Squabbling about the Lancer
Doubling the whp of any car is not safe, I don't know a mechanic or a tuner in the world that would say otherwise. To put this into perspective, it'd be like me saying a 500whp WRX is perfectly fine and reliable, it's not realistic. Taking out a loan to buy a new is a far better idea if you care about that sort of thing. Let's say you take a 5000$ loan out to make a lancer fast. What do you end up with, a fast lancer, it won't increase proportionally in value and it will have increased maintenance costs among other things. Use that 5000$ to get a new car and you end up with a new car that you can turn around and sell if you want to, that 5000$ will be gained back (somewhat).
Saying that the lancer is a good platform for turbo is an ignorant statement given how the engine is built. Yes you can modify it to handle boost, but you can do that to any car so it's a useless point.
How the hell is road racing for tools? Are you calling F1 drivers tools? Are you calling Warrtalon a tool? IMO road racing is the purest form of racing since it requires a lot of skill.
Modding a car is cheating as far as comparisons are concerned. A modified evo can beat a ferrari but no one would ever argue that an evo is better than a ferrari. Similarly I know a heavily modified lancer could beat my WRX from a roll but it'd be naive to say that a lancer is better than a WRX, civic SI, etc..
If you're happy modding your lancer, great, I understand where you are coming from since I was the same way. However, don't get all defensive and offensive when people decide it's not right for them, saying "Guys that have to prove themselves constantly in racing have small dicks and weren't hugged enough or possibly too much as a kid" is a slap in the face to all the people who take racing seriously and enjoy it as a sport, it'd be like saying "all football fans are latent homosexuals because they like watching men in tight pants chase and tackle each other".
Saying that the lancer is a good platform for turbo is an ignorant statement given how the engine is built. Yes you can modify it to handle boost, but you can do that to any car so it's a useless point.
How the hell is road racing for tools? Are you calling F1 drivers tools? Are you calling Warrtalon a tool? IMO road racing is the purest form of racing since it requires a lot of skill.
Modding a car is cheating as far as comparisons are concerned. A modified evo can beat a ferrari but no one would ever argue that an evo is better than a ferrari. Similarly I know a heavily modified lancer could beat my WRX from a roll but it'd be naive to say that a lancer is better than a WRX, civic SI, etc..
If you're happy modding your lancer, great, I understand where you are coming from since I was the same way. However, don't get all defensive and offensive when people decide it's not right for them, saying "Guys that have to prove themselves constantly in racing have small dicks and weren't hugged enough or possibly too much as a kid" is a slap in the face to all the people who take racing seriously and enjoy it as a sport, it'd be like saying "all football fans are latent homosexuals because they like watching men in tight pants chase and tackle each other".
As for the arguement over which car is better, Evo or Ferrari... you can make that argument for either. It only need be correct in the eyes of the person arguing the case. You can argue a model T is better than everything on the road today, if you put it in context. What I am saying is that you can't out right dog on the Lancer because the WRX or anyother car is better stock.
To the other point: I'm sorry that I feel that those who constantly have to compete as a way to prove themselves are tools... it's just the way that I feel. I might be wrong, I might be right... just as it's yours to think that I'm a tool, but you can't tell me how to feel about it....
Heres the litmus test: You know these fools by the way they swager and spout off about what they've done or what they ride in. It's called bragging... Not saying they don't have talent, not saying they don't have skill, not saying they didn't earn it... I'm just saying they are tools.
I stand by what I said.
Bottom line is that you didn't turbo your Lancer, you gave your reasons... I gave mine. I'm justifed and so are you. No skin off my nuts.
People don't compete because they need to "prove" themselves, people do it because they like to compete and enjoy what they are competing in. Hockey players play hockey because they like the game not because they have some deep-seated psychological need to prove their manhood. Do you play any team sports/sports in general? I climb but I don't do it to brag, I do it cause I enjoy the serenity that comes from being out in the mountains and just climbing for the sake of climbing.
After reading the past 2 pages it doesn't seem like you guys are really disagreeing a lot with each other. Both of you acknowledge that turbo lancers are not as reliable, but can be worth it to the individual. That's what it comes down to. Throwing around various opinions on the terms "competition" and "worthwhile" only defines what is best or worst for you an a person, and not a universal right and wrong. Granted debating cost effectiveness is cool, and I've enjoyed hearing both sides because I'm still figuring out what I want to do.
The facts are there. Some people do great with turbo lancer, others do not. Since it's the same motor and turbo kit (RRM), odds are having a turbo disaster is much more on the shoulders of the owner and less on the hardware. That being said, doubling the HP of a car can and will cause problems that no one can foresee, but some responsible owners can limit any issues or fix them without trouble.
Some people, like me, will do things that don't make a lot of sense in the eyes of others for the sake of curiosity or learning. Shingen's desire to turbo seems like it stems more from the satisfaction of doing something on your own and gaining the knowledge. I know I taught myself how to play guitar instead of having a teacher, just because I wanted to learn it and get to where I want to be that way. Of course it is quite efficient to get a teacher and learn faster, but I'm stubborn I guess and wouldn't have liked it as much that way.
