|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,676
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,676 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by BurritaSVT:
nice job ssmumich00 but you just nailed it on the head about hitting 500 hp to the wheels. I was talking with Chris and to get these number we will have to have NOS and i think I am going to get the electronic one with stages instead of buying a bigger intercooler since it will not net me more than hp. So I will betrying this next January.
Thats not true. They said that about the 300 hp and now 400 hp mark before that.
It just requires a bigger turbo and a higher rpm range. He's already got upgraded pistons and rings.
There are lots of built Honda 1.8L engines that put out 600+ HP because they have a huge turbo and they spin 10K rpm.
Tom, 500fwhp on pump gas? I just don't think it'll happen. . .you might be right, a bigger turbo, larger rpm range, might just do it. . .although, on my dyno, you can see that max tq is at 4400 rpm, so I guess it might require different cams (3L cams) and a higher redline. . .when are you coming back man? We need to get together. . .(this time, no nails in the tires!)
Suneil
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 718
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 718 |
i think it is very easily possible...you might not wont to drive it on the street anymore but i think 600 or even 700 is very possible with the right size turbo(huge) the right size injectors(huge) and the right size intercooler. as for the intercooler i dont know if 5,6, or 700whp would be possible with a water-air intercooler that would actually fit under or hood. we might would HAVE to do like the Honda folks and move to a frontmount. i know about the plumbing nightmare but i do have a friend with a Honda that with 25psi could easily reach 600-650 whp. it is all just in what you want.....1/8 mile power.....1/4 mile power.....or dyno queen power take your choice but ill take any of the above right now 
1999 Cougar V6 MTX
SVT UIM/LIM/65mm TB, I/H/E, Fidanza/SPEC III/Torsen, Koni/GC's, 19" Icon wheels w/ Pirelli rubber, NX Wet Kit
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by ssmumich00:
so I guess it might require different cams (3L cams) and a higher redline
You are on the right track.
My opinion is the "cap" so to speak is the significant overlap of using hot NA cams.
Custom cams are most likely the ticket to big numbers and yes even on pump gas.
Right now your max output is hurt by the fact you are low compression, runing hot NA cams, and losing too much of your high boost.
It could be a reason as to why the few dyno's show a cap around 6300 rpm and raising the boost doesn't help. (seen on 3 different setups now)
You know the turbo has more in it. A 57 trim should continue to raise power to 20-22psi on the 2.5 litre and not cap around 17psi.
Someone's sure to try the oval cams at high boost sooner or later. I think they'll make monster torque but they won't hold on long enough to make monster HP.
Also the monster torque may be unusable anyway because of traction issues in the first several gears. Low rpm torque is not necessarily a good thing in a platform that can't handle it. 
That brings us back to custom cams for those wanting to really push the limits.
Actually for high boost, high rpm "HP" the Vortech folks may have a leg up using the stock cams. They can increase compressor speed via pulleys (and rpm) and not generate the tremendous heat increase a turbo gets from losing the boost back into the turbine. (i.e. overspinning to generate high boost levels)
That's dependant on how fast the jackshaft and S/C can spin safely and reliably though...
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Suneil,
You can probably achieve 500 HP on pump gas but it would be close.
I think you'd have to go with a big turbo, big exhaust and a big intake. If you didn't alter your rpm range much then Escape cams may be the best thing.
You may not realize it, but your 70mm TB probably played a significant role in your success on the dyno. Having a low restriction intake is key. I did all my dyno testing with only the 60mm TB for consistency, but I ran around with the 70mm for a good portion of the time. I could tell a real difference when I had it on versus the 60mm.
Tom
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
You are on the right track.
My opinion is the "cap" so to speak is the significant overlap of using hot NA cams.
Custom cams are most likely the ticket to big numbers and yes even on pump gas.
Right now your max output is hurt by the fact you are low compression, runing hot NA cams, and losing too much of your high boost.
