Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 10 of 17 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 16 17
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
D
CEG\'er
Offline
CEG\'er
D
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
Originally posted by Ronan:
Not dissing the Cobra (want one,want one) but you've just highlighted that is has 2 extra cylinders and a blower! and its only 1 second quickler down the 1/4! It just hammers home the achievement of Demons car!
That just puts it all in perspective! Congrads again Demon, you must have created a monster.





Well mmars just needs to learn how to drive his Cobra I ran a 04 Cobra with less mods than him last time out at the track. This guy busted a severely traction limited 12.4@119mph with a 2.2 60'. This was going into a full on 20mph headwind which was sucking out about .2 ET and 3mph in trap. I watched another 03 Cobra roll up to the line and make an amazing pass of ~11.3@125mph. What was different in this 03 Cobra? It had an aftermarket SC, full exhaust, LIVE axle rear, 26" slicks. On the outside the car looked stock except for the drag wheels, front and rear.

I know Demon's car is fast as balls, but the difference between a high 13 at 101mph vs a car pulling traction limited mid 12s@119mph is not even funny. I was side by side with the 04 Cobra till about the 660' because he was all over the place. Once he hooked up, it was like I was standing still.


Dave


black 96 Maxima SE Best ET/MPH: 14.31@99.3mph with a 2.18 60' JDM intake manifold, ECU, intake, y-pipe, muffler
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
D
CEG\'er
Offline
CEG\'er
D
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
Can you guys elaborate on the intake manifold work you guys are doing? I know Demon removed his butterfly valves to somehow gain topend performance. The intake manifold setup I have on my Maxima utilizes the same kind of intake runner tuning with butterfly valves. I actually have a manual override switch to make the valves open at any rpm I want. I've noticed that switching the valves on any earlier that 5000rpms results in a pretty severe loss of lowend power. Take a look at my dyno when I flipped the switch at 4500rpms vs 5100rpms.



Why does the lack of the butterfly valves help the CSVT? Is there a loss of power below 4000rpms, but a gain above because the valves and rod are removed to reduce high rpm power?


Dave


black 96 Maxima SE Best ET/MPH: 14.31@99.3mph with a 2.18 60' JDM intake manifold, ECU, intake, y-pipe, muffler
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,087
B
Hard-core CEG\'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG\'er
B
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,087
Originally posted by livinsvt:
Originally posted by Ronan:
Not dissing the Cobra (want one,want one) but you've just highlighted that is has 2 extra cylinders and a blower! and its only 1 second quickler down the 1/4! It just hammers home the achievement of Demons car!
That just puts it all in perspective! Congrads again Demon, you must have created a monster.
Now please go get that sucka dyno'd?




But the Cobra is stock(I'm guessing) with warranty.




Nope, look at his sig. It's modded! Geez ur slow mmars J/K.


Matt 2002 Subaru Impreza WRX (WRB Stage 4+) Old Rides: 1999 Sil-Fro SVT Contour 3.0L with goodies (Totalled 6/21/06) 1988 Bronco II (Sold) You know you launch hard when you beat oncoming traffic through their own crosswalk lines.
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197
T
I have no life
Offline
I have no life
T
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197
Originally posted by Dave B:
Can you guys elaborate on the intake manifold work you guys are doing? I know Demon removed his butterfly valves to somehow gain topend performance. The intake manifold setup I have on my Maxima utilizes the same kind of intake runner tuning with butterfly valves. I actually have a manual override switch to make the valves open at any rpm I want. I've noticed that switching the valves on any earlier that 5000rpms results in a pretty severe loss of lowend power. Take a look at my dyno when I flipped the switch at 4500rpms vs 5100rpms.






Well the 3L with oval port heads that he's sporting now doesn't have secondaries from the factory. It doesn't need them because of more displacement and tq. A few people have removed them from their 2.5. Makes them a total dog below 3800 though. Their argument is that they never drive down there anyway. They were engineered for a reason. To increase low end.

Originally posted by Dave B:

Why does the lack of the butterfly valves help the CSVT? Is there a loss of power below 4000rpms, but a gain above because the valves and rod are removed to reduce high rpm power?






Yes.


-'96 SE MTX 3L -'98 SVT 1,173 of 6,535 -'05 Mazda 6s, loaded, g/f's ride -Need a 96-00 manual on CD? PM or email me
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
D
Hard-core CEG'er
OP Offline
Hard-core CEG'er
D
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
I found without the secondaries the 2.5L took a very noticeable hit below 2500rpm. (I.E. tractor range )

2500-3000rpm was a little weaker but nothing overly noticeable or unliveable.

Above 3000 rpm there was no loss.