Sometimes you have to learn the hard way, and sometimes you learn the hard way is the only way you want to learn.
The facts are there. Some people do great with turbo lancer, others do not. Since it's the same motor and turbo kit (RRM), odds are having a turbo disaster is much more on the shoulders of the owner and less on the hardware. That being said, doubling the HP of a car can and will cause problems that no one can foresee, but some responsible owners can limit any issues or fix them without trouble.
Some people, like me, will do things that don't make a lot of sense in the eyes of others for the sake of curiosity or learning. Shingen's desire to turbo seems like it stems more from the satisfaction of doing something on your own and gaining the knowledge. I know I taught myself how to play guitar instead of having a teacher, just because I wanted to learn it and get to where I want to be that way. Of course it is quite efficient to get a teacher and learn faster, but I'm stubborn I guess and wouldn't have liked it as much that way.
Sometimes you have to learn the hard way, and sometimes you learn the hard way is the only way you want to learn.
No matter what, we all have to remember that to each, his own.
Everything I want to do on my '69 Camaro makes my dad roll his eyes. But it IS my car, not his.
If I still had my 2002 OZ, it'd probably be boosted. Maybe it would run fine, maybe not. But that's the game you play when you modify.
Everything I want to do on my '69 Camaro makes my dad roll his eyes. But it IS my car, not his.
If I still had my 2002 OZ, it'd probably be boosted. Maybe it would run fine, maybe not. But that's the game you play when you modify.
Exactly, there is a risk anytime you modify a car. It'd be naive to expect a modified car to perform like a stock car especially when you are effectively doubling the hp of the motor. In my city I only know of two heavily modified lancers (ralliarts, both FI) and both are now dead in the water, one lit on fire because a fuel line burst (he was supercharged) and the other has a blown motor (he's RRM turbocharged). In the first case it was just bad luck, in the second it was a case of the owner driving the **** out of the car. He thought he blew the motor before but he kept driving the car. Eventually the CEL went away and he stupidly thought the car was fine. Surprise surprise it blows up a bit later. If you're responsible, you can have a working car that'll be a blast to drive. If you go in trying to bite off more than you can chew (this guy thought his car was hot **** and drove it like ****) you'll run into all kinds of problems.
Exactly. My buddy turboed his 1999 2.5RS and never had any problems. Car ran like a champ for over 3 years (Then someone broke in and stole half his motor. But that's another matter...). My friend with a boosted Lancer had his FMU die and blew his motor from the lack of gas. You never know how things are going to go.
Overall you can have problems even with a stock car if you drive the crap out of it. If you want to mod your car... go for it! let us know how it turns out. Everyone has an opinion about what they would do with their own car, and thats great, but trying to make others agree with your opinion is just plain wrong. It happens a lot on this site, from newbies to old timers (go through the threads and you will see). Every car is different in some way or another (even from the same production run), its the mass production way. So, one car may handle FI a little better than the next. Yes... OVERALL, NA Lancers are not designed to run turbos, but it doesn't mean that they can't. One owner could drive a modded motor forever, while the next will blow it up in no time flat.
It comes down to this; there are too many variables to make a solid conclusion, it not as black and white as some would like. It might break, it might not. Just like a stock motor. Excreation Occurs.
Anyone else want to beat a dead horse? <<waiting for a flogging to begin>>
There is no real wrong answer. Just have fun with it.
It comes down to this; there are too many variables to make a solid conclusion, it not as black and white as some would like. It might break, it might not. Just like a stock motor. Excreation Occurs.
Anyone else want to beat a dead horse? <<waiting for a flogging to begin>>
There is no real wrong answer. Just have fun with it.
Only with regards to high boost. But if you are planning on building a well balanced Lancer with 160-200whp then turboing is safe under 7psi. It's when you start pushing higher pressure and increasing the fuel that you need to rethink your plan and start to upgrade internals.
I'm starting to think we need to just start ignoring Nick. Any time he says some dumb s**t about how Lancers can't handle any boost at all, we need to just freeze him out. 
I would recommend upgrading the internals regardless of how much boost you plan on using. It's one of those things that just makes sense to me, if the internals are weak and you plan on putting more stress on the motor, replace them. It's a cheap (relatively) and easy insurance policy against a blown motor.
I would recommend upgrading the internals regardless of how much boost you plan on using. It's one of those things that just makes sense to me, if the internals are weak and you plan on putting more stress on the motor, replace them. It's a cheap (relatively) and easy insurance policy against a blown motor.
Lol also an option. I'm not saying they can't handle any boost, I'm just saying they weren't made to handle boost thus if you want to have the kind of reliability some people want in a daily driver you have to take the necessary precautions. Sure it might be overkill but I'd rather be out 2000$ for forged rods and pistons (rods probably aren't necessary for low boost applications) than be out X dollars in the unfortunate chance that the motor goes caputes.
