did i read correct that you want to hit 600 whp with a full 3 inch catted exhaust

 

Lmao have fun wasting $$

 

I wish you luck...but you're going to need more than just luck to achieve those goals....A LOT more.

 

 

for $25,000 you can build a faster car...... u prolly could build a fastercar for less than that. u could take an old car and drop in a BBC. easy, simple, faster, less money, you can get more power. overal better

 

Legion wasn't you on .com to. I remember seeing you somewhere besides here. I only spent two days on that site.

 

Wasn't sure he was referring to that car, hence why I said nothing, if he is he is all full of misinformations

 

Pretty sure I have that jar sitting at my cubicle at work, and its empty.....

 

Yeah....

I wasn't sure either, but wanted to correct it if he was.

 

That's not entirely true. If you have something can displace enough air, then you will. A stupidly large turbo, although not practical, could generate 600 fwhp on 28 PSI based on pure efficiency.

A fully built motor, proper cooling and exhaust, with a 1.6L twin screw should net about 500 fwhp. A 100 shot to get to 600 fwhp is fesable then.

 

lets rephrase. 26psi isnt enough boost to flow 600whp on an ecotec head, ported or not, regardless of displacement of the motor.
and i disagree with the 500whp twinscrew

 

umm thats not true.. zzp did mid 500 if i remember on their 2.4 motor on like 19-20 psi or something like that .. and they were just getting started.. i'm sure they'd be damn close if they were at 26 psi .. considering the turbo they're using

 

But he had said a built motor????

I do think its possible to jam 600 whp out of a stock block, granting the fact that it holds together. It just wouldn't be an efficient way to do it.



EDIT: Why is 500 hard to believe? Area had just about 400 whp on a TVS, stock displacement.

Assuming built motor, as I previously said, that means 2.4L, ported head, etc, it's doable. You're talking .3L more of blower and a hell of a lot more efficiency. I suppose I could do all of the calculations but its not worth the time for this argument.

Let's just leave it as agree to disagree.

 

still waint to see this whole build start already...

 

area revved damn high for that number, and you wouldnt be able to do so as well with a 2.4 (same reason ZZP says their 2.0 will make more than their 2.4 on these 800whp+ builds theyre doing). He had a ported head too, and the increased displacement is only a help when you can increase head flow as well to match the inceased displacement. Besides, as boost increases, parasitic draw increases at a geometric rate, so while near atmospheric, each psi of boost might add 5% more power, but when you start getting up to 3BAR pressures, 4 of the 5% is being lost just trying to spin the blower. Superchargers dont even have maps that go up past 2.5BAR more often than not..which means he needs to keep the PSI down and make the power by having awesome flow, which the ecotec does not enjoy.. If this were a K20, i would say he can hit 600whp...but on this head...idk

 

^^^^xx2

 

ecotec drag cars can handle 1k =p

 

not supercharged tho :/
course you can make insane power numbers off a turbo motor

 

I still say twin charge
best of both worlds

 

Yup. All the power, all the heat, lack of cooling. That's worth it? Not mention jamming a heap ton of air flow thru a small vacuum bypass? That bypass was not meant to see air flow of those numbers.

Twincharging is the least efficient way to make power. Yes it does work, but its not as efficient as just one system or the other. Its more of a show car thing.

 

Still doesn't stop the horde of people that heard from that guy, that friend, or my buddy says...

BBC will always lose to the more efficient handling car on track, I have seen very few people attempt to bring a car over 700hp into a non-formula or GT spec race. So no I will never corrupt my cobalt with a non-LSJ engine transplant.

28psi is all I need, yes there may be a need to use some bottle, but I am hoping to keep the type of bottle I'm using to track legal CO2, not NO2. If you know why that's important you'll realize where it's going. The NO2 factor is unreliable and testy at best in the corners I am hoping to run.

Probably still see both, but much less than your thinking.

The stock head won't work at all, whole things a great idea for a GTi contending stocker, but for the purposes of my build we'll see some extreme dollars go to work on a heavily improved system to support high RPM's and a verocious cam, and yea note here, my state doesn't test on the tail pipe, has Cat it's good to go.

The car will have the potential to flow all the fuel, air, and exhaust necessary to on paper deliver the power, the new Supercharger fills the displacement gap in at 2 barish, and with the other pieces of the equation I'll get the number out.

Ever seen Turbo/Supercharged Mustang's? Some key notes I would like to point out is somehow they're are mustangs making 100% gains on 9psi. WOW impossible Jimmy Johns! HOW DOES IT WORK? There are plenty of restrictions an engine faces when pumping air/exhaust, take them away and improve the speed it does it, and you see pretty results.

The supercharger is just an aid, it amplifies the potential of the engine, which I have total faith in. Transmission not so much...

Yes engine will be built, and it will be built with internals that will hopefully pay off up top, down low when I get the dyno it's ganna be pretty much the same, maybe slight lull or gain, but up top, doing what it's set to do, it'll be cake.

Don't think I'm stupid, the car sits quasi modified now, but this is the test phase, having done that all I need to setup the parts that will support the climb.

When it's done, if the tires and how she sits with a wicked set of brakes doesn't give away the biz of the build I'd be honest and say you probably never liked cars.

 

Since you plan to build a custom engine anyways. You should build a long rod stroker. I have a feeling the numbers will work out to be more favorable as a 2.3 then a 2.4.

The long rod combined with a stroker crank should allow for awesome revving capability, which is what you need.

 

I have considered the long rod, but the extra engine size is undeniably a big part of the numbers I'm looking at, if I get the specs from some friends on they're 240's builds I should have info that will answer how the engine will be prepared in concept.

@bogalusahondakiller
I have never been to the .com cobalt website if that's whay your suggesting...?

I've hit some snags with the car, so there will be some down time to address it. Meter Maid decided to hit me, and the clutch has since given it's last fully functional clutch (clutch?) so drivetrain upgrades will be coming up soon, the body is just scratched nothing major until you get to the details up close. I need a bodykit regardless to support wider tires legally, so that'll be addressed soon too.

Hopefully by July I will post the Baseline Dyno for where I started out with some garage (my home one not something special just yet) tuning when the new clutch arrives.

 

lack of cooling
explain please

 

Trust me, do a long rod if you are serious. Its worth every penny. Just ask those who have stroker motors with and without.