So how does the McLaren feel like?

[felix]

What cars have you driven then roland? Ever driven a zonda?

[LateNightCable]

I think most any decently engineered turbo car displays minimal lag these days. But naturally asperated will always be more flexible.

[kleinefisch]

If you put a turbo on an engine that already has plenty of early power, then it still has that power, but it has more later on. You can also use turbo lag to your advantage. With an engine that has excellent power all around, but boosted power up top, then you can control whether you want to tap into that based on your shifting style. If you a more naturally aspirated feel, with quick response, keep the revs low by shifting up sooner. If you want that kick, hold into the higher rev ranges and shift later. You would certainly have to learn the car very well however.

[thepolarfoxqx]

the thign is, turbos start to loose efficiency enhancing power at very high RPMS, there is a point of diminishing returns, BMW engines don't stand that much to gain from them.

[skyline R-34]

i think that might be too much power to handle but dont get me wrong i love power but it might be too much like i have a gas r/c car and i goes 65mph and i didnt think thats was good but when i took it out for a spin it was uncontrollable(like way too much power to handle) so i went and boght a better one for a beginer.

[wEstSide]

You can say a supercharger will increase power and be responsive, but it will always rob you of about 1k worth of revs and pretty much kill your top end. A twin turbo system is good, but really a big ass single turbo is the best for power. It won't diminish at the top end, and if properly tuned, can have pretty good response, even better than twins sometimes. The optimal setting for most power at all ranges (from what I hear) is a twincharger, which is basically a supercharger + turbocharger system. This system has only been featured on a few cars (MR2 had a kit and Lancia Delta Integrale had this system, try this link for info: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/L...ncharging.html

If McLaren were to do a twincharger system rather than the twin M3 motors, I don't know how it would've worked out, all I know is it would've been damn cool and earned it an even more legendary status.[/url]

[skyline_r34v]

Geez first the topic gets brought back to life after 2 years, then it gets brought back to life again after 1 year.

[zit]

ive seen many a mclaren but never driven one the fastest car ive ever driven is a jag xj220 but my personal opinion is that they have a similar aim to be the fastest and yet they come across as 2 completely different cars the mac is a lm racer for the road whilst the jag is great to drive but fels weighted and heavy and at low speeds feels a bit dozey because of the horrific turbo lag

what i am saying is that the jag is sleeper supercar it comes across at first as a sharp(ish) grand tourer and yet when u well the turbos up you won't believe the speed but then it was the fastest car in the world before the macca f1

[LateNightCable]

Xj220 was the fastest production car with a V6 that is. And one of the fastest in the world by any means, which is really saying something for "just" a V6.

This topic is three years old, really? Gee wiz.

[Thunf]

Interesting this about FI and NA engines. BMW makes great engines... but it's just their image to not bring turbos -- and that's it. Look what they do about turbo technology for diesels! Twin turbo - one for low revs, one for high revs - E60 BMW 535d. That engine got more power and torgue than their own current commonrail diesel V8!

Turbo is certainly not a bad thing in modern cars. AUDI makes the best diesels today when talking consumption/power, but also the gasolines. A chipped A3 1.8T 5 valve/cyl makes an average fuelconsumption of 7.3litre /100 gasoline, that's totally ok with 220 hp! Ofcourse it depends how you use the throttle, but the fuelconsumption can get much lower than you are able to with a V6 for example.

The pump diesels (TDI) AUDI have is the best engines you can get.