods) and content with the volume of sales you'll get in the local domestic market then all is good. Happy to move on.
G
Hey, if you're happy to disregard a global market of 1.6 customers (cause outside the USA the 1.6 was sold for longer periods) and content with the volume of sales you'll get in the local domestic market then all is good. Happy to move on.
G
The 1.6 was sold but the 1.8 is the superior engine. Should I make a turbo for the v6 GM cars or the LSX cars. Simple choice unless you are forced by engine classing.
And I loved my 92 1.6 miata.
0
05-21-2012, 06:43 PM
#97
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
I love my 1.6l miata considering I've done every mod to make it on par with a base 94...now todo something with all that loss of torque and spool and inferior boner ppower.
0
05-21-2012, 06:50 PM
#98
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,099
At the end of the day, the 1.6 is an inferior motor. It doesn't have the displacement or the port flow of the later 1.8s, and if you are talking about spending a bunch of money on a world-class turbo setup, we don't see a reason to put it on an inferior motor. In general, we don't work with 1.6 motors - the swap is not difficult at all and the benefits are significant.
Put a check for $60k in my hands and I will build 10 1.6 kits. Until then, let's keep this thread on topic. Thanks.
Put a check for $60k in my hands and I will build 10 1.6 kits. Until then, let's keep this thread on topic. Thanks.
0
05-21-2012, 07:07 PM
#99
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,022
Total Cats: 6,590
Yes, I was thinking along those lines.
Actually, saying "you are all cheap" is rather more polite than what I had in mind.
No question about it, and I would not seriously expect a company working on a turbo system of the caliber which you have in mind to pay the 1.6 engine much thought.
To be honest, I'm a little bit surprised that the 1.6 still receives the attention that it does from folks like Bell and FM, given the age of these motors, the relatively small number of them which were produced in the first place, the even smaller number of them which are still on the road, and the fact that the cars in which they are fitted are probably most likely to be owned by the biggest cheapskates within the community (eg: those least likely to spend $5000 turbocharging a $1,000 car.)
Actually, saying "you are all cheap" is rather more polite than what I had in mind.
To be honest, I'm a little bit surprised that the 1.6 still receives the attention that it does from folks like Bell and FM, given the age of these motors, the relatively small number of them which were produced in the first place, the even smaller number of them which are still on the road, and the fact that the cars in which they are fitted are probably most likely to be owned by the biggest cheapskates within the community (eg: those least likely to spend $5000 turbocharging a $1,000 car.)
0
