Blown 5.0L Hybrid pics
07-01-2008, 09:57 PM
#46
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Sterling, Justin, here ya go. http://www.kuhnperformance.com/components.php
Takes 30 days to manufacture. They are really for the 32V radiator shroud, some modification was needed on my 1982. Of course I dig the look but the S/C intake was thru the left fender. Now I can use that space for additional coolers.
Tony
Takes 30 days to manufacture. They are really for the 32V radiator shroud, some modification was needed on my 1982. Of course I dig the look but the S/C intake was thru the left fender. Now I can use that space for additional coolers.
Tony
07-02-2008, 12:23 AM
#47
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Way to go, toofast!!!! How does that bad boy feel with the good old butt dyno?
``````````````````````````
Much discussed, but I will fill you in a little.
One good reason to go hybrid is that it can be (if you score parts on the cheap and do you own work!) a pretty cost-effective way to get a sizable power jump out of an early 928, you know the lightweight car someone might already own, love, and know every inch of... and don't want to sell to jump into a strange heavier S4.
You can't easily swap a junkyard score 32v motor into an old CIS car - that 32v'r needs it's entire fuel system and brains so there's a lot of wiring and plumbing to fab up. But if you simply replace the BLOCK with an externally similar but 5.0 inside... EZ.
Also, there's the matter of Personal Preference:
The stock 16v design, especially in it's later Euro configuration, should NOT be underestimated. And when it get's a bump up in displacement (hybrid) and then get's boosted... well have you read up on Carl Fausett's Pike's Peak rookie podium 928?
Some people prefer the simpler two-big-valves-in-a-wedge-chamber design as there's less moving parts = less to break and less power to spin. Plus all 16vs are non-interference (although some believe that the later Euros might be?) which is a burden off the mind.
The 4-valve-per-pentroof-chamber design: it's easy to argue that it is technologically superior because it has greater flow characterisitics and greater resistance to detonation. Search around some old threads, there's some 600+hp 32v superchargers and strokers running around. But some people just prefer the classics...
I like them both.
- Josh
``````````````````````````
Much discussed, but I will fill you in a little.
One good reason to go hybrid is that it can be (if you score parts on the cheap and do you own work!) a pretty cost-effective way to get a sizable power jump out of an early 928, you know the lightweight car someone might already own, love, and know every inch of... and don't want to sell to jump into a strange heavier S4.
You can't easily swap a junkyard score 32v motor into an old CIS car - that 32v'r needs it's entire fuel system and brains so there's a lot of wiring and plumbing to fab up. But if you simply replace the BLOCK with an externally similar but 5.0 inside... EZ.
Also, there's the matter of Personal Preference:
The stock 16v design, especially in it's later Euro configuration, should NOT be underestimated. And when it get's a bump up in displacement (hybrid) and then get's boosted... well have you read up on Carl Fausett's Pike's Peak rookie podium 928?
Some people prefer the simpler two-big-valves-in-a-wedge-chamber design as there's less moving parts = less to break and less power to spin. Plus all 16vs are non-interference (although some believe that the later Euros might be?) which is a burden off the mind.
The 4-valve-per-pentroof-chamber design: it's easy to argue that it is technologically superior because it has greater flow characterisitics and greater resistance to detonation. Search around some old threads, there's some 600+hp 32v superchargers and strokers running around. But some people just prefer the classics...
I like them both.
- Josh
07-02-2008, 01:10 AM
#49
Pro
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Québec, Québec, Canada
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Much discussed, but I will fill you in a little.
One good reason to go hybrid is that it can be (if you score parts on the cheap and do you own work!) a pretty cost-effective way to get a sizable power jump out of an early 928, you know the lightweight car someone might already own, love, and know every inch of... and don't want to sell to jump into a strange heavier S4.
You can't easily swap a junkyard score 32v motor into an old CIS car - that 32v'r needs it's entire fuel system and brains so there's a lot of wiring and plumbing to fab up. But if you simply replace the BLOCK with an externally similar but 5.0 inside... EZ.
Also, there's the matter of Personal Preference:
The stock 16v design, especially in it's later Euro configuration, should NOT be underestimated. And when it get's a bump up in displacement (hybrid) and then get's boosted... well have you read up on Carl Fausett's Pike's Peak rookie podium 928?
Some people prefer the simpler two-big-valves-in-a-wedge-chamber design as there's less moving parts = less to break and less power to spin. Plus all 16vs are non-interference (although some believe that the later Euros might be?) which is a burden off the mind.
The 4-valve-per-pentroof-chamber design: it's easy to argue that it is technologically superior because it has greater flow characterisitics and greater resistance to detonation. Search around some old threads, there's some 600+hp 32v superchargers and strokers running around. But some people just prefer the classics...
