R
robinsongtir
Guest
my stroker kit is due finally to be sent out for the end of july
my stroker kit is due finally to be sent out for the end of july
O
Odin
Guest
8) I bet you can't wait matey :twisted: .
rob
rob
A
AZ STE
Guest
Pete,
As soon as ive finished my Front mount going to start picking your brains as the handlings finished now so its onto the engine .Have you any free time sometime next week for me to come and see your pipe runs on your R33 install?
As soon as ive finished my Front mount going to start picking your brains as the handlings finished now so its onto the engine
.Have you any free time sometime next week for me to come and see your pipe runs on your R33 install?
R
robinsongtir
Guest
STE
my cars at RC already not much of the piperun left on it.PM me I am of most of this week I could call down one night if you want give me your number.
my cars at RC already not much of the piperun left on it.PM me I am of most of this week I could call down one night if you want give me your number.
A
AndrewD
Guest
im still wondering why ppl go for a stroker kit
i have nothing against it, or the ppl that chose em but
it lowers the max hp rpm with respect to a larger bore displacement
increases inertial stresses
etc
still you get a power increase roughly equal to the increase in displacement, but wouldnt it be better to get the cylinders honed and a larger bore piston to reduce the s/b ratio to below 1?
consider this:
most racing engines have a stroke to bore ratio (s/b) below 0.86
the sr20det is 1
increasing stoke will obvisouly make it > 1
but hey think of the new power gains
i have nothing against it, or the ppl that chose em but
it lowers the max hp rpm with respect to a larger bore displacement
increases inertial stresses
etc
still you get a power increase roughly equal to the increase in displacement, but wouldnt it be better to get the cylinders honed and a larger bore piston to reduce the s/b ratio to below 1?
consider this:
most racing engines have a stroke to bore ratio (s/b) below 0.86
the sr20det is 1
increasing stoke will obvisouly make it > 1
but hey think of the new power gains
O
Odin
Guest
I agree with him though .
Ivan made 560 bhp with 2,0lt's so why the need for the stroker :?: .
rob
.Ivan made 560 bhp with 2,0lt's so why the need for the stroker :?: .
rob
A
AndrewD
Guest
yea but its not just that tho, i mean a 2.5 ltre engine sounds sweet to anyones ears, but wouldnt it make more sense to increase the bore than the stroke (if it was possible to increase it that much i mean)vpulsar said:I agree with him though
Ivan made 560 bhp with 2,0lt's so why the need for the stroker :?: .
rob
and i ment it pushes the max hp rpm HIGHER not lower hehehe
sorry sweeny i dont want an argument, but if you insist
O
Odin
Guest
I think the bore is increased to 90mm on the 2.3 kit :shock: with new liner's.
rob
rob
R
robinsongtir
Guest
the stroker kit I am going for is an RC spec billet steel assembly,I don't know the spec of it bore/stroke but I do know it will rev to 8500rpm.I think that the rods are longer than standard anyway and with the kit being billet instead of forged you can rev it a lot higher than forged kits.
Rob the liners will still be standard bored out so that would rule out 90mm bore think it will be more like 87mm?
Rob the liners will still be standard bored out so that would rule out 90mm bore think it will be more like 87mm?
O
Odin
Guest
billet 8) :shock: .
well 8500rpm should do the job nicely peter .
If it's not a secret mate what sort of power R U hopeing for :?: .
rob
well 8500rpm should do the job nicely peter
.If it's not a secret mate what sort of power R U hopeing for :?: .
rob
R
robinsongtir
Guest
put it this way anything over 600bhp and I will be happy there is always the choice to change the exhaust housing on the turbo from a .82 to a 1.06 if I feel I want more power see what the spool up and poweroutput is like first
there is always the choice to change the exhaust housing on the turbo from a .82 to a 1.06 if I feel I want more power see what the spool up and poweroutput is like first
E
Edd
Guest
well i may be taking mine off the road and going for a HKS GT3240 so you had better watch out as i'm aiming for over 700 on a freshly built new engine :twisted: :evil: :shock: :lol:
also i will be using a different gearbox as i have some issues with mine :roll:
new engine :twisted: :evil: :shock: :lol: also i will be using a different gearbox as i have some issues with mine :roll:
A
AJ4
Guest
Answer to devylboi - who wants an engine that only produces some ridiculous power figure in a rev range that you only spend 5% in ? If your building a track car thats going to spend all day long between 7000 and 8000 rpm then fine, keep a 2.0 and make it rev.
