I want 200WHP...NA
10-06-2008, 01:59 PM
#102
Senior Member
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: South County Orange County, CA
Posts: 1,386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
take out your engine, replace with bigger engine.
heres what you would need to do IF you wanted to do this
INSANE compression sumting like 14:1 (jk)
cyro'd block
ported head
rods/pistons/headgasket/studs sleeves
stroker kit
ported intake manifold
race gas
entire valvetrain upgrade
injectors
custom tuning
oh
but you wont have any traction so
new tires
and new axles to handle the new tires
and then a new clutch
hmm... probably like 15,000 dollars
heres what you would need to do IF you wanted to do this
INSANE compression sumting like 14:1 (jk)
cyro'd block
ported head
rods/pistons/headgasket/studs sleeves
stroker kit
ported intake manifold
race gas
entire valvetrain upgrade
injectors
custom tuning
oh
but you wont have any traction so
new tires
and new axles to handle the new tires
and then a new clutch
hmm... probably like 15,000 dollars
thats a joke!
now youre looking at a non street-legal car!!!
haah!
10-06-2008, 11:49 PM
#103
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-09-07
Location: minnesota
Posts: 1,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you cant have it ported, get it ported? Could you elaborate on this?
what kind of numbers are you contemplating for valve lift? because if you get into truly high lift and youll need to run serious springs, possibly get springs seat machine work and youll start approaching the area where solid lash adjusters are used. 264 ot thereabouts? I can only surmise that you must be talking about 264 advertised duration as 264 @ lash would be insane, that said a 264advertised cam is still a really serious piece, and not what most people would consider streetable, 264 is what the Comp STGIII intake cam is advertised as. Like I said, not really a street friendl cam
In a lot of ways? really? I am pretty sure it would only reduce in two ways, and that would the same way all cams bleed compression, by leaving the intake valve open into the compression stroke, and opening the exhaust valve during the power stroke. Would you care to detail any of the other ways the cams ou recommend would bleed dynamic compression??
I am very interested to know what formulae and criterion youve used to determine runner length, and cross section diameter. Would you care to offer further details regarding plenum volume and ideal TB placement in order to achieve our goals?
I was wondering what youve estimated the BMEP to be for this combination......
what kind of numbers are you contemplating for valve lift? because if you get into truly high lift and youll need to run serious springs, possibly get springs seat machine work and youll start approaching the area where solid lash adjusters are used. 264 ot thereabouts? I can only surmise that you must be talking about 264 advertised duration as 264 @ lash would be insane, that said a 264advertised cam is still a really serious piece, and not what most people would consider streetable, 264 is what the Comp STGIII intake cam is advertised as. Like I said, not really a street friendl cam
In a lot of ways? really? I am pretty sure it would only reduce in two ways, and that would the same way all cams bleed compression, by leaving the intake valve open into the compression stroke, and opening the exhaust valve during the power stroke. Would you care to detail any of the other ways the cams ou recommend would bleed dynamic compression??
I am very interested to know what formulae and criterion youve used to determine runner length, and cross section diameter. Would you care to offer further details regarding plenum volume and ideal TB placement in order to achieve our goals?
I was wondering what youve estimated the BMEP to be for this combination......
anyways what is BMEP again?
brake mean effective pressure? or am i just making up stuff
10-07-2008, 10:10 AM
#104
Pedantic, no. I think details are essential when you bust out a comment like "reduce the runner length to about 5 inches at 1.65 inches". Pedantic, absolutely not. Arguably bombastic, and most likely a bit prolixious(look them up),.... Perhaps I should have just said "how the hell did you come up with that?"
Yup.
anyways what is BMEP again?
brake mean effective pressure?
brake mean effective pressure?
Last edited by Maven; 10-07-2008 at 10:42 AM.
10-07-2008, 04:54 PM
#105
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-09-07
Location: minnesota
Posts: 1,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pedantic, no. I think details are essential when you bust out a comment like "reduce the runner length to about 5 inches at 1.65 inches". Pedantic, absolutely not. Arguably bombastic, and most likely a bit prolixious(look them up),.... Perhaps I should have just said "how the hell did you come up with that?"
Yup.
Yup.
l agree with what your saying for sure
but i think hes on the right track, you want shorter runners for more hp with bigger inlets makes the engine more efficient at higher rpms
idk... my basic knowledge of intakes says if you want big hp make short, big, not complicated runners.
10-07-2008, 10:57 PM
#106
troof
l agree with what your saying for sure
but i think hes on the right track, you want shorter runners for more hp with bigger inlets makes the engine more efficient at higher rpms
idk... my basic knowledge of intakes says if you want big hp make short, big, not complicated runners.
l agree with what your saying for sure
but i think hes on the right track, you want shorter runners for more hp with bigger inlets makes the engine more efficient at higher rpms
idk... my basic knowledge of intakes says if you want big hp make short, big, not complicated runners.
5" runners are REALLY short for a street engine. Ask anyone who has ever run the Saab LK9 manifold, Hahn Port fueler manifold, or any other similar style short runner intake, they SUCK on the street, you absolutely lose all low end and midrange power. A key thing to keep in mind is that we have 86mm x 94.6mm cylinders, and this guy is recommending a 127mm x 41.9mm inlet to this cylinder. So your trying to fill a cylinder with 549cc capacity, thru a tube with a 175cc capacity. Now obviously I am leaving out a lot of the science here, but its pretty easy to see that in order to get a complete fill you need the intake to fill and empty over 3 times to get a full cylinder...... Not gonna hapen at reasonable speeds(under about 8000rpm)
All you need on the street is the LE5 manifold. Any shorter runners and you start to drastically alter the low/mid power output with only minimal top end gains(remember its the cams that ultimately decide how much air and at what rpm the engine uses)
10-07-2008, 11:38 PM
#108
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 07-24-06
Location: Canada
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-08-2008, 12:11 AM
#109
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-04-08
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 2,018
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-08-2008, 07:22 AM
#110
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-09-07
Location: minnesota
Posts: 1,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to get 280 to the wheels with your car n/a you might as well dedicate it a drag only car... and drop in a new engine.
Last edited by Greased; 10-08-2008 at 07:22 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
10-08-2008, 10:58 AM
#112
Senior Member
Yeah, 310 at the crank on a NA 4 cylinder is really pushing it. Alot of people don't realize the work, money and time needed to get a *FI* 4 cylinder up to those kinds of numbers (at least if you want to do it safely and get to run the car more then 2 or 3 times... lol).
10-08-2008, 01:24 PM
#113
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-29-05
Location: AZ
Posts: 7,926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts