Notices
944 Turbo and Turbo-S Forum 1982-1991
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Clore Automotive

16v turbo dyno testing

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-11-2010, 10:33 AM
  #31  
Van
Rennlist Member
 
Van's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Hyde Park, NY
Posts: 12,008
Received 94 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Looks nice, but I bet you could pick up 4 more HP if you took the balance shaft belt off.
Old 11-11-2010, 10:37 AM
  #32  
Chris White
Addict
Rennlist Member

Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor

Thread Starter
 
Chris White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Marietta, NY
Posts: 7,505
Likes: 0
Received 36 Likes on 27 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by DDP
Well there are a few hurdles to jump over to do the 16V correctly. That's the reason why most don't commit to it. Yes it has many advantages to the **** poor (that's me being nice) 8V head. However, going 16V requires new pistons, custom intake and exhaust, etc. And when you can get 500whp from a large displacement 8v, it's hard to not go the 'easier' route.
Here is an interesting story – one of my engine building friends builds high end V8 circle track engines and I occasionally ‘borrow’ some of his nice testing equipment (computerized flow bench – [u]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKegh5nRi-o[u] ). When I flow tested a bone stock 8v head he suddenly got interested in it, it was flowing air better than the castings he was using (at least up to our .5” lift). When I put a 16v head on the bench I think he started drooling, he could not get those kind of numbers with any mods (again – up to .5”, over .5” lift he was making a lot more flow!)
Old 11-11-2010, 10:39 AM
  #33  
Chris White
Addict
Rennlist Member

Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor

Thread Starter
 
Chris White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Marietta, NY
Posts: 7,505
Likes: 0
Received 36 Likes on 27 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Van
Looks nice, but I bet you could pick up 4 more HP if you took the balance shaft belt off.
You would not believe how smooth this engine is...(balance shafts have been weight matched to the modified reciprocating mass).

I’ll make up the 4hp by upping the boost .1 psi….
Old 11-11-2010, 10:54 AM
  #34  
Van
Rennlist Member
 
Van's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Hyde Park, NY
Posts: 12,008
Received 94 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Chris White
(balance shafts have been weight matched to the modified reciprocating mass).
Very cool. I'm jealous. You'll have to give me a ride when it's in a car.
Old 11-11-2010, 11:13 AM
  #35  
reno808
Rennlist Member
 
reno808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the garage trying to keep boost down
Posts: 8,809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Chris White
No secrecy….its mine dammit. I have been building engines for all those pesky customers and not able to finish up my track engine for quite a while.

This one is mine…all mine…(I can hear the seagulls from ‘Finding Nemo’ echoing through my skull!!)
Does this mean Rolex's engine is done?
Old 11-11-2010, 12:13 PM
  #36  
67King
Race Car
 
67King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 3,641
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Chris White
When I flow tested a bone stock 8v head he suddenly got interested in it, it was flowing air better than the castings he was using (at least up to our .5” lift). When I put a 16v head on the bench I think he started drooling, he could not get those kind of numbers with any mods (again – up to .5”, over .5” lift he was making a lot more flow!)
FWIW, the 8V head had the best flow coefficients (which is flow normalized to valve size, allowing you to compare apples to apples) of any head it autdom at least into the early 2000's. The reason is pretty simple, the damn port sits on top of the head - looks more like a Formula 1 port than a normal street port.

4V chamber heads usually have inferior flow coefficient numbers to 2V chambers. But, the 2V intake valve is only 45mm, versus 39mm for the 968 head (37 for both the S and S2). That is a single valve equivalent of 55mm (52.3mm). So the overall flow is always better.

And overall horsepower is a function of three things - volumetric efficiency, thermal efficiency, and mechanical efficiency:
VE - F(airflow), and a 55mm equivalent valve flows a lot more than a 45mm one, making the 968 head the best starting point.
TE - F(CR). The centally located plug an increase in compression by about 0.7-0.8 points, sometimes as high as 1.0. Again, the 4V chamber is better
ME - F(friction). The only one of three that hurt the 4V chamber, due to added friction of hte second cam. But it is minor compared to the cranktrain and pistons.

SO there are the Cliff's NOtes versions of why the 16V head is gaining interest. I could probably write a few chapters on most of this stuff, but I'm an engineer and would probably put everyone reading but Chris to sleep (and Hell, he'd probably have a red pen out correcting me!). Hope what I put out there helps answer some of the questions.

Oh yeah - the GM pushrod engines are a LOT more sophisticated than they get credit for. GM has freakin' great engineers. I'd take them over Porshce engineers any day of the week (yes, I did just say that). It is no longer ancient technology. The advantages of it, as any LSX 944 owner will tell you, is its power to weight ratio, and relative reliability. It is a very compact engine, and very robust for one making its power level. Yes, it costs less than, say, the new Ford 5.0L, but it costs a lot more than the Ford Modular 2V's, which are "technologically superior" due to the OHC design. Had Ford's old 32V Modular been produced in like volumes, it would have been cheaper than the LSX, as well. Still cheaper than a turbo 4 banger with all of the bells and whistles, though!
Old 11-11-2010, 12:23 PM
  #37  
MooreBoost
Three Wheelin'
 
MooreBoost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,622
Received 23 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

what turbo???
Old 11-11-2010, 12:32 PM
  #38  
Chris White
Addict
Rennlist Member

Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor

Thread Starter
 
Chris White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Marietta, NY
Posts: 7,505
Likes: 0
Received 36 Likes on 27 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by reno808
Does this mean Rolex's engine is done?
Its been assembled for quite a while (a long time…) – we were waiting to get the tuning done on my engine and any info / mods that came out of that will go in to his, Rolex’s engine is very similar except it is using the stock cam drive, vario cam, a custom Vitesse turbo and Ti connecting rods. Rolex’s engine should pick up revs faster that I can imagine!
Old 11-11-2010, 01:17 PM
  #39  
reno808
Rennlist Member
 
reno808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the garage trying to keep boost down
Posts: 8,809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Chris White
Its been assembled for quite a while (a long time…) – we were waiting to get the tuning done on my engine and any info / mods that came out of that will go in to his, Rolex’s engine is very similar except it is using the stock cam drive, vario cam, a custom Vitesse turbo and Ti connecting rods. Rolex’s engine should pick up revs faster that I can imagine!
good stuff
Old 11-11-2010, 01:53 PM
  #40  
A.Wayne
Formula One Spin Doctor
Rennlist Member
 
A.Wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: RPM Central
Posts: 20,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by fwb42
Is someone finally getting their engine ?


Originally Posted by 333pg333
Any reason for the secrecy of the owner?
Dats funny ..........


Chris nice setup that 16 V power curve goes along way ..............
Old 11-11-2010, 01:57 PM
  #41  
A.Wayne
Formula One Spin Doctor
Rennlist Member
 
A.Wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: RPM Central
Posts: 20,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 67King
FWIW, the 8V head had the best flow coefficients (which is flow normalized to valve size, allowing you to compare apples to apples) of any head it autdom at least into the early 2000's. The reason is pretty simple, the damn port sits on top of the head - looks more like a Formula 1 port than a normal street port.

4V chamber heads usually have inferior flow coefficient numbers to 2V chambers. But, the 2V intake valve is only 45mm, versus 39mm for the 968 head (37 for both the S and S2). That is a single valve equivalent of 55mm (52.3mm). So the overall flow is always better.

And overall horsepower is a function of three things - volumetric efficiency, thermal efficiency, and mechanical efficiency:
VE - F(airflow), and a 55mm equivalent valve flows a lot more than a 45mm one, making the 968 head the best starting point.
TE - F(CR). The centally located plug an increase in compression by about 0.7-0.8 points, sometimes as high as 1.0. Again, the 4V chamber is better
ME - F(friction). The only one of three that hurt the 4V chamber, due to added friction of hte second cam. But it is minor compared to the cranktrain and pistons.

SO there are the Cliff's NOtes versions of why the 16V head is gaining interest. I could probably write a few chapters on most of this stuff, but I'm an engineer and would probably put everyone reading but Chris to sleep (and Hell, he'd probably have a red pen out correcting me!). Hope what I put out there helps answer some of the questions.

Oh yeah - the GM pushrod engines are a LOT more sophisticated than they get credit for. GM has freakin' great engineers. I'd take them over Porshce engineers any day of the week (yes, I did just say that). It is no longer ancient technology. The advantages of it, as any LSX 944 owner will tell you, is its power to weight ratio, and relative reliability. It is a very compact engine, and very robust for one making its power level. Yes, it costs less than, say, the new Ford 5.0L, but it costs a lot more than the Ford Modular 2V's, which are "technologically superior" due to the OHC design. Had Ford's old 32V Modular been produced in like volumes, it would have been cheaper than the LSX, as well. Still cheaper than a turbo 4 banger with all of the bells and whistles, though!
+10 on the Porsche head

Yeas ago we did a lot of work with the 32v mod engine , bone stock out of the box engine with exhaust system and pulleys was good for 340 whp....

A prepped engine ( show room stock ) well ......
Old 11-11-2010, 02:57 PM
  #42  
67King
Race Car
 
67King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 3,641
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by A.Wayne
Yeas ago we did a lot of work with the 32v mod engine , bone stock out of the box engine with exhaust system and pulleys was good for 340 whp....

A prepped engine ( show room stock ) well ......
Hope I'm not thread jacking, but the head on the 2003 4.6-4V was very good. It outflowed the BMW M5 head. Problem with it was teh interface to the intake. The lash adjusters pushed the port down, making the interface to the intake horrible. We fixed all that with newer, better HLA's (among many other things) on the new 5.0L, which is a phenomenal engine.
Old 11-11-2010, 03:37 PM
  #43  
lart951
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor

 
lart951's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: California
Posts: 14,445
Received 94 Likes on 55 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by reno808
Does this mean Rolex's engine is done?
He better have it ready when I come out of Federal pen
Old 11-11-2010, 03:55 PM
  #44  
reno808
Rennlist Member
 
reno808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the garage trying to keep boost down
Posts: 8,809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by lart951
He better have it ready when I come out of Federal pen
jeje Hola que tal? Como te estan tratando por alla?
Old 11-11-2010, 09:12 PM
  #45  
Chris White
Addict
Rennlist Member

Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor

Thread Starter
 
Chris White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Marietta, NY
Posts: 7,505
Likes: 0
Received 36 Likes on 27 Posts
Default

Here is the dyno graph – its in excel since the dyno likes to dump the data into excel tables.
There was a slight misfire at 6k (you can see the hick up in the line) and I believe that I can flatten out the torque curve on the top end with the cam timing. If I can get the torque flat to 7k then the hp will be about 675 (at 15 psi!).
Then I can try 18…..maybe a tad more just for fun!

Anyway - the torque curve ‘shape’ is what I was looking for - +/- 5% from 4k to 6.5k. That’s what gets you out of the corners fast!!!
Attached Images  


Quick Reply: 16v turbo dyno testing



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 12:35 AM.