600 Turbo?

[IDAHO HOT SHOT]

I was quizzing boondockers today about 600 vs. 800 turbo. As I understand, they have the same bottom end, so why not a 600. If any of you guys are running a 6 or 7 turbo fill me in. I've heard that the 7 has more snap but less low end. Enlighten me!!!

 

[Vertical Asshauler]

The bigger discplacement will make more torque and overall power with less boost.

 

[Timbre]

no lag??

Nearly every turbo mfg makes the claim that their kit has the same bottom end as stock...or "no lag". When compared to stock, that is simply not true. I have had the opportunity to ride several turbo setups and they are all a little soft on the bottom end. I believe the 600, 700, 0r 800 would all have porportionately the same issue on the bottom end. There is no way around it due to the mechanics of the way turbos build boost.

Hope this helps

 

[mod03rmk800]

I agree that there noticeably less power from a dead stop(compared to a stocker), and really hard to tell but a little delay(if that) when in the lower rpms and wacking the throttle. With that said, it is fractions of a second before the boost builds and the power is there. A 600 imo, would build plenty of power with maybe a touch less of time to build boost with the smaller cylinders(guess).
I wouldn't say I suck as a rider, but anything over 8# is power over my head for sure with a 800 on technical type of hills. Unless you are into doing the 'movie' wheelies all the time 6-10# is a lot of go.

 

[IDAHO HOT SHOT]

I'm thinkin a 600 RUSH with an RMK tunnel and a turbo would be the kats a$$