Making Power Over 6700 RPM?
Originally Posted by chris'smax
Doesn't turbo sizing also affect power curves (ie a bigger turbo will be able to make power further into the rpm band). My car makes power through the whole power band all the way to redline. I figure this is due to my setup having a fairly decent sized pair of turbos.
So a more relevant title/topic for this thread would have been, show me a setup that makes power above 6700 rpms above 600 whp, for example. You can imagine that at the 400 whp level it's not an issue. At 700? Above that? I don't think even the almighty Cosworth could have saved the high rpm plummetting torque line on IP's green monster as it passed the 1000 whp level.
Last edited by rcdash; Feb 8, 2008 at 08:59 AM.
Originally Posted by rcdash
Larger turbos have the ability to run more efficiently for the same boost pressure compared to smaller turbos, resulting in cooler, denser air (more air mass) and thus more power. You have a ways to go before you start moving out of the highest efficiency islands for your set up. Most turbo set ups can make power at the 400 whp level all the way to redline. Regardless of turbo specs, there is a point where the intake system can only feed so much mass air per unit time and the cylinders require more as power levels rise. You will reach that point later with larger turbos (that are pushing out denser air), but that point exists for everyone and every setup.
So a more relevant title/topic for this thread would have been, show me a setup that makes power above 6700 rpms above 600 whp, for example. You can imagine that at the 400 whp level it's not an issue. At 700? Above that? I don't think even the almighty Cosworth could have saved the high rpm plummetting torque line on IP's green monster as it passed the 1000 whp level.
So a more relevant title/topic for this thread would have been, show me a setup that makes power above 6700 rpms above 600 whp, for example. You can imagine that at the 400 whp level it's not an issue. At 700? Above that? I don't think even the almighty Cosworth could have saved the high rpm plummetting torque line on IP's green monster as it passed the 1000 whp level.
Very well said! That is exactly what i was thinking, but you summarized better than i could
Originally Posted by IIQuickSilverII
.... i think he was tryign to say that the higher the boost the harder it is to get the power to make it all the way up..not that 650 is the limit of the non stroked engine(i hope he isnt saying that)
That also depends on which turbos you are using to make 650WHP.If you are using twin 18G's with super tiny hotsides then it will be very hard. But if you are using a pair of 61mm turbos with .82 AR exhaust housings then it is alot easier to make the power keep climbing.With less backpressure, you can run more timing,have lower charge air temps with the big compressors,etc.......
Originally Posted by JAMEZ
How would this work with a setup like the GReddy intercooler (ie, 2 in, 1 out)? Or does this twin plenum intake manifold necessitate the use of a new intercooler? Also, how does the second throttle body work? I'm on their (SFR's) site right now, and it appears as though it uses dual OEM electronically controlled throttle bodies. How does the ECU control this? I've been intrigued by this thing for the longest time, but it hardly ever comes up in conversation on here, so I guess now would be an appropriate time to ask.
The factory ECU is controlling both throttlebodies and both MAF sensors.
Originally Posted by TurboTim
The factory ECU is controlling both throttlebodies and both MAF sensors.
Originally Posted by JAMEZ
Wow, that is extremely impressive. I presume that for someone is running a greddy tt, they would also need the 2-in 2-out intercooler too.
Yes sir.Unless you want to get into a plumbing nightmare
Originally Posted by JAMEZ
I don't know a whole whole about the heads on our cars, but I have a friend with an heavily modded Evo that was experiencing something called "valve float". Is this a problem that affects our heads?
valve float is when you don't have enough spring pressure to control the valves...this is usually due to rpm, but can also happen due to radical cam profiles. No one has really radical ramps on their cams for the VQ, so that's not as much an issue as rpm is.
if you try to push 7500 on stock valve springs, you will "float" the valves. the stock springs are so soft that at 7500 rpms, th cam is spinning so fast that when the ramp part of the lobe comes in contact with the lifter (bucket), it basically slams the valve open to the point where the valve isn't in contact with the cam. conversely, the same can happen on the closing ramp of the cam too. at higher rpms, the cam is mocing so quickly that as the valve is literally floating because the cam ramp moved away from the valve faster than the spring can keep the valve in contact with the cam ramp.
Originally Posted by thom000001
Valve float is generally due to too high of an rpm for the spring pressure you are running. By that I mean, the springs aren't stiff enough to keep the valves closed, so the valve hovers open a little bit thus not getting full comression in the cyclinders.
I would think by the content of my post you would observe that I know what valve float is...
Originally Posted by QuadCam
if you try to push 7500 on stock valve springs, you will "float" the valves. the stock springs are so soft that at 7500 rpms, th cam is spinning so fast that when the ramp part of the lobe comes in contact with the lifter (bucket), it basically slams the valve open to the point where the valve isn't in contact with the cam. .
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
350Z_Al
Exterior & Interior
133
Oct 29, 2020 07:44 PM
Justin100
Intake Exhaust
26
Nov 29, 2015 03:58 PM