It could be a reason as to why the few dyno's show a cap around 6300 rpm and raising the boost doesn't help. (seen on 3 different setups now)
You know the turbo has more in it. A 57 trim should continue to raise power to 20-22psi on the 2.5 litre and not cap around 17psi.
Someone's sure to try the oval cams at high boost sooner or later. I think they'll make monster torque but they won't hold on long enough to make monster HP.
Also the monster torque may be unusable anyway because of traction issues in the first several gears. Low rpm torque is not necessarily a good thing in a platform that can't handle it.
That brings us back to custom cams for those wanting to really push the limits.
quote]
And you wonder why I was willing to try and stick with the escape 3L cams! 
I hinted as much before. I had some indecision because I was going to run lower boost for a while, but I was planning for the future. 
Suneil, can you email me the dyno showing the 330 wHP on pump gas? I'm very interested.
Thanks,
tom
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,676
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,676 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
Suneil,
You can probably achieve 500 HP on pump gas but it would be close.
I think you'd have to go with a big turbo, big exhaust and a big intake. If you didn't alter your rpm range much then Escape cams may be the best thing.
You may not realize it, but your 70mm TB probably played a significant role in your success on the dyno. Having a low restriction intake is key. I did all my dyno testing with only the 60mm TB for consistency, but I ran around with the 70mm for a good portion of the time. I could tell a real difference when I had it on versus the 60mm.
Tom
EXACTLY!
That's why I had the UIM extrude honed, I knew that the inlet from the TB and UIM should be as close as possible in size. . .and guess what, the intercooler outlet fits RIGHT IN the TB, a perfect match again. . . you're right Tom, without your TB, I probably would've hit what Keyser hit, which was like 390fwhp. . .so I guess I could say the Warmonger TB gave me 11fwhp??
I'll try to dig up the dyno on the pump gas, I've got 98 of them (yes, Keith is absolutely nuts, I love him for it).
500hp could be doable, but since it's so quiet and driveable right now, I'm reluctant to muck around with a perfect setup, that and my fiancee would have my nuts if I dumped ANYMORE TIME AND MONEY into the car. . .when you get back though, I might get adventurous. . .
Suneil
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,860
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,860 |
Sorry Suneil you can't exactly compare our motors. During the intial tuning your car took 3 degrees more to match mine at the same boost. My guess is that the combustion chamber work dropped your compression a bit more. That 388 I did was on 15psi. That 401 you did was on 17psi. I think Keith could have turned it up higher but his logic was kind of like 'why?' when I can let Suneil break it. 
2001 Lincoln LS8
1994 Lexus GS300
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,676
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,676 |
You're right, I forgot about the CR differences. . .I'm like 8.5:1, you are like 9:1. . .well, I guess I was trying to relegate the smite differences to the TB, but there's more lurking behind the differences. . .yeah, let me break it, NO WAY!!! Just for that, I'm not turning up past 16psi!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 299
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 299 |
Originally posted by 18psi2300:
Those losses are caused by friction...apply more power, result is more friction.
Is this the final answer to the original question? If so, I can understand why the confusion then. Its hard for me even to know why there is more friction simply because there is more power. I've just taken it for granted from what people have told me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by GreenNuggs:
Originally posted by 18psi2300:
Those losses are caused by friction...apply more power, result is more friction.
Is this the final answer to the original question? If so, I can understand why the confusion then. Its hard for me even to know why there is more friction simply because there is more power. I've just taken it for granted from what people have told me.
That's a simplified version of the real answer.
Yes it is always a percentage. However as the power level increases the percentage will decrease slightly.
So it may be 17-18% at 200HP but only 15-16% at 400HP. (random numbers to show my explanation)
It's not that the powertrain gets any more efficient but the amount of parasitic loss will not grow in a direct proportion to the power gain.
Either way it's all like I originally stated. "For Bench Racing" crank numbers.
A close guesstimate is good enough for bench racing and the only numbers that truly matter are what is getting to the ground.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