I like them both.
- Josh
One good reason to go hybrid is that it can be (if you score parts on the cheap and do you own work!) a pretty cost-effective way to get a sizable power jump out of an early 928, you know the lightweight car someone might already own, love, and know every inch of... and don't want to sell to jump into a strange heavier S4.
You can't easily swap a junkyard score 32v motor into an old CIS car - that 32v'r needs it's entire fuel system and brains so there's a lot of wiring and plumbing to fab up. But if you simply replace the BLOCK with an externally similar but 5.0 inside... EZ.
Also, there's the matter of Personal Preference:
The stock 16v design, especially in it's later Euro configuration, should NOT be underestimated. And when it get's a bump up in displacement (hybrid) and then get's boosted... well have you read up on Carl Fausett's Pike's Peak rookie podium 928?
Some people prefer the simpler two-big-valves-in-a-wedge-chamber design as there's less moving parts = less to break and less power to spin. Plus all 16vs are non-interference (although some believe that the later Euros might be?) which is a burden off the mind.
The 4-valve-per-pentroof-chamber design: it's easy to argue that it is technologically superior because it has greater flow characterisitics and greater resistance to detonation. Search around some old threads, there's some 600+hp 32v superchargers and strokers running around. But some people just prefer the classics...
I like them both.
- Josh
And doubling the moving parts for 32v sounded even more weird.
Now seeing the picture of broken headcam chains, blowing up and ripping appart everything around them, I'm even less sure about the design. It's obvious about the greater flow... But I dunno about the greater resistance to detonation, after all you got twice the moving part that has to resist to detonation with almost no upper surface that's actually not moving. None moving surface can obvious be reinforced to support detonation.
Anybody tried a chamber not cylindrical, with valve of other form? I can actually imagine some really weird "dual in-line" 8 cylinder 16v with 2 camshaft rotating in opposite direction.
07-02-2008, 01:28 AM
#50
Interresting. Personnaly I never really understood the circular valve into circular chamber design.
And doubling the moving parts for 32v sounded even more weird.
Now seeing the picture of broken headcam chains, blowing up and ripping appart everything around them, I'm even less sure about the design. It's obvious about the greater flow... But I dunno about the greater resistance to detonation, after all you got twice the moving part that has to resist to detonation with almost no upper surface that's actually not moving. None moving surface can obvious be reinforced to support detonation.
Anybody tried a chamber not cylindrical, with valve of other form? I can actually imagine some really weird "dual in-line" 8 cylinder 16v with 2 camshaft rotating in opposite direction.
And doubling the moving parts for 32v sounded even more weird.
Now seeing the picture of broken headcam chains, blowing up and ripping appart everything around them, I'm even less sure about the design. It's obvious about the greater flow... But I dunno about the greater resistance to detonation, after all you got twice the moving part that has to resist to detonation with almost no upper surface that's actually not moving. None moving surface can obvious be reinforced to support detonation.
Anybody tried a chamber not cylindrical, with valve of other form? I can actually imagine some really weird "dual in-line" 8 cylinder 16v with 2 camshaft rotating in opposite direction.
07-02-2008, 01:37 AM
#51
Pro
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Québec, Québec, Canada
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I put into question everything untill I fully understand it inside out.
I even managed to make it my job.
I'm paid to understand how horribly large and complexe system works, analyse them, and find solution to problem people didn't even knew about...
Ok, I do more than that, but it's the part I love.
07-02-2008, 09:44 AM
#52
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Ok to answer the question why build a hybrid here’s my reasoning:
• The OEM 4.5L cracked 3 pistons. My 928 needs engine rebuild so let’s increase the displacement to 5.0L
• The rest of the 928 is show perfect. I wouldn’t be able to sell the car and pick up a 1985 or < 32v of equal status.
• Already have invested hard to find Euro intake, and I like the look
• S/C is set up for 16v and already have it
• And the last reason…OEM fuel system is L Jet. Overall that dictated the use of the 16V heads and where the HP will max out. For me I don’t want to spend $$ and time tuning an aftermarket fuel system. (Keep in mind I already spent 1 year in research and assembly. Engine rebuild parts are expensive; have you priced main bearings lately? I just want to drive the car now)
This hybrid was assembled to be used with boost. The 1986 short block has the thick liners and pistons are dished. I ported and polished the USA heads, and ceramic coated the pistons all in effort to prevent detonation.
It’s making over 400 HP at the flywheel, starts easily. A/C works, exhaust is almost factory quiet, and MPG is 18-20 off boost.
Now there's no question that the 32v has a better chamber and will produce 500HP with an S/C. If that was the OEM engine than that’s what I would have rebuilt.
