Touareg vs LC
- Thread starter 88CltLC
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
Thai said:
All I can say is that you are stuck in 1970's turbo technology. If sized properly with proper exhaust there is virtually no turbo lag and they can add a lot to the off-road ability of any truck. If done right.
See thread on AVo turbo and please point out the turbo lag as well as non-linear response. Unless you have wheeled one a 80 with a proper turbo setup do not spew BS about it.
yeah, i guess that you guys know a lot more than car manufacturers with turbos.
I have not come across a turbo without lag...by principle, you must have lag in a turbo. Why have you guys not try superchargers???
Please, if you guys have a picture (computer generated or real) of the TLC80 frame and suspension, then i would be really appreciative!
This is my last post in this thread.
I have not come across a turbo without lag...by principle, you must have lag in a turbo. Why have you guys not try superchargers???Please, if you guys have a picture (computer generated or real) of the TLC80 frame and suspension, then i would be really appreciative!
This is my last post in this thread.
Last edited:
Thai said:yeah, i guess that you guys know a lot more than car manufacturers with turbos.
No, we don't. But apparently we know more than you. Plenty of turbos in factory trim, built today as we speak. Like I said, in most countries you don't have a V8 option on either the G-wagon or the LC. You get a TURBO diesel.
280 and 300GD are turbos (those are G-wagons if you didn't know).
78 and 100 Series Land Cruisers have turbo variants.
And far to many cars to list, most of them high performance. You think the Porsche 911 Turbo pilot worries about lag when he gets to 100 km/h in 4.2 seconds? Mercedes has been using superchargers after years of turbos in their passenger cars. Guess what? AMG has said they will build no more surpercharged engines. In a nutshell, they determined that superchargers suck.
Let me repeat, superchargers suck. They generate too much heat and rob too much power from the engine (parasitic drag). Turbos are much more efficient as they are run strictly off exhaust gasses. Why do you think all serious horsepower applications use turbos instead of blowers?
We had a nice turbo on our SAAB 9-5 Aero (God I miss that car). Not a drop of lag. Since throttle is all electronically controlled now, SAAB dialed in a bit of overboost at first throttle application. That was their elegant solution to the lag issue.
Geez, you need to get out and drive more and read less.
- Thread starter
- #146
WOW!!! Cannot believe this thread is still going strong!
As a follow-up, my co-worker (who I posted this thread for) ended up at the very last second buying a fully-loaded 05 Sequoia. I think the reliability issues were too worrisome concerning the Touareg. As for the LC, I think he agreed that the technology needed a refreshing and that what was on the market now was not worth spending approx $60K on.
He has yet to join me off-road! Oh well........
As a follow-up, my co-worker (who I posted this thread for) ended up at the very last second buying a fully-loaded 05 Sequoia. I think the reliability issues were too worrisome concerning the Touareg. As for the LC, I think he agreed that the technology needed a refreshing and that what was on the market now was not worth spending approx $60K on.
He has yet to join me off-road! Oh well........
Obviously, another someone uses an ultra expensive vehicle to make up for shortcomings elsewhere.
-Mark
-Mark
Thai said:
Declee...please read what i posted already...see quote above.
READ IT AGAIN. Is the 4.5L I6 a diesel??
I can add a turbo or SC to my truck too for insane power! 
As far as SC vs. Turbo, i don't like any of them personally. I prefer NA all the way. I only suggested SC because Toyota TRD uses the Eaton SC to good result. I did not even consider it on my '02 4runner for reasons you already know...force induction = more power, but decreases durability no matter how you look at it. (The 3.4L V6 engine was as durable as any Toyota engine...but i still wouldn't do it.)
When i had my M3, i get the same dumb argument from Civic ricers..."oh yeah, we can turbo the crap out of our 4-cylinder to match your 6 cylinder output!"
Displacement and cylinders rule, especially in trucks! Period.
Last edited:
Mark SR. said:Obviously, another someone uses an ultra expensive vehicle to make up for shortcomings elsewhere.
-Mark
Ok i lied...THIS is my last post.
Oh yeah, TLC100 is a lot less expensive (sarcasm)
..."people in glass house should not throw rocks."
Last edited:
Thai said:This is my last post in this thread.
Thai said:
He with glass house and small penis, should not walk around with no pants when home.
Mark..
haha that was awesome. this thread is so dumb now. lets drop it.
But im curious...Thai, do you wheel? i mean can you at least post up one or two pics of the G doing stuff. With all this discussion i would think you would get some pics of your rig and enough of the heavily modified military s***. LETS SEE THAT THING IN ACTION!!!!
haha that was awesome. this thread is so dumb now. lets drop it.
But im curious...Thai, do you wheel? i mean can you at least post up one or two pics of the G doing stuff. With all this discussion i would think you would get some pics of your rig and enough of the heavily modified military s***. LETS SEE THAT THING IN ACTION!!!!
You're really showing your ignorance now, if you won't listen to Slee, of Slee Off Road, who is considered the authority on 80 and 100 Series Land Cruisers in the Western Hemisphere, I don't think anything will get through to you. Slee's shop is pretty much known the world over for serious off road mods as well as Supercharger and Turbocharged applications for real world!Thai said:yeah, i guess that you guys know a lot more than car manufacturers with turbos.