I couldn't give a toss if my car only makes 300 bhp, if it has 300 ft/lb of torque from 2500 to 6000 It'll piss anything 'more powerful' all day, everyday. But hey, I wont be able to boast down the pub that my car has xxx bhp....
It seems lots of people are obsessed about huge power figures, regardless of how the car actually drives. You spend 90% of your time driving below 6000rpm, so who wants a stupid high peak bhp figure at 8000 rpm with feck all torque just because your turning high rpms, its absolutely meaningless. And who is going to fork out on new gear ratios to spread the power at 8000 rpm ?
Apologies to Edd and Robinsongtir who clearly know what they're talking about and know exactly what they want, my comments not intended at you guys, rather the 'peak bhp over a 200 rpm range is better than high torque over a 4000 rpm range' people
Feel free to flame me to a crisp ( but not Rob )
I couldn't give a toss if my car only makes 300 bhp, if it has 300 ft/lb of torque from 2500 to 6000 It'll piss anything 'more powerful' all day, everyday. But hey, I wont be able to boast down the pub that my car has xxx bhp....
It seems lots of people are obsessed about huge power figures, regardless of how the car actually drives. You spend 90% of your time driving below 6000rpm, so who wants a stupid high peak bhp figure at 8000 rpm with feck all torque just because your turning high rpms, its absolutely meaningless. And who is going to fork out on new gear ratios to spread the power at 8000 rpm ?
Apologies to Edd and Robinsongtir who clearly know what they're talking about and know exactly what they want, my comments not intended at you guys, rather the 'peak bhp over a 200 rpm range is better than high torque over a 4000 rpm range' people
Feel free to flame me to a crisp ( but not Rob
)
R
robinsongtir
Guest
Fair point Ross my intentions from the start was to build a 1/4 mile car and not an everyday driven car however I hope to have full boost on my car by 4300rpm compared with a similar engine setup this should be possible and with a power band of 4200rpm.
O
Odin
Guest
You don't just need a stroker to get good torque a well buit 2.0lt withRoss said:Feel free to flame me to a crisp ( but not Rob
a good ECU upgrade mapped well will do the job just as well, My car
got 304lb's and 311 bhp at 1.2 bar a pretty even spread of power and torque I hope you would agree, And I'm hopeing for 400lb's and 400 bhp
at 1.4 on my new turbo and injector's.
But after the rebuild when I can afford it I'm hopeing for another 50 lb's
50 bhp at least
.rob
A
AJ4
Guest
lol, no worries bud. I just get a bit annoyed off with this max flower idea that bhp is everything, regardless of where the peak is, or how wide the peak is etc. I can't see the point of having an engine that produces 600 bhp if the torque curve looks like a needle. Unless your going to rag it all day at that rpm its a useless engine
As you might have guessed, I'm going for the rally style engine, low bhp and wide torque. Mine is never intended to be a drag or track car, more a sort of 'urban rally monster'
Like I said above, you obviously know what your doing and it wasn't intended at you, sounds like you'll have a pretty good motor when your done. 8)
As you might have guessed, I'm going for the rally style engine, low bhp and wide torque. Mine is never intended to be a drag or track car, more a sort of 'urban rally monster'
Like I said above, you obviously know what your doing and it wasn't intended at you, sounds like you'll have a pretty good motor when your done. 8)
A
AJ4
Guest
And yes Rob, you know I agree with what you said and I know you know what your doing Fair point 8)
I think the argument was "not using a stroker as you need to rev the engine high, which gives unrealistic and meaningless bhp figures" versus "using a stroker because you never spend any time at high revs anyway" ( I think :?: )
Fair point 8)I think the argument was "not using a stroker as you need to rev the engine high, which gives unrealistic and meaningless bhp figures" versus "using a stroker because you never spend any time at high revs anyway" ( I think :?: )