how many 7 liter strokers are out there???? - Page 8 - Rennlist - Porsche Discussion Forums

Go Back  Rennlist - Porsche Discussion Forums > Water Cooled Technical Discussion Areas > 928 Forum
Reload this Page >

how many 7 liter strokers are out there????

Notices
928 Forum
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: 928 Specialists

how many 7 liter strokers are out there????

 
Old 02-12-2018, 07:57 AM
  #106  
Marti
User
 
Marti's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 454
Default

Originally Posted by 928sg View Post
There is great information in this thread of late. What would be cool, is if we could take all of the positive info and pics in this thread and add it to a Stroker Collaboration thread. So that we could see what others are doing. Set some ground rules about trash talking, and the like and keep it fact based. If you post something negative it could only be about your experience, like you tried xyz and y failed. X & Z were good though. A collaborative exchange of information. We would need mod sponsorship to keep the rennlist out of the thread.. LOL
I think that is the thread we have here in essence. I am not sure we could ever stop someone venting an opinion but hopefully members will respect the objective we are aiming for.

I have tried to post any build pictures I could find here as have others.
Marti is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 08:08 AM
  #107  
Marti
User
 
Marti's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 454
Default

Originally Posted by Strosek Ultra View Post
Engine block bored out to 114mm and reinforced with Belzona Super Metal. Insert cylinder blocks of similar design as for Volvo (picture) will be installed.
┼ke




Hi Ake

this is great input to the build, so much information in fact that I am not fully following the build spec you are pursuing

Are you building a 7.2 with this lightweight crank and NASCAR rods?

Liners are going to be a completely different approach like the type pictured which all appeared in be joined together at the top ?
If that is the case what is the objective of this approach?
Marti is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 08:18 AM
  #108  
Strosek Ultra
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Strosek Ultra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mostly in my workshop located in Sweden.
Posts: 1,286
Default

Originally Posted by 928sg View Post
There is great information in this thread of late. What would be cool, is if we could take all of the positive info and pics in this thread and add it to a Stroker Collaboration thread. So that we could see what others are doing. Set some ground rules about trash talking, and the like and keep it fact based. If you post something negative it could only be about your experience, like you tried xyz and y failed. X & Z were good though. A collaborative exchange of information. We would need mod sponsorship to keep the rennlist out of the thread.. LOL
Sure, the purpose of this forum is to have fun with our cars - right? We all can share experience to help each other to successful modifications of our cars making life even more fun. We can continue this thread or shall we start a new one?
┼ke
Strosek Ultra is online now  
Old 02-12-2018, 08:32 AM
  #109  
Strosek Ultra
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Strosek Ultra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mostly in my workshop located in Sweden.
Posts: 1,286
Default

Originally Posted by V2Rocket View Post
Ake, you have a machine shop I'd kill for...
Forces are different but make sure your harmonic balancer is up to the task on that crank.

One 944 racer snapped his max-knife-edged crank in two pieces due to crazy harmonics whipping it around...
Thank you Spencer, a lifetime of building up a business and a workshop ends up with a lot of stuff. Still there are some stuff I like to have like a flat grinding machine and a hub dyno.
Regarding the harmonic balancer I have not come so far but it probably will be 7" ATI Super Damper part no. 917020 with my own custom made hub.
┼ke
Strosek Ultra is online now  
Old 02-12-2018, 08:49 AM
  #110  
Strosek Ultra
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Strosek Ultra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mostly in my workshop located in Sweden.
Posts: 1,286
Default

Originally Posted by Marti View Post

Hi Ake

this is great input to the build, so much information in fact that I am not fully following the build spec you are pursuing

Are you building a 7.2 with this lightweight crank and NASCAR rods?