Please, if you guys have a picture (computer generated or real) of the TLC80 frame and suspension, then i would be really appreciative!
This is my last post in this thread.
Cruiserhead05 said:
Sure...here's me in Colorado:
http://www.toyota-4runner.org/showthread.php?threadid=5881
I was 100% stock...still am except for 16" rims and BFG AT KO tires.
Next destination: Colorado again end of this month (for family more than off-roading unfortunately)...and Utah/Moab later this year or next year.
Nice pictures Thai, thanks for sharing.
I would recommend you giving up on the "discussion" at this point as it has degraded to a "flame-fest". I know everyone here respects the G-Class...but they seem to be losing patience with you
But it is like the old saying goes. "you can make fun of a man's wife; but never his car, or his dog"
Vehicles are large investments of cash and energy (yours more cash than most), and results in people defending their purchase and choice vehemently. The lines of benefit to one model or the other in this case are so blurred that none of us can see the conclusion clearly...
Oh well, enough from me... sorry, just my .02
I would recommend you giving up on the "discussion" at this point as it has degraded to a "flame-fest". I know everyone here respects the G-Class...but they seem to be losing patience with you
But it is like the old saying goes. "you can make fun of a man's wife; but never his car, or his dog"
Vehicles are large investments of cash and energy (yours more cash than most), and results in people defending their purchase and choice vehemently. The lines of benefit to one model or the other in this case are so blurred that none of us can see the conclusion clearly...
Oh well, enough from me... sorry, just my .02
Last edited:
EarthX
Owner of Earth Exploration Technologies
dclee said:
Ok sorry I had to jump in......
If you think that superchargers rob too much power from the engine then you are either crazy or have no idea what you are talking about......turbos rob far far more then superchagers.........further more, they dont not generate much heat at all...........i can place my hand on my supercharger after doing 70mph on the express way for about four hours, and its not hot....neither is any part of the intake. sorry, but seems might you need to "get out and drive more"
not saying a dont like turbos, just get your facts straight.
hoser
SILVER Star
Respectfully, I have to say, you are both only semi-correct. Yes, turbos generate a lot more heat than superchargers but Turbo systems are also more efficient. I'd take a turbo set-up over an SC any day of the week.
EarthX
Owner of Earth Exploration Technologies
hoser said:
I’m not sure turbos are more efficient. Yes, the "can" make much more power then a supercharger (although most don’t) but they "can". If Whipple Superchargers are truthful about there stats (and I'm sure they are) my SC only steals 1HP from my motor...compared to about 95HP that it adds.
Also, it might be a bit easier to talk about this stuff if everyone wasn’t such asses to each other(not that anyone has been to me but...)... do what you want
Mor4wd said:Ok sorry I had to jump in......
If you think that superchargers rob too much power from the engine then you are either crazy or have no idea what you are talking about......turbos rob far far more then superchagers.........further more, they dont not generate much heat at all...........i can place my hand on my supercharger after doing 70mph on the express way for about four hours, and its not hot....neither is any part of the intake. sorry, but seems might you need to "get out and drive more"
not saying a dont like turbos, just get your facts straight.
Geez, just come on in and insult me why don't ya!
Maybe you should follow your own advice about being civilized.If I am wrong than I apologize, but I do know that many on this forum and elsewhere complain about overheating and head gasket problems after adding the blower (at least to the 1FZ-FE). Roots type blowers such as the Eaton unit used by Kazuma/TRD are especially notorious for excess heat production. In addition, a blower is driven by the engine's crank via the accessory pulley system. Therefore, it causes parasitic drag on the crank. That's why many racing cars remove accessory pulleys altogether (and do w/o aircon, power steering, etc. of course). The turbine in a turbo spins via recirculated exhaust gasses. There is no mechanical drag on the engine. Sure, there is some increase in back pressure, but the effects on crank power are not anywhere close to the mechanical loss incurred by a supercharger. Could you please explain why you think a turbo robs more power than a supercharger? Just curious.
BTW, I've been out there driving turbos for a while. The last one was, as I said, the SAAB. Wonderful machine. Amazing what SAAB got out of that little 4-banger with a good turbo setup, while still maintaining 30 mpg on the highway. I liked this setup much better than the blower on my old 5.0L Mustang, which was quite problematic (I had an Eaton unit with all custom heads, intake manifold, headers, throttle body, etc.). I vowed that would be the last supercharger I ever bought.
Thanks,
Last edited:
EarthX
Owner of Earth Exploration Technologies
dclee said:
I'm glad we have some intelligent people on this forum....so many other forums are ridiculous.....anyway
From what I understand it is simply the "increase in back pressure" that causes the engine lots of power.........I remember when buying mine, I looked all around, talked to many companies and so on. The reason I went with a SP is because Whipple's reps. where very knowledgeable. They assured me that its never takes more than something like 5hp away at any time.........and we all know that a Turbo can at times use much more.
The reason (I think) that many racing cars use turbos is because of the adjustability of them........SCs seem to be a bit less adjustible/tuneable...I may be wrong. But with the right set up, a turbo can make gobs of power.
