I have been heavily thinking about either getting a turbo kit or the SS tein coilovers and recently i was researching on some turbo kits out there and I was looking at the turbo kit from RRM and the turbo kits from turbo-kits.com. Since I don't know much about turbos in general, I was wondering what the differences are (hp wise) between the kits from RRM and turbokit.com. your opinions are well appreciated.

 

from what i hear, turbo-kits.com is pretty much universal kinda thing. whereas RRM actually put a lot of R&D into thier kit so that it will be reliable and powerful.

 

go RRM turbo, made specifically for the lancer in mind.

 

diff hp wise? depends on which kits you compare, rmm has nonIC stg1, IC stg1, and IC stg2. also you cant really compare numbers bc there isnt a dyno posted for the turbo-kits one. and its not all about the peal numebers anyways, its about the over shape of the powerband, the area under the curve.

 

its up to you. we helped my buddy install a turbokits.com kit on his civic. it was a couple of months ago, but i think he's boosting 7psi intercooled. its a good kit for the price. it added a good amount of power. its not super fast, but its nice and quick. i guess it all depends on what your going for. money....power....what you plan on doing in the future....upgrading? its up to you.

 

Thanks guys for all your info, looks like i'll be going with the RRM one, it seems to have the most bang for your buck. Guess that means i'll have to save a little more now. But hey, it will definitely be worth it. Wish RRM had its own credit line, that way I could get my turbo faster...oh well.

 

I think the biggest thing is the support issue. If and when you need some help, RoadRace is only a call away. Not sure that would happen with the TSI kit.

***EDIT*** -- BTW, I went toe to toe with a modded Mustang GT 5-spd last night and walked him pretty quick like. I asked him what he had and he had it chipped, full catless exhaust, and something about his motor being a 302 worked or 502 worked??? I didn't understand that part because I don't know much about big blocks. Anyone know???

 

mwahahahahah mustang= dookie=

 

nice dookie, thats really good to hear.

 

The Mustang had a 302 ci (5.0L) V8. What year was the Mustang? It was probably a later Fox body style (late 80s, early 90s) right? I believe that engine makes around 225 hp or so.

I myself am considering droppin a crate 302 into my 72 Maverick. Or get a turbo for my Lancer. Or both.

 

It was a later model Mustang, with the new rounded body style. Maybe a 1998? If the motor is worked, what does that mean? What about the chip and exhaust? 225HP for all that???

 

That's odd that his Mustang had a 5.0 since that generation of Mustangs have 4.6L V8s. I'm guessing his came with a stock six-banger and he swapped it out? The highest production 5.0L was rated at 225 hp / 300 tq. In 93 Ford revised their figures saying 205 hp was more accurate. So, all in all, it looks like he was probably running 205 stock. With the mods he was probably making about the same hp as you more or less, but with the lighter body of the Lancer you had the advantage.

I don't know exactly what he means by "worked". Maybe he replaced some internals or something?

 

Yeah it's hard to say, I didnt talk to him much. I noticed that the rear bumper had "MUSTANG GT" etched out in it, like they usually do. Unless he went to all the trouble to get a GT bumper with all the badging to go with it, I'm thinking he had the original 4.6L in there. I dont know though....if I see him again, I'll ask. Look for a NV license that says "THROTLE"

 

If it was a later model '93- up model then it was most definitely the 4.6L 283 C.I. engine. Most of the Mustangs, unles a true drag car, will not have a swapped motor. The term "worked" usually reffers to having been port and polished, which usually they will, at that time, swap out the cam too for more low end.

 

1994-95 still had the 5.0 motor. 1996 was the first year of the 4.6 motor in the Mustang.