Sc42 or Md321t?
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sc42 or Md321t?
Hi guys, need some help with choosing the right turbo! I am looking to achieve the 450bhp mark with a quick spool up on my Sti blobeye! I am currently running a afp 20g, I have all the supporting mods already! Which of the 2 chosen turbos would be best for my car? or would anyone else have any better ideas? Thanks!
#2
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (52)
Hi guys, need some help with choosing the right turbo! I am looking to achieve the 450bhp mark with a quick spool up on my Sti blobeye! I am currently running a afp 20g, I have all the supporting mods already! Which of the 2 chosen turbos would be best for my car? or would anyone else have any better ideas? Thanks!
#4
personally id go for the sc42 over the md321t.a friend of mine has a sc42 thats running over 500bhp on 20% meth on a 2.0.plus you have the clinics customer service with the sc42 so a no brainer for me
Trending Topics
#8
Sc42 is that not a 420bhp turbo on pump fuel, you will need the 321t for your power choice although on a 2.0 it will be laggy as far as I know its better suited for the 2.5. I wouldnt worry to much about 459 as a 2.0 with a sc42 will be one hell of a road car with good spool characteristics, I don't think you would miss the 20/30 bhp or if you do map it with a splash of meths.
#9
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (7)
Sc42 is that not a 420bhp turbo on pump fuel, you will need the 321t for your power choice although on a 2.0 it will be laggy as far as I know its better suited for the 2.5. I wouldnt worry to much about 459 as a 2.0 with a sc42 will be one hell of a road car with good spool characteristics, I don't think you would miss the 20/30 bhp or if you do map it with a splash of meths.
Older T is laggy on 2.0L,but new spools nicely as said on 2.0L or 2.1L
Jura
#10
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite a few different opinions on the two then... I guess the overall has chosen the sc42 over the md321t! Hope I won't notice the 20-30bhp loss then! Cheers for help peeps!
#12
#13
Scooby Regular
you'll find its folks being very partisan for which ever they have or prefer.
best bet have a nosey at the graphs for both and go from there. Also have a chat with both companies and see if they are the best turbos to suit your requirements, might turn out another option is better.
Personaly prefer the SC series myself,,, hahahaha
#14
I was in a similar boat! choices were SC46 or 321T for a 440 target .... was a close call but ended up opting for the SC46.
Spool of an SC46 on a 2.5 is fantastic, and apparently the 42 is similar on a 2.0. So if your internals can take it, a 42 with meths should be the best of both worlds.
Spool of an SC46 on a 2.5 is fantastic, and apparently the 42 is similar on a 2.0. So if your internals can take it, a 42 with meths should be the best of both worlds.
#15
Former Sponsor
Sc42 is that not a 420bhp turbo on pump fuel, you will need the 321t for your power choice although on a 2.0 it will be laggy as far as I know its better suited for the 2.5. I wouldnt worry to much about 459 as a 2.0 with a sc42 will be one hell of a road car with good spool characteristics, I don't think you would miss the 20/30 bhp or if you do map it with a splash of meths.
Sorry Stevie but you are wrong the SC42 will make 420 on pump fuel hence the name, the number on our Turbo units equates to the power it can achieve on V-power but even more power can be achieved with better fuels, Hope this helps.
Ads
#17
I have an SC42 twinscoll with IHI housing and it's bonkers!! When I had it all done my car only had 1500 miles on it so barely run in and it made 405bhp/383ltb however my car is feels much quicker now o need to get her on the dyno.
#19
Scooby Regular
2.1 with no AVCS so I reckon you'd see there or there abouts the same result on an AVCS equipped 2 litre engine.
#20
Scooby Regular
Pretty sure they have both had revisions done to improve them.
#21
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
I went for the sc46 by the way on standard sti engine perfick and future mod proof
Remember the 2.1 etc are forged built engines so will produce different (better) figures than a standard factory engine.
Also some of the 2 litre cars are forged built too.
Don't get too hung on figures mate .
Good luck
Remember the 2.1 etc are forged built engines so will produce different (better) figures than a standard factory engine.
Also some of the 2 litre cars are forged built too.
Don't get too hung on figures mate .
Good luck
#22
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of interesting comments from everyone.. My cars only on standard forged internals but have heard n read a lot about these engines being able to handle over 500bhp! I guess i will be happy getting towards the 430bhp mark! Less stress on the engine!
#23
The OP was asking about a 450+ turbo hence why I said the 321t would suit his needs as the sc42 won't make that power on pump fuel as its a 420bhp turbo ;-) also stated that a non billet turbo would take some time to get going on a standard 2.0 as TX said 4500rpm and that to forget about the bhp target and your sc42 would have better spool and be better suited for his needs.
#24
Id also say spool and drivability is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much more important than pub numbers! In the real world a 400bhp car thats drivable is quicker than a spikey 600.
Definately dont get hung up on numbers! But you mentioned spool in your opening post in the same breath as bhp, so im guessing youve got your head screwed on straight!
Good luck with the choice! either one is a quality blower! You wont regret leaving the TD world behind and entering the 21st century! haha :-)
Definately dont get hung up on numbers! But you mentioned spool in your opening post in the same breath as bhp, so im guessing youve got your head screwed on straight!
Good luck with the choice! either one is a quality blower! You wont regret leaving the TD world behind and entering the 21st century! haha :-)
#25
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Somerset
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a sc42 on my bug sti. Not sure on exact figures but Duncan said it was easily on the happy side of 400. He had never mapped a 42 before, but said it felt great with fantastic spool and no more laggy than the standard vf35 turbo, and i have to agree with him
#27
One think we really need is the same car with the same setup testing both turbos.
If some one buys my SC42 I may just get an LM420 or 450 and put this issue to bed.
The only thing is, I am very very happy with the performance so don't feel the need to change.
However a 450 does sound nice, but means going front mount
If some one buys my SC42 I may just get an LM420 or 450 and put this issue to bed.
The only thing is, I am very very happy with the performance so don't feel the need to change.
However a 450 does sound nice, but means going front mount
Last edited by juggers; 08 June 2012 at 12:08 AM. Reason: D
#29
Scooby Regular
One think we really need is the same car with the same setup testing both turbos.
If some one buys my SC42 I may just get an LM420 or 450 and put this issue to bed.
The only thing is, I am very very happy with the performance so don't feel the need to change.
However a 450 does sound nice, but means going front mount
If some one buys my SC42 I may just get an LM420 or 450 and put this issue to bed.
The only thing is, I am very very happy with the performance so don't feel the need to change.
However a 450 does sound nice, but means going front mount