Love to see this kind of stuff. Nice work Injected! :-)

 

Cool.

 

awsome

 

Damn.. I would have thought it would have made more power. No more tuning?

Weak power output for much higher displacement, high compression and ITBs considering what bolt on HR is putting out.

EDIT: Just read all the jolly posts. Sorry to be so pessimistic :/ but maybe some1 can chime in for my opinion. Maybe much more power can be unleashed with more tuning, a better exhaust setup, test pipes, and even a more aggressive cam (GT motorsports' NA stg 3 cam?) since it's already a "race" setup w/ Haltech ECU and all.

 

On a DD dyno? Those #s are amazing. An HR would put down what - 260? Who knows what the #s mean since they're dyno specific, but take a look at the comparison to stock on the first dynograph...

 

You're really entering full blown ricer math territory with that post I gotta say...disappointing.

An HR is a vastly superior engine to a DE in every way, shape and form - it's simple evolution.

Secondly, no one knows what is a "more aggressive cam" - your supposition that a GTM cam is somehow a better choice than a BC is purely speculative (I wouldn't pretend to even guess, as I don't have a cam card on either one). As has been discussed in these forums many times before, alot more goes into a cam than just lift and duration #'s, and cams alone are not going to radically change the power output. NA is about cumulative gains, not singular part gains. An NA setup is far more interdependant at a lower power scale than a forced induction setup is.

 

Rice? Lol.. Let's not get on the topic of spending $2k on a titanium OEM like exhaust. The only m4d JDM rice around = you.

I would have just expected to see more power output. Lube up the booty nextime you might get ur emotions thrown off by someone having an opinion and an expectation different from others and calling someone a ricer. Constructive and conservative debate is cool aight guy?? Thnks for your knowledgeable response then I guess. If your arguments are that a higher lift/duration cam and more aggressive tune/additional time on dyno on a highly modified, high compression, naturally aspirated motor won't yield an increase in power then... ok... kthxbai..

 

I'm not here to defend Adam in the least, he's a big boy and if he wants to reply directly to you he will do so if he so pleases. In addition, I would not like to be the one to ruin this thread with off-topic personal attacks. However, I think your taking Adam's comment about the camshafts the wrong way.

He was simply stating that a great majority of the time you can't necessarily say that a camshaft from company A is way more aggressive than a cam from company B simply because company B states that their camshaft has a higher numerical value for its duration and a higher numerical value for its lift. It is very common, and I am not saying this is the case with GTM cams as I have had zero personal experience with them, for two different manufacturers to use different checking heights in order to calculate the gross durations for their respective camshafts. This obviously would make a camshaft seem way more radical than it really is if it is measured too far down on the lobe. The only way to truly compare two camshafts are by comparing their cam cards and not their marketed specifications.

 

I don't recall asking you for permission for what exhaust to put on my car, nor do I recall you paying the bill. My car = my choice. When you build your car, you make your choices. Life is great that way. However, the thread is about another build, and a successful one at that (especially evidenced by the final judge, the owner, as he seems very pleased with the outcome, and rightfully so).

As far as the camshaft choice, yes that is precisely what I am saying. Comparing cams based on lift and duration is a small sliver of the pie. Cams on an NA engine, and with a VQ in particular, rely on far more than just their singular existance to make substantial gains. Many factors are at play, and all are highly interdependant on one another. I won't pretend to know what cam is "more aggressive" between the two, and I can tell you don't know either. What I do know is advertised lift and duration is surely not be all end all yardstick to make the determination - far more details are needed, and those type of unbiased details only can come about with the 2 cams in hand, in the hands of an experienced machinist. Going one step further, assuming one does discover the more aggressive cam, and uses it as a direct replacement for the other, it still is not predestined that you would make any more power, peak or otherwise, at any other point in the rev range, even with tuning. The reasons for this are numerous, ranging from trumpet length, outer trumpet lip design, trumpet dimaeter, injector placement, valve seat diamater (as well as seat pressure), port diameter and velocity at a given valve lift, header primary diameter, cam timing (I think he is on the stock gears still) etc. All of these things together would need to be at least examined if one was to choose a new cam. Given who did the build, I know that their machinist took all these things into consideration, as they are all important. When you do your build, you can make your choices and hopefully you'll end up with an even better result. As I mentioned in my last post, the NA set is much more interdependant at a far lower horsepower threshold, than, for example, a FI setup is. There are alot more factors that rely on one another in an NA setup at this power level than even on an FI setup at 2 x the power level - it's just the way it is.

That being said, if you do want to solely go by advertised lift and duration, then it could easily be said that the Crower 272 are more aggressive than the GTM's - GTM has a longer duration on the intake side, Crower has more on the exhaust side. Crower also has more peak lift (11.66 vs GTM's 11.5/11.0 on both intake and exhaust side). But again, even with those #'s, it still doesn't tell you all that much about what is more aggressive, and it certainly doesn't tell you that one one would make more power in any setup, let alone in this setup. There are plusses and minusses to each approach, and it's not a matter of one being better than another, just different, requiring different supporting mods, and a different tuning approach as well.

Given what I know about these engines in NA form, and what I continue to learn almost every day on engines in general, this, IMHO, is a very nice, complete, well thought out build, and the results show it. Ivory deserves a solid thank you for stepping up the plate to try something no one else had before, not a kick to the shins. Builds like this are what help to make the community smarter, and give others interested in the NA side of things, a higher bar to shoot for.

 

Ivory, can you post pictures of your engine? is it first page's pictures progressin time?, but wonder how it finished look.

 

There is two approaches to tuning that I have run into, and really a continuum in between them:

One approach is the old "hot rodder" approach where people continually try things until they find a combination that seams to work well. Then the knowledge of this combination spreads about and people copy these things using generalities.

The second approach involves advanced analysis of the physical phenomena at hand--and specifically designing or choosing certain parts that meet a design criteria.

I would certainly be happy with the power curve this engine is currently at, however in the future with specific port work as well as header and cam design I think this engine is a 400bhp engine with a smooth torque curve off idle and on up! That doesn't negate these great results so far!

 

i get what ur saying...

but 100whp from n/a mods with a very conservative tune aint bad...

 

Tuning will make all the difference in the final output of this build, given what I have so far I can't imagine what it would be like with even more power.

Like someone mentioned, looking at the base curve and see how much has gained is more important than sheer peak hp, also the power curve is like stock,the way it builds power is simply amazing. Combined with shorter final gear, it pulls like nothing I've ever driven.

The only thing so far I see can be added to yield more power would be larger valves, that's about it on the plate, not sure much else would change much other than the tune.

Looking to get an E85 tune to see how that pans out also.

No final photos, we're at a SEMA crunch, all I can say is the curse is real.

 

Hey Paul any updates on your G??

 

I believe he has been busy getting the car prepared for SEMA. Anyone going, be sure to check it out! I can't wait to see the final outcome with body all done up

 

Getting the last pieces put together...after all the troubles I had to go through to do it...I'd say it's about as good as it's going to get...but it's definitely far from perfect...SEMA crunch and SEMA curse gets all of us...

 

Paul, I stopped by the booth but didn't see you. I'll drop back in. The color looks great!

Here are a couple pics from the show for everyone:

 

Nice!

Love those wheels. Are those matte black or dark gunmetal?

 

color looks really nice and clean

wheels appear to be bronze

 

looks nice. whose booth are you in?