Thanks,
Tony
• The OEM 4.5L cracked 3 pistons. My 928 needs engine rebuild so let’s increase the displacement to 5.0L
• The rest of the 928 is show perfect. I wouldn’t be able to sell the car and pick up a 1985 or < 32v of equal status.
• Already have invested hard to find Euro intake, and I like the look
• S/C is set up for 16v and already have it
• And the last reason…OEM fuel system is L Jet. Overall that dictated the use of the 16V heads and where the HP will max out. For me I don’t want to spend $$ and time tuning an aftermarket fuel system. (Keep in mind I already spent 1 year in research and assembly. Engine rebuild parts are expensive; have you priced main bearings lately? I just want to drive the car now)
This hybrid was assembled to be used with boost. The 1986 short block has the thick liners and pistons are dished. I ported and polished the USA heads, and ceramic coated the pistons all in effort to prevent detonation.
It’s making over 400 HP at the flywheel, starts easily. A/C works, exhaust is almost factory quiet, and MPG is 18-20 off boost.
Now there's no question that the 32v has a better chamber and will produce 500HP with an S/C. If that was the OEM engine than that’s what I would have rebuilt.
Thanks,
Tony
Last edited by toofast928; 12-09-2012 at 10:55 PM.
07-02-2008, 09:47 AM
#53
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh damn, you ain't see nothing yet. I just arrived here.
I put into question everything untill I fully understand it inside out.
I even managed to make it my job.
I'm paid to understand how horribly large and complexe system works, analyse them, and find solution to problem people didn't even knew about...
Ok, I do more than that, but it's the part I love.
I put into question everything untill I fully understand it inside out.
I even managed to make it my job.
I'm paid to understand how horribly large and complexe system works, analyse them, and find solution to problem people didn't even knew about...
Ok, I do more than that, but it's the part I love.
Sounds interesting - what type of systems?
BTW the Porsche 928 is the best "horribly large and complex system" I've ever had the pleasure of wrenching on...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As far as I understand from my research:
The 4-valve 928 design's ability to resist detonation is due to a number of factors in both the physical shape of the chamber (including piston tops) and the head flow characteristics. The dual-intake-valve flow inputs a high quality homogenous air-fuel mix (swirl and tumble) into the chamber. The piston rushes up, compressing this mix. As it appraches TDC the quench areas all around force the mix into the center of the chamber directly under the centrally located spark plug, which by this point should already have fired to light off the top of the mix. The centrally-compressed homogenous mix burns evenly and quickly, with very few dangerous lean zones that can overheat chamber components and lead to death-by-detonation in subsequent cycles. Finally, the two exhaust valves provide plentiful escape route for burnt gases so they don't hang about overheating things and contaminating the next intake charge.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sorry for the thread hijack, toofast. Your Ultimate-16v is fookin' awesome.
- Josh
07-02-2008, 09:49 AM
#54
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok to answer the question why build a hybrid here’s my reasoning:
• The OEM 4.5L cracked 3 pistons. My 928 needs engine rebuild so let’s increase the displacement to 5.0L
• The rest of the 928 is show perfect. I wouldn’t be able to sell the car and pick up a 1985 or < 32v of equal status.
• Already have invested hard to find Euro intake, and I like the look
• S/C is set up for 16v and already have it
• And the last reason…OEM fuel system is L Jet. Overall that dictated the use of the 16V heads and where the HP will max out. For me I don’t want to spend $$ and time tuning an aftermarket fuel system. (Keep in mind I already spent 1 year in research and assembly. Engine rebuild parts are expensive; have you priced main bearings lately? I just want to drive the car now)
This hybrid was assembled to be used with boost. The 1986 short block has the thick liners and pistons are dished. I ported and polished the USA heads, and ceramic coated the pistons all in effort to prevent detonation.
It’s making over 400 HP at the flywheel, starts easily. A/C works, exhaust is almost factory quiet, and MPG is 18-20 off boost.
Now there's no question that the 32v has a better chamber and will produce 500HP with an S/C. If that was the OEM engine than that’s what I would have rebuilt.
Thanks,
Tony
• The OEM 4.5L cracked 3 pistons. My 928 needs engine rebuild so let’s increase the displacement to 5.0L
• The rest of the 928 is show perfect. I wouldn’t be able to sell the car and pick up a 1985 or < 32v of equal status.
• Already have invested hard to find Euro intake, and I like the look
• S/C is set up for 16v and already have it
• And the last reason…OEM fuel system is L Jet. Overall that dictated the use of the 16V heads and where the HP will max out. For me I don’t want to spend $$ and time tuning an aftermarket fuel system. (Keep in mind I already spent 1 year in research and assembly. Engine rebuild parts are expensive; have you priced main bearings lately? I just want to drive the car now)
This hybrid was assembled to be used with boost. The 1986 short block has the thick liners and pistons are dished. I ported and polished the USA heads, and ceramic coated the pistons all in effort to prevent detonation.
