FI on Stock Engines Data (Consolidated)
#21
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be careful, I didn't say that was optimum, I just said below that is where things start to get shaky. Obviously we would like to make to most power on the least amount of PSI possible.
The big point is that there seems to be a correlation, but it's important to remember that correlation is not causation!
I think we need to look more at the torque numbers down low from everyone's dyno sheets; maybe we can pick a sample RPM and gather some numbers to analyze from there. FI gurus please chime in and feel free to throw BS flags as required!
The big point is that there seems to be a correlation, but it's important to remember that correlation is not causation!
I think we need to look more at the torque numbers down low from everyone's dyno sheets; maybe we can pick a sample RPM and gather some numbers to analyze from there. FI gurus please chime in and feel free to throw BS flags as required!
#23
New Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
6 Posts
I want to point out an observation. These cars are NOT making 42hp per lb of boost. You have to have a baseline of the n/a engine and then you only count the horsepower you GAIN above that to determine how much hp per lb of boost you get.
Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
#24
Registered User
iTrader: (13)
I want to point out an observation. These cars are NOT making 42hp per lb of boost. You have to have a baseline of the n/a engine and then you only count the horsepower you GAIN above that to determine how much hp per lb of boost you get.
Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
#25
New Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
6 Posts
Mine was putting down about 20hp per 1psi on the DD dyno.
#28
New Member
iTrader: (18)
I want to point out an observation. These cars are NOT making 42hp per lb of boost. You have to have a baseline of the n/a engine and then you only count the horsepower you GAIN above that to determine how much hp per lb of boost you get.
Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
#30
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the stock rods are just crap and were taking this way to seriously. The engine is only as stong as the weakest link...and the rods are crap combined with the high compresion.
I would really like to just see someone lower the compression of the motor without changing a single part and then boost the crap out of the motor. I bet it would hold up fine.
I would really like to just see someone lower the compression of the motor without changing a single part and then boost the crap out of the motor. I bet it would hold up fine.
Last edited by twitch579; 09-07-2010 at 05:47 PM.
#32
New Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
6 Posts
ya, sad thing is when you have it torn down you might as well put better pistons in it so the engine is fresh. It's a violent cycle since the engine is open you save time and money just doing it all. That's why nobody has experimented with it.
#33
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, but I'm not one to really care if I have to tear it down again. I do these kind of things for fun and thankfully I've had pretty darn good luck...lol. I dunno...maybe I'll just get everything in one shot....but I may just stick with the rods alone....just because I can.
#34
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I want to point out an observation. These cars are NOT making 42hp per lb of boost. You have to have a baseline of the n/a engine and then you only count the horsepower you GAIN above that to determine how much hp per lb of boost you get.
Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
#35
New Member
iTrader: (2)
Excellent thread majestik. In my opinion part reason why turbo setups are more prone to have problems is not only because of torque, but because of how they are tuned at those higher torque numbers (compared to SC). More torque usually requires a good ear for knock, and good timing, there is alot of good tuners out there, but there are also alot of not so good tuners that dont pay 100% attention to some things. I personally think its the tune that causes issues and not the boost (well upto a point ofcourse).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
liqalu04
Engine & Drivetrain
31
01-02-2022 12:58 PM