Liners are going to be a completely different approach like the type pictured which all appeared in be joined together at the top ?
If that is the case what is the objective of this approach?
The Volvo insert cylinder block is cast iron. For the 928 I will make aluminium insert cylinder blocks having cast iron sleeves. The insert block will be made from four aluminum cylinders welded together. The advantages I can see are easy to machine and hone the cylinder bores when the insert block is out of the engine block, improved strength, same heat expansion as the engine block, no problems to heat the bulky engine block for the installation of interference fit sleeves not talking about pressing down the sleeves (post # 102).
It will be bore 4.250" and stroke 3.750", 426 CI or 7.0 liter.
┼ke
Strosek Ultra is online now  
Old 02-12-2018, 10:20 AM
  #111  
Marti
User
 
Marti's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 454
Default

Originally Posted by Strosek Ultra View Post
The Volvo insert cylinder block is cast iron. For the 928 I will make aluminium insert cylinder blocks having cast iron sleeves. The insert block will be made from four aluminum cylinders welded together. The advantages I can see are easy to machine and hone the cylinder bores when the insert block is out of the engine block, improved strength, same heat expansion as the engine block, no problems to heat the bulky engine block for the installation of interference fit sleeves not talking about pressing down the sleeves (post # 102).
It will be bore 4.250" and stroke 3.750", 426 CI or 7.0 liter.
┼ke
Ok I am with you now, thatĺs an interesting approach about the cylinder insert and liners. Regarding the strength, are you aiming to add strength to the bottom end with this approach to address the possibility of the block cracking across one of the main bearings?
Marti is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 11:03 AM
  #112  
ptuomov
Super User
 
ptuomov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MA
Posts: 4,593
Default

In my opinion, the 928 block isn't particularly fragile. A thrust-bearing failure, severe high-boost detonation, wildly imbalanced rotating assembly, or poorly designed sleeves could get it to crack. However, since it's a cross-plane V8, it balances nicely naturally and the forces acting on the block are much smaller than in a four-banger 944 sister engines. A 3.5 liter inline four is an order of magnitude harder on the block than a 7.0 liter cross-plane V8. Just my opinion.
ptuomov is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 12:11 PM
  #113  
Strosek Ultra
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Strosek Ultra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mostly in my workshop located in Sweden.
Posts: 1,286
Default

To summarize what has been said so far. How many 7 liter strokers are out there? The answer is just a few. Will the bored out 7 liter engine block crack? The answer is nobody knows, just pure speculations. Time will tell when more 7 liter motors are finished and being used.
┼ke
Strosek Ultra is online now  
Old 02-12-2018, 01:24 PM
  #114  
Catorce
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor

 
Catorce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Orange County
Posts: 1,311
Default

Again, I think 7 liters is going in the wrong direction. Why is so much displacement needed to achieve more power? Although I own a 6.57L stroker that made 602hp with the custom manifold shown on my thread, it begs the question as to why the motor has to be so big to achieve that power level. As a counterpoint, I just placed an order for the Huracan Performante - 5.2L V10 normally aspirated, 640hp. Many people think this is underrated since the Performante smashed the Nurb lap time of the 918 Spyder, a much more powerful car by like 5 seconds.

I know, the new motor has DFI and a bunch of other doodads, but at the end of the day 640HP is being achieved by a motor that is smaller than that of the 928 GTS even. To me, that is a way more exciting challenge at this point - to build a super high horsepower 5.0 or 5.4.........
__________________
Current cars:
70 914-6 - 2.7L screamer
73 911T Carrera RS Clone, 3.6 power
75 911 Targa - RSR width 930 motor
78 928 - DEVORE CAR, 6.54L
83 911 Euro SC - 3.2 Short Stroke!
88 928S4 5 speed
02 911 Targa
04 911 40th Anniv
07 997 Twin Turbo 6MT - Techart beauty
09 997 Twin Turbo 6MT - Factory Aerokit
11 Camaro SS - 6MT Z28 Spec, V7Ysi 850whp
12 McLaren 12C
17 McLaren 570S
The only reproduction flat six engine cases on the planet -3.6, 2.0, 2.2, 2.7, GT3/TT
www.taorminaracingdesigns.com
Catorce is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 01:47 PM
  #115  
Marti
User
 
Marti's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 454
Default

Originally Posted by Catorce View Post
Again, I think 7 liters is going in the wrong direction. Why is so much displacement needed to achieve more power? Although I own a 6.57L stroker that made 602hp with the custom manifold shown on my thread, it begs the question as to why the motor has to be so big to achieve that power level. As a counterpoint, I just placed an order for the Huracan Performante - 5.2L V10 normally aspirated, 640hp. Many people think this is underrated since the Performante smashed the Nurb lap time of the 918 Spyder, a much more powerful car by like 5 seconds.

