Looks like Road//Race is working with American Suzuki to produce a turbo Kizashi for an upcoming episode of "Test Drive with Tommy Kendall" on SpeedTV.
If I happen so see anyone post any more information I'll let you know.
Credit where credit is due....
http://kizashilounge.com/forum/index.ph ... .msg82#new
A Turbo Kizashi will see the light of day.
http://www.speedtv.com/programs/speed-t ... ve-suzuki/
Fri Apr 30 @ 9:00pm ET
Sounds like the Road/Race car will be in this episode quite a bit.
I'll probably post some clips if the episode is any good.
Fri Apr 30 @ 9:00pm ET
Sounds like the Road/Race car will be in this episode quite a bit.
I'll probably post some clips if the episode is any good.
I rode in this car while down having mine worked on...and wow! I almost didn't want to get back in mine! LOL I'm told that they really put it through the paces at the track while filming so it's definitely gonna be a don't-miss episode.
I'm looking to replace my 02 WRX for something with a bit more interior room. I like the new Legacy, especially the Legacy GT, but this Kizashi has me curious. I've been reading road tests around the web, but haven't seen one specifically about the AWD version. I could go for an AWD 6-speed turbo if one were available. Maybe next year?
Flyby out
Flyby out
Drive that thing or pull over! (Either common sense ain't all that common, or it ain't what it's cracked up to be)
Zach Bowman autoblog wrote:Suzuki took a pretty big gamble by only offering its new Kizashi with a fuel-thrifty 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine. While the mill produces a respectable 185 horsepower, it falls well short of the numbers available from its V6-clad competition. To address that situation, the company has partnered with Road Race Motorsports to develop a Kizashi Turbo Concept. The aftermarket company worked in a Mitsubishi 16 G turbo coupled with a Road Race Motorsports intercooler and a handful of other goodies to help up the power to a much more respectable 290 horses.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/05/05/vide ... urbocharg/
Its probable that the current CVT AWD (probably)won't take a turbo that's producing 290 hp. So I say beef up the AWD and put a turbo on the 2.4. That way you get a bit more torque off the larger 4 as opposed to the VW turbo2.0, imo. Also, better weight savings over a V6 (who wants extra understeer? Anyone? Not me! 
). And don't forget the 6-speed manual, beefing up the tranny as well. With respect to Road Race Motorsports, no piggyback signal interceptors. Please. If Suzuki is going to work with RRMS then share the ECU coding and use larger fuel injectors, and maybe VW's direct injection fuel technology as in the MazdaSpeed3' direct injection2.3 (265hp and over 270lb/ft of torque). Oh, don't forget the limited-slip diffs, a brake upgrade to help it stop, and larger anti-roll bars to help keep it planted (without making the ride harsher) and the warranty. 
That's the ticket!
Flyby out
). And don't forget the 6-speed manual, beefing up the tranny as well. With respect to Road Race Motorsports, no piggyback signal interceptors. Please. If Suzuki is going to work with RRMS then share the ECU coding and use larger fuel injectors, and maybe VW's direct injection fuel technology as in the MazdaSpeed3' direct injection2.3 (265hp and over 270lb/ft of torque). Oh, don't forget the limited-slip diffs, a brake upgrade to help it stop, and larger anti-roll bars to help keep it planted (without making the ride harsher) and the warranty. That's the ticket! Flyby out
Drive that thing or pull over! (Either common sense ain't all that common, or it ain't what it's cracked up to be)
Ha ha - be carefully making positive remarks about another make " MazdaSpeed3' direct injection2.3 (265hp" - some posters (mostly on another forum) will tell you to take a hike and only post on that forum.Flyby wrote:Its probable that the current CVT AWD (probably)won't take a turbo that's producing 290 hp. So I say beef up the AWD and put a turbo on the 2.4. That way you get a bit more torque off the larger 4 as opposed to the VW turbo2.0, imo. Also, better weight savings over a V6 (who wants extra understeer? Anyone? Not me!
Flyby out
Most however will appreciate some intelligent discussion like yours and get some good insights from it. I was thinking about getting the ECU - but not any more. 180 - 185hp is not impressive. Was looking at RRM gear to try at least get it over 200, but will hold off until documented aftermarket upgrades are available.
I'm still driving my Mazda for now, but not for much longer. I'll probably get more serious about getting a new car in the fall.Whoa! I wasn't making a positive remark about the MazdaSpeed3. I was only stating a fact about it's turbo-2.3's horsepower and torque. "Just the facts, ma'am. Just the facts."gaww wrote:Ha ha - be carefully making positive remarks about another make " MazdaSpeed3' direct injection2.3 (265hp" - some posters (mostly on another forum) will tell you to take a hike and only post on that forum.Flyby wrote:Its probable that the current CVT AWD (probably)won't take a turbo that's producing 290 hp. So I say beef up the AWD and put a turbo on the 2.4. That way you get a bit more torque off the larger 4 as opposed to the VW turbo2.0, imo. Also, better weight savings over a V6 (who wants extra understeer? Anyone? Not me!
Flyby out
Most however will appreciate some intelligent discussion like yours and get some good insights from it. I was thinking about getting the ECU - but not any more. 180 - 185hp is not impressive. Was looking at RRM gear to try at least get it over 200, but will hold off until documented aftermarket upgrades are available.
I was merely pointing out the power potential of a good 4-banger, and the torque-steer issue that much power produces on an FWD vehicle. That's why the ECU on that car actually reduces engine power slightly in 1st and 2nd gear hard launches.For some of my own mod-ing history, I once had my little '02 WRX turning out a AWD-dyno output of 222hp & 222lb/ft. That's to the wheels. The setup was supposed to be good for 285hp so you see how much an AWD setup sucks power. I had an ECU flash (Cobb Stage2 AP), and a turbo-back exhaust. I really liked it for several years. It was a clean setup. Just reflash the ECU, be sure you have at least a Catback, and you're good to go. At WOT the stock injectors and stock turbo were at their limit without risking going lean. But I sold all the engine-performance bits and reverted the ECU back to stock, plus reinstalled the stock exhaust. One thing I want to point out about such a mod is that unless you intend to use it competitively (and a lot of guys do) dipping into the boost really burns the premium fuel. As you know, some fuel is actually used for cooling the fueling charge a bit to prevent detonation; a rich turbo engine is a healthy turbo engine.
Stock hp is 227 on my car. Not bad for a 2.0-4. It's enough, but it lacks the off-the-line torque that a larger 4 might provide. All the good stuff happens further up the rpm range- but it's all good. Still I leave most traffic sitting still from the light, just because it's still pretty "peppy". I never did Auto-X the car, but I sure went raging about in some of my favorite twisty bits. The car has been rock solid. No tranny issues ever. I'd want that robustness in the Kizzie. I think most people here would. Taking it down a notch, I hope a turbo-Kizzie also gets a quicker steering ratio that what it has now. BTW, I have searched several sites including SuzukiAuto.com and cannot find out what the steering ratio is. Does anyone know? If it's greater than 13:1 I'm sure it will disappoint me. I put an 11.5:1 rack in my car after driving an EVO-VIII, which is 13:1. The stock ratio on my WRX was 16:1!!! 
Talk about sawing at the wheel! 
Before the WRX I had a 91 MR2 turbo for 10 years. It had many signal interceptors on it to massage it's 200hp 2.0-4 upwards of 280hp. Those were to old days when no one could crake the programming of Toyota ECUs. No more signal interceptors for me.
Gotta go now. Getting writers' cramps!
Flyby out
Drive that thing or pull over! (Either common sense ain't all that common, or it ain't what it's cracked up to be)
sounds like dat poster is the intelligent one you shouldnt come into a forum for a specific model dissing that model for another model obviously we are here cause we love the kizashi ...facts can be stated of course but u should be wary of how its said i think would be a common sense approach i wouldnt go into a camry forum saying kizashi is better its just not nicegaww wrote:Ha ha - be carefully making positive remarks about another make " MazdaSpeed3' direct injection2.3 (265hp" - some posters (mostly on another forum) will tell you to take a hike and only post on that forum.Flyby wrote:Its probable that the current CVT AWD (probably)won't take a turbo that's producing 290 hp. So I say beef up the AWD and put a turbo on the 2.4. That way you get a bit more torque off the larger 4 as opposed to the VW turbo2.0, imo. Also, better weight savings over a V6 (who wants extra understeer? Anyone? Not me!
Flyby out
Most however will appreciate some intelligent discussion like yours and get some good insights from it. I was thinking about getting the ECU - but not any more. 180 - 185hp is not impressive. Was looking at RRM gear to try at least get it over 200, but will hold off until documented aftermarket upgrades are available.