Is naturally aspirated tuning dead? Just about every single

>>17452437
Good for you.

File: 1994_McLaren_F1-3-1024.jpg (184KB, 1024x650px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1024x650px

>>17452437
it now occurs to you that the mclaren f1 is still the fastest NA production vehicle

File: valkyrie.jpg (30KB, 768x384px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 768x384px

>>17452458
>Cosworth 6.5L V12 making nearly 1000HP

Finally, 25 years later, a worthy successor

>>17452467
>implying the top speed wont be limited to 217 mph

i do still consider it a spiritual successor though

File: brz.jpg (150KB, 750x422px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 750x422px

It's almost like manufacturers forgot how to make engines without turbos

>1999
>F20C
>125HP/L

>2012
>FA20
>100HP/L

I mean, the former makes no torque, but the latter makes even less

>>17452437
>>17452506
Its almost like meeting emissions happened.

>>17452467
Is this a >production vehicle tho? I suppose it could be but it certainly isn't street legal

>>17452882
106 McLaren F1's were made, while 175 of these will be made. Whether either is "production" is up to you.

>>17452506
the FA20 is a totally different engine design, it makes more usable torque lower than the F20C and it's significantly less stressed.

>>17452921
I'm not saying it's not, just curious. The F1 is street legal though and that requires meeting emissions which is the big hurdle, that's why i think the F1 is still such an icon, it will likely always be the most powerful street legal NA car

>>17452685
its almost like (((communism))) has taken over


fake news about (((global warming))) has truly ruined cars

>>17452945
>autism the post

>>17452882
I'm pretty sure it will be street legal

File: Why not both.jpg (562KB, 1920x1159px) Image search: [Google]

562KB, 1920x1159px

>>17452437
>I can't appreciate throwing 30 pounds of boost in an engine like I can appreciate 9000 RPM screamers.

>>17452437
Probably a dumb question, but won't NA engines last longer?
Seems like forcing anything through a system will wear on the components more, despite the added performance.

>>17455685
No, because x output hp = x amount of force on the internals (minus internal losses of course). They'll last equally long if the internals are designed to cope with that internal force.

Note: If the n/a engine does rev higher, it'll have more internal losses, which means the internals are being exposed to more power despite not making more at the output end. This might cause the n/a engine to not last as long - but you can design around that.

>Seems like forcing anything through a system will wear on the components more
It's an air pump. You're even forcing air in without boost.

I have a supercharged 2 ltr engine and I don't like how punchy it is in 1st gear. I wish it was smoother. Though I love the boost in other gears.

Should I go for an NA next time?

>>17455723
Forced induction is a replacement for displacement, but an imitation can't beat the original.

>>17452506
Hp/L is a useless metric. Sorry.

>>17455751
I'd agree if we were comparing F20's to LS3's, but we're comparing two torqueless DOHC 4 bangers.

>>17452437
>Can't appreciate boost coming on
>Can appreciate gutless revving to the moon

You should get a 250.

>>17452437
As long as CAFE standards keep going up, everything will get boosted eventually. Either that or go hybrid or full electric

>>17455685
Yes. Less moving parts, less to break. I'd say a lot depends on maintenance though. Turbos are very hard on the oil and it must be changed when recommended.