I know, the new motor has DFI and a bunch of other doodads, but at the end of the day 640HP is being achieved by a motor that is smaller than that of the 928 GTS even. To me, that is a way more exciting challenge at this point - to build a super high horsepower 5.0 or 5.4.........
Yes 7.0 is big but the work is doable and you know it will kick out a good bit extra HP

The challenges to extract super HP from a 5.0 may require complete reengineering of the engine or may never reach the limits of an engine designed yesterday.

Marti is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 02:09 PM
  #116  
Carl Fausett
Developer
Rennlist Member


Rennlist
Site Sponsor

 
Carl Fausett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Horicon, WI
Posts: 6,493
Default

I have made the same kind of work on many, many motorcycle cylinders and cylinder blocks. Basically you make the sleeves with an interference fit, heat up the aluminum piece to well over 200 C for the sleeves to drop in. However one thing happens when it has cooled down. The aluminum shrink at a higher rate compared to the cast iron sleeves creating an air gap between the sleeve flange and the aluminum block. The upper large diameter part of Carl┤s sleeves can be seen as a very think flange. When cooled down using several tons of pressure the sleeves must be pressed down to close the air gap. Failure to press the sleeves down will result in sleeves dropping and blown head gasket.
I find it particularly difficult to perform the pressing down of the sleeves on the huge bulky 928 engine block. I have been thinking of making a special tool where the sleeves can be pressed down using a large threaded bolt.
Carl I very much want to know how you managed to do this?
┼ke
I agree with you Ake, and have had the same experience. In the early days we machined our dry liners to sit on a shelf we machined into the block at the bottom of the cylinder. On occasion, we would experience a leaky head gasket that after disassembly, we were able to confirm was cause by the cylinder liner descending. So we changed two things: 1) now we machine our blocks to accept a T-Top (Darton style) sleeve instead of resting on the bottom as before, and we heat cycle the assembled long block with MLS gaskets and heads torqued in place. Once cooled, we re-torque the heads and usually find that we get a better/tighter torque the second time after heat-cycling. Since these changes, we have had no head gasket issues on dry sleeved motors.

On wet-wall cylinders, I have less experience, having only built the 1 so far. I understand your point and it sounds valid. I would think they would almost have to be pulled in (not pressed) individually, not in a bank of 4 at a time like we do on the dry wall liners, to insure they are fully seated before further assembly.

Beautiful machine shop, Ake!
__________________
Questions? Tech Support?
Call 920-485-0928
International 001-920-485-0928
Email: [email protected]
Website: https://928motorsports.com/
Instructions: http://www.928motorsports.com/install.php


Carl Fausett is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 02:15 PM
  #117  
GregBBRD

Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor

 
GregBBRD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Anaheim
Posts: 9,366
Default

Originally Posted by SwayBar View Post
Once you get your new intake(s) going and assuming they're sized properly, you won't be forced to make those compromises any longer.
My changes don't come from induction related issues but of concern over piston speeds in the larger stroke engines.

Drag racers rarely worry about piston speeds....they spent only a few tenths of seconds at rpms that would tear a road racing engine apart. Road racing is very different.

The engineers at Chevrolet found that with a 3.750 stroke engine, 7,600 rpms was the absolute limit, even with super light pistons and titanium rods ( with engines used in Trans Am racing.)

Mark Anderson's 928 race engine used an extremely "beefy" connecting rod (heavy) with relatively heavy pistons for years. He reved this engine 8,000+ for years. The only side effects were cracked blocks, pounded bearings, and rapid cylinder wear.

When we switch to a lighter rod, engine failure (rod failure) occurred very quickly. Analysis of the remaining pieces of the failed rod (not all of the pieces remained) at Carrillo found no defects or problems (with the pieces we supplied.) They said that the rod failed from excessive loading (too many rpms) and asked for any recorded data to see what rpms the rod had been subjected to. We had no such data.

Final engineering findings resulted in no changes to the design of these rods, but simply a suggestion to reduce the piston speeds (or use a lighter piston) and "gather" some recorded rpm data.

