Function:Tuned - 3.8L N/A Build Auto Tranny!!
Not sure if all the parts listed will make the most whp out of this NA setup. There are better headers and intake plenum in the market but the problem is the auto tranny... but who knows, u might get lucky and see low 300s on race gas.
Very peculiar and questionable build list for maximizing an NA setup.
Is this what the customer wanted, or did you recommend this combination of parts? Or is it a little of both?
Why no headwork??? And the JWT C2 cams are a weak choice IMO. But most of all... Please tell me you're not using a Kinetix SSV!!!
If so... WHY?!?!?!?!??? That thing has been shown to be a piece of crap for NA applications. Like most folks, I lost power with mine. I immediately went back to the stock plenum and later added a PowerLab spacer.
Is this what the customer wanted, or did you recommend this combination of parts? Or is it a little of both?Why no headwork??? And the JWT C2 cams are a weak choice IMO. But most of all... Please tell me you're not using a Kinetix SSV!!!
If so... WHY?!?!?!?!??? That thing has been shown to be a piece of crap for NA applications. Like most folks, I lost power with mine. I immediately went back to the stock plenum and later added a PowerLab spacer.
Last edited by RudeG_v2.0; Apr 23, 2009 at 01:10 PM.
What a waste of potential for a 3.8L sleeved block IMO.
I was wondering about the 3.8L too and didn't see anything about a crank. Interesting that he chose to do a 100mm bore instead of a stroker crank. I thought about going 100mm but got scared of the sleeves. It will be interesting to see how this motor performs. Should make good power.
Someone move this to the "N/A Build" forum before all the FI people infect the thread.
Someone move this to the "N/A Build" forum before all the FI people infect the thread.
yeah but in this case "maxing out" NA is only going to have minimal hp gains and is going to cost him an amount of money that A.) could've put him into a completely different league of car or B.) could've easily given him a TT beast
I am trying to keep an open mind. 
Just commenting on the remarks on lack of headwork on this build. I've always been dubious about maximum flow vs maximum velocity at a given rpm that head porting provides. I recall reading that the HR engine (as a point of comparison for a NA build) has intake ports that are actually smaller than DE heads. So perhaps the whole concept of oversized valves is overrated, especially on a NA build. The same rules for FI builds does not necessarily apply. Again, my understanding is that maximizing velocity is more important than FI setups, which can rely upon a high pressure differentials to maximize air flow, regardless of the port size.
Anyway, if it doesn't work, a nice METH setup with some well selected turbos and this thing will be nasty.
Just commenting on the remarks on lack of headwork on this build. I've always been dubious about maximum flow vs maximum velocity at a given rpm that head porting provides. I recall reading that the HR engine (as a point of comparison for a NA build) has intake ports that are actually smaller than DE heads. So perhaps the whole concept of oversized valves is overrated, especially on a NA build. The same rules for FI builds does not necessarily apply. Again, my understanding is that maximizing velocity is more important than FI setups, which can rely upon a high pressure differentials to maximize air flow, regardless of the port size.Anyway, if it doesn't work, a nice METH setup with some well selected turbos and this thing will be nasty.
Last edited by rcdash; Apr 30, 2009 at 05:08 AM.
I am trying to keep an open mind. Just commenting on the remarks on lack of headwork on this build. I've always been dubious about maximum flow vs maximum velocity at a given rpm that head porting provides. I recall reading that the HR engine (as a point of comparison for a NA build) has intake ports that are actually smaller than DE heads. So perhaps the whole concept of oversized valves is overrated, especially on a NA build. The same rules for FI builds does not necessarily apply. Again, my understanding is that maximizing velocity is more important than FI setups, which can rely upon a high pressure differentials to maximize air flow, regardless of the port size.
Anyway, if it doesn't work, a nice METH setup with some well selected turbos and this thing will be nasty.
Just commenting on the remarks on lack of headwork on this build. I've always been dubious about maximum flow vs maximum velocity at a given rpm that head porting provides. I recall reading that the HR engine (as a point of comparison for a NA build) has intake ports that are actually smaller than DE heads. So perhaps the whole concept of oversized valves is overrated, especially on a NA build. The same rules for FI builds does not necessarily apply. Again, my understanding is that maximizing velocity is more important than FI setups, which can rely upon a high pressure differentials to maximize air flow, regardless of the port size.Anyway, if it doesn't work, a nice METH setup with some well selected turbos and this thing will be nasty.
However, it should be noted that thus far the NA guys who have made 300+whp all have headwork and/or aggressive cams.
Mike,
Were you guys (Justice Race Engine do the machining?) able to retain the oil squirters? The bore is really aggressive on a 3.8L non-stroker, same for the 4.15 stroker. We've used 99.5mm JE's a couple times in the past - the skirt was rather long. To retain the oil squirters, we had to clearance the piston skirt on the JEs so they wouldn't hit.
The CPs, If I remember correctly, are shorter - maybe you didnt need to cut the skirts? Or did you guys just scrap the squirters like BC requires for their stroker?
I'm interested to see the power band a 3.8L creates NA. Good luck!
Were you guys (Justice Race Engine do the machining?) able to retain the oil squirters? The bore is really aggressive on a 3.8L non-stroker, same for the 4.15 stroker. We've used 99.5mm JE's a couple times in the past - the skirt was rather long. To retain the oil squirters, we had to clearance the piston skirt on the JEs so they wouldn't hit.
The CPs, If I remember correctly, are shorter - maybe you didnt need to cut the skirts? Or did you guys just scrap the squirters like BC requires for their stroker?
I'm interested to see the power band a 3.8L creates NA. Good luck!
Interesting build .
The 100mm bore makes sense if you are planning on using more RPM's (I would do this over a stroker, but thats my preference). I would have gone with a better head, cam, and intake manifold setup though.
Keep us posted on the build
. The 100mm bore makes sense if you are planning on using more RPM's (I would do this over a stroker, but thats my preference). I would have gone with a better head, cam, and intake manifold setup though.
Keep us posted on the build
