Okay maybe we should be a bit more specific about what the issue might be if we're going to criticise.
Even by 91 standards, putting a transverse turbo 4 pot in a 1350kg sedan doesn't make a huge amount of sense. It doesn't have to, of course, if it works well. But something's funny with your engine if for what you may have put in it you're returning overall figures like that. That said I can't see the total costs of your car or engine so I can't say for sure.
Maybe I'll play around later when I get home, and see what's up in 91.
Also, your first car, that's not meant to be nearly 300k is it?
EDIT: Okay, booted up a super basic eco turbo with about as much horsepower, and no quality sliders. God these emissions ratings are horrendous. Anyway, immediate questions that come to mind:
- You've got some room to move with the AKI. Are you shooting for 91RON?
- What's with the torque peaking at 5700rpm? Is it a really long flat plateau that just happens to peak at that point?
- The responsiveness is probably the worst part. Lugging around a sedan like that, it would be torture if you wanted to get on the freeway, overtake, even hustle through city traffic.
- Even without the responsiveness, just look at that 0-100 time. 15 seconds!? Even for a 1991 car that's glacial... you should probably aim for 9-10. Also, as a result of the presumably anaemic performance, your driver is probably mashing the pedal most of the time, hence a lackluster mpg. You should probably be aiming to get closer to 28-30mpg.
- Without any quality sliders this is an extraordinarily cheap engine. IMHO making turbo engines automatically warrants making some more expensive engineering options because you want to actually make good use of that turbo. I mean, plenty of SOHC turbo setups exist (looking at you Honda), but they're generally going in cars with about 300-500 less kilos on them!
The most comparable car I can think of here that really fits the kind of brief, is a '91 Camry. But the Camry has MPFI. It does get 136hp from a naturally aspirated 2.2L I4 though and weighs about 1300kg, so that's where you want to be aiming at as an equivalent. It's a bit of a challenge to have a good turbo run 91RON but if you pick a good enough intercooler it makes your job way easier. And an air-air intercooler is, for our purposes, more than adequate, and not expensive or heavy.
So what I've attached here is something which I consider to be still very cheap (and only has +1 tech on everything except the exhaust. I bumped that up to +5 because emissions, man). But the power curve is pretty tasty and peaks at a fairly healthy >140hp, with a slightly improved responsiveness and efficiency. This is probably not the *best* solution for your car's brief, but it's what I'd have in mind if I was "innovative" enough to try a smaller displacement i4 in a 1991 sedan!
Thu Oct 09, 2014 11:57 am 
