Next years goal... 750 true RWHP
)
10-06-2012, 02:10 PM
#32
Race Car
Thread Starter
wow, those dyno charts from 'down under' are a little difficult to read! 
On a serious note, I like your bore/stroke better. 103/93 works better for turbocharging than the stock 100/76.
Mine is currently 102/84
I think you're giving up some power with the low comp ratio given the high amount of timing you're using, and the late spoolup of the turbo, and the raised rev limits.
On a serious note, I like your bore/stroke better. 103/93 works better for turbocharging than the stock 100/76.
Mine is currently 102/84
I think you're giving up some power with the low comp ratio given the high amount of timing you're using, and the late spoolup of the turbo, and the raised rev limits.
What do/will you use for ignition?
I will start with the current ignition that has worked well this year. MSD 6AL2, Jacobs coild and MSD wires with NGK bpr7es plugs
Trust you know you need to be careful about getting oil to the lifters with small base circles.
Yes Ive reserach it and actually I've already ran a small base circle cam with lash caps this year. I just did a poor design given the back pressure I had
Stock headers and intake?
Headers are already on, they are FRF headers I had a thread and forget what pipe diameter we went with but IIRC it was 1.7 ID. I also have FRF 3.5" exhast and 3" downpipe. I will probably do a little work to the stock intake and go with an even larger TB (76mm vs my 67 , IIRC)
Any plans for stregthening the bottom end -- things can get squirrely down there at very high power levels, especially if you wil be racing it and not just doing a few dyno runs at that level. There are some lower stud options out there...
I will start with the current ignition that has worked well this year. MSD 6AL2, Jacobs coild and MSD wires with NGK bpr7es plugs
Trust you know you need to be careful about getting oil to the lifters with small base circles.
Yes Ive reserach it and actually I've already ran a small base circle cam with lash caps this year. I just did a poor design given the back pressure I had
Stock headers and intake?
Headers are already on, they are FRF headers I had a thread and forget what pipe diameter we went with but IIRC it was 1.7 ID. I also have FRF 3.5" exhast and 3" downpipe. I will probably do a little work to the stock intake and go with an even larger TB (76mm vs my 67 , IIRC)
Any plans for stregthening the bottom end -- things can get squirrely down there at very high power levels, especially if you wil be racing it and not just doing a few dyno runs at that level. There are some lower stud options out there...
The last thing I will be doing is raing the RPM limit. I will only do this once the big turbo is on and if I really need to. As it stands just adding teh stroke should give me a decent power gain with all things being equal and it is very un-stressed.
I do hope that it all comes together well. As I've been very happy with the current engine. I have made over 80 passes on it this year and driven it daily since install.
Last edited by blown 944; 10-27-2012 at 02:56 PM.
10-06-2012, 02:16 PM
#33
Race Car
Thread Starter
LOL, actually I figured you would know what I'm talking about. I hope you didn't mind me using yours as an example. Those that have doen this kind of thing tend to understand. Those that have only dynod don't seem to get it. No offense to anyone here. I just had an example of a 700 dynod HP mustang only run 118 at one of teh last events. He was pretty surprised that my car weighed more and was completely dumbfounded as to how much HP "he thought I was making" LOLOL
10-06-2012, 02:17 PM
#34
Race Car
Thread Starter
10-06-2012, 02:26 PM
#35
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is your technical speak, technically I like COLD beer, not just beer
and 8:1 is perfect. end of story..
10-06-2012, 02:54 PM
#36
Race Car
Thread Starter
I'm going to "try" with the current one and the big 8v head. I think it may fall short though. The 16 v even using this shortblock ( if it makes it) should do it I think. And yes, once the other short is done I plan on blowing this one yo smithereens!!!
10-06-2012, 03:08 PM
#37
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all I'm gonna say is going from 500(+/-) to 750rwhp is a tall order for an 8v. I got $5 that says you can't.(close and perhaps fwhp don't count) BUT, I hope you prove me wrong!! You know I have much love for the Colorado crew.
10-06-2012, 04:25 PM
#39
Rocket Scientist
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I never want to be a hater (well, that's a lie), but 750 whp on an 8v is not going to be easy. And I'm definitely more of a dyno guy rather than trap speed. I'd appreciate it if you found an accurate reading dyno (not dynojet) and took a run. I would estimate right at, or just under, 500whp for you. Either way, I appreciate the technical chat over the regular turbo my NA threads.
10-06-2012, 04:31 PM
#40
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never want to be a hater (well, that's a lie), but 750 whp on an 8v is not going to be easy. And I'm definitely more of a dyno guy rather than trap speed. I'd appreciate it if you found an accurate reading dyno (not dynojet) and took a run. I would estimate right at, or just under, 500whp for you. Either way, I appreciate the technical chat over the regular turbo my NA threads.
If you look,my trap speed speed/weight (as sid cacluated it) was within 10hp of the dyno.
So what he is saying he is making is pretty damn close. A dyno isnt going to prove any more or any less
10-06-2012, 04:51 PM
#41
Race Car
Thread Starter
Just went up the dyno. 522 hp and 500 lb ft. 400+ tq from 4000-6500.
Didn't do much changing. There were some guys waiting. Just decided to go..
Didn't do much changing. There were some guys waiting. Just decided to go..
10-06-2012, 04:55 PM
#42
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Official Jack off extinguisher
Posts: 1,173
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
^
You have to take the driver into consideration , it has HUGE impact on trap and ET. Sid is a experienced drag racer but make no mistake the ones that can do similar than him on this board you can count on one hand.
You have to take the driver into consideration , it has HUGE impact on trap and ET. Sid is a experienced drag racer but make no mistake the ones that can do similar than him on this board you can count on one hand.
10-06-2012, 05:11 PM
#44
Rocket Scientist
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
DDP whatever calculator he is using for the trap speed to HP is pretty accurate.
If you look,my trap speed speed/weight (as sid cacluated it) was within 10hp of the dyno.
So what he is saying he is making is pretty damn close. A dyno isnt going to prove any more or any less
If you look,my trap speed speed/weight (as sid cacluated it) was within 10hp of the dyno.
So what he is saying he is making is pretty damn close. A dyno isnt going to prove any more or any less
10-06-2012, 05:35 PM
#45
Race Car
Thread Starter
I'll post a chart a little later. I ran it between 18 psi and 21 psi. The results were 480- 522 hp. Pretty on par with what I figure at the track.
Next time we'll work on timing, fueling a little more and maybe turn it up a little. This was extremely impromptu after Rod's post and my response I thought I should quantify my statements. I was pretty close. I also ran it much warmer than I do at the track.
Next time we'll work on timing, fueling a little more and maybe turn it up a little. This was extremely impromptu after Rod's post and my response I thought I should quantify my statements. I was pretty close. I also ran it much warmer than I do at the track.