# New guy here **URL:** https://forums.speedlife.net/t/new-guy-here/185324 **Category:** PittSpeed Off Topic **Created:** [October 1, 2006, 1:03pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/new-guy-here/185324 "2006-10-01T13:03:02Z") **Posts on this page:** 1 **Showing post:** 26
### Author: ![SixSpeed454SS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19adc/32.png) [@SixSpeed454SS](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/SixSpeed454SS) #### Post date: [October 3, 2006, 4:36pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/new-guy-here/185324/26 "2006-10-03T16:36:47Z")
> [@Another project....](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/another-project/24748/38): > > when built right, the 2.3T is just as fast, if not faster than a supercharged 4.6. if it wasnt for the 2.3T being a direct bold in (and significantly cheaper to build properly) i probably would go for a supercharged 5.4 or an n/a 5.8 out of a lightning but that would make for a not so good weight distribution. id be fighting physics the whole time. and what i meant by toasting ricers and chevy guys, not on the street, at the auto X. thats also taking in consideration of how light my truck is, how much hp it’ll be making, and how evenly balanced the weight is. Tell ‘sonic03snake’ that a 2.3L is just as fast. He’s running 10s in the 1/4 mile with a stock 4.6L bottom end, I believe. You aint gonna make a 2.3L in that truck run that without alot of $$$$$$$$$$. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but SERIOUS work. Dollar for dollar, the 4.6 is the way to go. Not that I don’t think the 2.3L turbo would be cool in your truck. It would be different, hence it would be cool if executed correctly. Like I said, Good luck to you. --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/new-guy-here/185324)._