It’s making over 400 HP at the flywheel, starts easily. A/C works, exhaust is almost factory quiet, and MPG is 18-20 off boost.
Now there's no question that the 32v has a better chamber and will produce 500HP with an S/C. If that was the OEM engine than that’s what I would have rebuilt.
Thanks,
Tony
07-02-2008, 10:02 AM
#55
Race Car
I still have one of those BEGI/cartech boost referenced AFRs in my basement from a VR4 project that I didn't dig into as deeply as I anticipated. What's the source for the fuel logs, are those 944 parts?
I wish a good alternative to add electronic control and adjustment potential to the CIS...but from what I understand the scarcer than hens teeth KE-jet just keeps things leaner and L-jet doesn't flow more and requires much work to retrofit- including forfieting the Euro intake or major work to adapt injectors. Maybe that Unwired Technology WUR product line will get somewhere eventually...
I wish a good alternative to add electronic control and adjustment potential to the CIS...but from what I understand the scarcer than hens teeth KE-jet just keeps things leaner and L-jet doesn't flow more and requires much work to retrofit- including forfieting the Euro intake or major work to adapt injectors. Maybe that Unwired Technology WUR product line will get somewhere eventually...
07-02-2008, 10:31 AM
#56
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Thanks JEC_31.
I made the fuel rails. The logs are just 1/2 aluminum extruded. Length is just cut to size. Then the rail was drilled/tappedfor crome plated 1/8 nipples to attach the injector hose to. My whole fuel plumbing was converted to -AN years ago. I get easy an connection to fuel gauge and an adjustable fuel regulator. BEGI works perfect. Hoses are braided and can withstand higher FMU fuel pressure. In the PICs you can see the heat reflection wrap.
I made the fuel rails. The logs are just 1/2 aluminum extruded. Length is just cut to size. Then the rail was drilled/tappedfor crome plated 1/8 nipples to attach the injector hose to. My whole fuel plumbing was converted to -AN years ago. I get easy an connection to fuel gauge and an adjustable fuel regulator. BEGI works perfect. Hoses are braided and can withstand higher FMU fuel pressure. In the PICs you can see the heat reflection wrap.
07-02-2008, 04:32 PM
#60
Pro
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Québec, Québec, Canada
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Ok to answer the question why build a hybrid here’s my reasoning:
• The OEM 4.5L cracked 3 pistons. My 928 needs engine rebuild so let’s increase the displacement to 5.0L
• The rest of the 928 is show perfect. I wouldn’t be able to sell the car and pick up a 1985 or < 32v of equal status.
• Already have invested hard to find Euro intake, and I like the look
• S/C is set up for 16v and already have it
• And the last reason…OEM fuel system is L Jet. Overall that dictated the use of the 16V heads and where the HP will max out. For me I don’t want to spend $$ and time tuning an aftermarket fuel system. (Keep in mind I already spent 1 year in research and assembly. Engine rebuild parts are expensive; have you priced main bearings lately? I just want to drive the car now)
This hybrid was assembled to be used with boost. The 1986 short block has the thick liners and pistons are dished. I ported and polished the USA heads, and ceramic coated the pistons all in effort to prevent detonation.
It’s making over 400 HP at the flywheel, starts easily. A/C works, exhaust is almost factory quiet, and MPG is 18-20 off boost.
Now there's no question that the 32v has a better chamber and will produce 500HP with an S/C. If that was the OEM engine than that’s what I would have rebuilt.
Thanks,
Tony
• The OEM 4.5L cracked 3 pistons. My 928 needs engine rebuild so let’s increase the displacement to 5.0L
• The rest of the 928 is show perfect. I wouldn’t be able to sell the car and pick up a 1985 or < 32v of equal status.
• Already have invested hard to find Euro intake, and I like the look
• S/C is set up for 16v and already have it
• And the last reason…OEM fuel system is L Jet. Overall that dictated the use of the 16V heads and where the HP will max out. For me I don’t want to spend $$ and time tuning an aftermarket fuel system. (Keep in mind I already spent 1 year in research and assembly. Engine rebuild parts are expensive; have you priced main bearings lately? I just want to drive the car now)
This hybrid was assembled to be used with boost. The 1986 short block has the thick liners and pistons are dished. I ported and polished the USA heads, and ceramic coated the pistons all in effort to prevent detonation.
It’s making over 400 HP at the flywheel, starts easily. A/C works, exhaust is almost factory quiet, and MPG is 18-20 off boost.
Now there's no question that the 32v has a better chamber and will produce 500HP with an S/C. If that was the OEM engine than that’s what I would have rebuilt.
Thanks,
Tony