Couldn't tell you what it gave on the top end but I would not be surprised if it was 5 FWHP or maybe more from 4000 to redline. (UIM, intake, heads, etc all play a part too)
Heck even if it was miniscule I don't have to worry about the POS IMRC fluttering or it closing every time you leave WOT.

That is all once you have the spark advance tuned in properly (KEY WORDS!!!)


Also you have to realize the my UIM is EH'd to the limit. That itself makes a change in the rpm range of the runners since it's altering their max flow ability and low speed velocity.

I strongly believe that mod alone allows for a much better power curve above 4000rpm. Especially with the larger 3L engine.
Yes the true duals with balance pipe are wonderful for fat midrange TQ and great top end HP but if the engine can't suck the air in to begin with you are not getting full benefit from all of your other mods.

I think I am now finally reaping the full benefits of the EHing. Though my plans were always to build a 3L so all my mods were done with that and other future projects in mind


2000 SVT #674 13.47 @ 102 - All Motor! It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
D
Hard-core CEG'er
OP Offline
Hard-core CEG'er
D
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Originally posted by incubusjunkie614:
now imagine how quick you would be if you were supercharged....*hint**hint*



Sorry to burst your bubble but this project was designed "Specifically" to be the antithesis of the Vortec S/C.


Why is that you ask???

Because I did an entire car upgrade for just the cost of the S/C alone!!!

$1200 Engine (near bullet proof - bullet proof with a accusump!)
$1350 MTX (bullet proof)
$650 Bilstein struts & springs

$3200 total spent for a car that will likely hand any S/C beast it's ass on the track. (Okay so I had some mods to start with but so do most cars when they get a S/C )
Definitely on a road course since the midrange power of the 3L kills any S/C car. Throw in the fact I did LSD, flywheel, struts & springs among other things for the same cost it would not even be close!
Hell my 2.5L was fast on bald stock tires even! Just ask the guys I beat by over 5 seconds a lap.


2000 SVT #674 13.47 @ 102 - All Motor! It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,970
S
Hard-core CEG'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG'er
S
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,970
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by Swazo:
Nice, and the first to use SVT induction and cams on mod'd oval port heads I was hoping to be the first I too would like to see your dyno run just to gawk at and drool over



Nope I was the second.
Jiako was the first (but he used an adapter plate IIRC) and Tom (last engine) the third.
So I guess I was the first to port the heads to match the split LIM. No secondaries of course. I didn't miss them with the 2.5L and the 3L definitely doesn't need them.



I meant using the SVT cams, didn't Tom use 3L cams? Did Jiako port the heads aswell?
I'll be using SVT cams aswell and I will be porting in the same way. There was no way I was sticking with a hybrid after seeing what Tom put down, and now you just made me feel a whole lot better about the ability of this route in NA form

Another good thing is that you'll be putting the SPEC stage I clutch to a good test.

Last edited by Swazo; 03/23/04 06:43 PM.

2005 Ford F150 SuperCab FX4 1964 Chevrolet Impala SS 1998 CSVT: 354HP/328TQ @ 10 psi, now gone
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,475
A
Hard-core CEG\'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG\'er
A
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,475
Man it really pays to do all the work yourself!!!

I would've guessed you spent twice as much on all the mods youve done to your car

Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
D
Hard-core CEG'er
OP Offline
Hard-core CEG'er
D
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Originally posted by bnoon:
What kind of rubber are you running now? Stickier tires make all of the difference...



225/50 G-Force KDW

They give good grip for a street tire actually.


I have a set of 225/50 Nittos on a set of E0 rims sitting on a shelf in my garage. As hind sight normally is I now wish I had tried them for my first time out. It's quite possible I could have hit the fastest Contour time ever much less best NA time.
The street tires planted 2.2's like it was nothing thanks to all the TQ but those are 2.2's coming from horrible wheel hop and wheel spin.
Now "I doubt the platform would have handled it" but if I had a little more traction sub 2 60' times were there for the taking.

It's bad when your best launch (2.17) comes from walking the car out at idle then shifting to 2nd. The 330' time slowed in comparisson though.


2000 SVT #674 13.47 @ 102 - All Motor! It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,099
M
Hard-core CEG\'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG\'er
M
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,099
I actually haven't ran my car since I added the x-pipe, chip, pulley, etc. 12s was running stock.

--Matt


2003 Sonic Blue SVT Cobra Coupe 2003 RedFire SVT Cobra Convertable 2005 Dark Toreador Red F150 XLT 4x4 2000 Black SVT Contour - Beater
Page 10 of 17 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 16 17

Moderated by  mbb41_dup1 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5