"Research" resulted in finding Chevy's information about piston speeds with a 3.750" crankshaft.
​​​​​




​​
GregBBRD is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 02:28 PM
  #118  
V2Rocket
Rainman
Rennlist Member
 
V2Rocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Posts: 42,328
Default

Originally Posted by Strosek Ultra View Post
The Volvo insert cylinder block is cast iron. For the 928 I will make aluminium insert cylinder blocks having cast iron sleeves. The insert block will be made from four aluminum cylinders welded together. The advantages I can see are easy to machine and hone the cylinder bores when the insert block is out of the engine block, improved strength, same heat expansion as the engine block, no problems to heat the bulky engine block for the installation of interference fit sleeves not talking about pressing down the sleeves (post # 102).
It will be bore 4.250" and stroke 3.750", 426 CI or 7.0 liter.
┼ke
...can you make more....
Originally Posted by Catorce View Post
Again, I think 7 liters is going in the wrong direction. Why is so much displacement needed to achieve more power? Although I own a 6.57L stroker that made 602hp with the custom manifold shown on my thread, it begs the question as to why the motor has to be so big to achieve that power level. As a counterpoint, I just placed an order for the Huracan Performante - 5.2L V10 normally aspirated, 640hp. Many people think this is underrated since the Performante smashed the Nurb lap time of the 918 Spyder, a much more powerful car by like 5 seconds.

I know, the new motor has DFI and a bunch of other doodads, but at the end of the day 640HP is being achieved by a motor that is smaller than that of the 928 GTS even. To me, that is a way more exciting challenge at this point - to build a super high horsepower 5.0 or 5.4.........
"no replacement for displacement" unless you can add RPM.
that V10 does 8000rpm out of the box, and then some.
928 bottom end needs cubic dollars to survive anywhere near those RPM level. crank work, rods+pistons, dry sump oiling with windage and draining managed.
for a stock oiling system capped out at maybe 6000rpm plus a little bit, HP = CI.
V2Rocket is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 08:16 PM
  #119  
Marti
User
 
Marti's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 454
Default

Originally Posted by Catorce View Post
Again, I think 7 liters is going in the wrong direction. Why is so much displacement needed to achieve more power? Although I own a 6.57L stroker that made 602hp with the custom manifold shown on my thread, it begs the question as to why the motor has to be so big to achieve that power level. As a counterpoint, I just placed an order for the Huracan Performante - 5.2L V10 normally aspirated, 640hp. Many people think this is underrated since the Performante smashed the Nurb lap time of the 918 Spyder, a much more powerful car by like 5 seconds.

I know, the new motor has DFI and a bunch of other doodads, but at the end of the day 640HP is being achieved by a motor that is smaller than that of the 928 GTS even. To me, that is a way more exciting challenge at this point - to build a super high horsepower 5.0 or 5.4.........
Congratulations on the purchase, I am sure it will be a heck of a car to drive. I generally don't comparing different engine types as it is of little meaning as people are typically committed to one direction and happy with it. Also where does it end, should you compare to something with much less horsepower and feel better, so it's a road that is difficult to get any direction on. I did look up the Huracan engine outputs and saw some impressive figures, the torque however ranged from 398lb/ft to 443lb/ft, now the lower end of that scale is a figure than an S4 or GT could match with some simple tuning. To me that's pretty good for an 80's design with some 90's and 00's development.
Marti is offline  
Old 02-12-2018, 08:21 PM
  #120  
Marti
User
 
Marti's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 454
Default

Originally Posted by V2Rocket View Post
...can you make more....

"no replacement for displacement" unless you can add RPM.
that V10 does 8000rpm out of the box, and then some.
928 bottom end needs cubic dollars to survive anywhere near those RPM level. crank work, rods+pistons, dry sump oiling with windage and draining managed.
for a stock oiling system capped out at maybe 6000rpm plus a little bit, HP = CI.
So because it would be very difficult to get the 928 V8 to rev to 8000 - 9000 we add CC to compensate. If the engine can take 7.0 or 7.2 reliably then why not.
Marti is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: how many 7 liter strokers are out there????


Contact Us About Us Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: