Originally posted by FlatFour
I don't wanna go off topic again, but i've still gotta disagree with this post. First off, I thought h22's and b20's were both not good bottom-ends for boost applications? Second, the most boost you will ever run on a stock bottom end honda reliably would prob be 12psi. A factory-turbocharged dsm bottom-end will prob hold 20+. Even with the higher compression on the stock honda pistons, i don't see a comparison. I think i've heard of dsm's breaking into the 11's on the stock turbo, this is just an impossible feat for a stock honda bottom-end.
As for the neon comment, 
, i can't agree with you more, but i was just talking about what was under the hood. Mitsubishi, Mopar, whatever the hell that thing is, its impressive.
Back on topic - Volcom, just because you don't drive a factory-turbocharged car like we've been discussing, doesn't mean your car won't be plenty fast and reliable with a turbo setup on your stock motor. It's just that once you have your turbo setup and a year goes by and the thrill starts to fade and you want more power, you are gonna have to take that baby apart and start a huge upgrading project, whereas the factory-turbo owner, just needs to change some bolt-ons and he's seeing more power. In short, the upgrade path is alot simpler for the factory-turbo car.
then i guess we will have to agree to disagree then
china