Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 107

Thread: HP guesses in the new year.....

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    175
    Quote Originally Posted by neverfastenough View Post
    Only sissy people plumb their wg back in . I'm sure the public can hear it.
    Sorry, what was that? I can't hWSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHH *shift* WSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!
    '93 SubieCoupe 5-speed, red on black

  2. #77
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,126
    Quote Originally Posted by XR7 Dave View Post
    Thanks Ken! It's been fun so far.
    Did you fabricate the exhaust manifolds? They look real clean and professional.

    Ken

    93 SC Whipple powered 11.648 @ 119.6
    Twin Turbo, air intercooled..yet to see

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    5,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacob_Royer View Post
    A turbo setup that spools like my 3.5 EcoBoost would be nice lol but I know
    that is s pipe dream considering the tiny turbos on the truck. I actually have a turbo
    grind in my car now. I run 3.73s and a 2800stall non locking aod I am curious if I would
    have to make any changes to that setup to utilize a turbo. .
    Part of the transition will include a converter change for auto cars. Then all else is dependent on your goals/expectations. Spool is dependent on a decent amount of specs, but it will make power regardless of what you have. Optimization is a tricky concept.

    The stall speeds that guys currently run for blower cars is too low, so it definitely will be for turbos. Since you don't get boost as quick with a turbo, you'll need to help it by loosening it up. Converter requirements are more dynamic for turbo setups than NA or blower engines.

    I think some people are silly on when they want power to come in. Like, 2500 RPM? There's no feasibility there. So if you have a turbo that spools at 3000RPM (or 3500 even), then you'll need to set up your car to accommodate for that. Your car will be faster, the higher RPM your operating range is, regardless. You can realistically expect these engines to make 500rwhp with a 3000RPM spool speed, given a proper setup. Converting over to turbo with a given any setup, it won't be a guaranteed.

    Another thing to consider is that once you get to the 400+rwhp range, premium pump gas isn't a very robust or reliable fuel to use. You assume risk with a turbo because you can easily turn boost up to make 500+whp, but pump gas wont support it. A big turbo kind of helps things in the detonation world because they spool when piston speeds are high, thus the cylinder pressures are lower. In other words....CORN.
    1994 SC
    4.5L Twin Turbo SVO
    Project GTFD

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    377

    Thumbs up cleeeean

    that thing looks top shelf!! SCU does it again. You're a lucky young man Phil! is this the car with the 6 speed swap?

  5. #80
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by XR7 Dave View Post
    A couple pictures for the impatient ones.
    Dave, any pics of how you plumed the passenger side header? Do flipped headers hit the motor mount on a sc like they do on sn95 on that side or does it require finesse also?

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by CMac89 View Post
    Another thing to consider is that once you get to the 400+rwhp range, premium pump gas isn't a very robust or reliable fuel to use. You assume risk with a turbo because you can easily turn boost up to make 500+whp, but pump gas wont support it. A big turbo kind of helps things in the detonation world because they spool when piston speeds are high, thus the cylinder pressures are lower. In other words....CORN.
    I'm interested in this statement. I understand the general concept of octane and dynamic compression... but I have not seen something in writing that supports what you say. What happens if you have a SC based car that makes 400whp at 17 psi on pump gas and you install a turbo kit making 17 psi and still run pump gas? my guess would be that with the turbo kit would be pretty close to 500whp using pump gas. Or am i just misreading what you are saying?

    Thanks,
    Derek
    Any idiot can make a Mustang fast...
    It takes a special idiot to make a Thunderbird fast!!!
    89 SC 4.3 stroker 384rwhp 473ftlbs
    Best ET 13.085 Best MPH 106.6... got some work to do!
    2016 V6 M90 Dyno Champ 2016 Mod 1 Runner Up

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    3,651
    I feel the need to post.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Madison, OH
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by figulaz View Post
    that thing looks top shelf!! SCU does it again. You're a lucky young man Phil! is this the car with the 6 speed swap?
    Yeah, this is the same car that I 6spd swapped a couple years ago. After I rowed that extra gear for the first time, I never looked back. Lol
    Will work for performance parts.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by dthompson View Post
    I'm interested in this statement. I understand the general concept of octane and dynamic compression... but I have not seen something in writing that supports what you say. What happens if you have a SC based car that makes 400whp at 17 psi on pump gas and you install a turbo kit making 17 psi and still run pump gas? my guess would be that with the turbo kit would be pretty close to 500whp using pump gas. Or am i just misreading what you are saying?

    Thanks,
    Derek
    Good morning


    I agree with Mr. Derek until I read the following post by XR7 Dave. As I understand the information a 400 hp blower driven SC engine is close to a max out burning premium pump gas alone.

    http://www.sccoa.com/forums/showthre...139#post995139
    Last edited by sam jones; 02-17-2017 at 03:58 AM.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Madison, Ohio
    Posts
    17,498
    17psi on pump gas is pushing your luck, regardless of measured HP. Most people running this level of boost are using a supplement such as alcohol injection. Due to the increased exhaust temperatures with a turbocharger, boost levels that "seem" ok with a supercharger (typically light detonation) will result in severe detonation with a turbocharger. This is due primarily to the increased exhaust temperature.

    You will make more HP with a turbo compared to a supercharger, exactly how much more is not a pencil and paper calculation. With the right fuel the power gains can be significant.
    Quote Originally Posted by Miller View Post
    Ya thats why i tape mine down. People think its bc i dont have a moonroof seal (which is true) but its really to keep my roof from ripping off .
    Email me here.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    5,613
    Quote Originally Posted by dthompson View Post
    I'm interested in this statement. I understand the general concept of octane and dynamic compression... but I have not seen something in writing that supports what you say. What happens if you have a SC based car that makes 400whp at 17 psi on pump gas and you install a turbo kit making 17 psi and still run pump gas? my guess would be that with the turbo kit would be pretty close to 500whp using pump gas. Or am i just misreading what you are saying?

    Thanks,
    Derek
    Yes, there will be a HP difference when going turbo because you aren't driving a blower, but you still assume the same risk. Since the turbos are spooling around 2800-3200 rpm, that's still far below the 5200 HP / TQ crossover point, so cylinder pressures are still a concern for turbos.

    Part of the point I was trying to make is that this group has good awareness about limits of how much one can overdrive the blowers and they have a mechanical inefficiency posing as a safety-net built in to them that prevents too much boost being ran. With a turbo, you push a couple of buttons in your car, or you get out and turn the boost controller and you go from a pet to a monster in seconds. So using a fuel that can't handle a monster, but can feed a pet only is a recipe for disaster.

    I'm sure Dave has experience repairing detonated engines because of pump gas at levels even lower than 400rwhp. Considering magnitude of affect, there are many other engines that get destroyed because of pump gas being non-robust for their power levels. It's all too common.
    1994 SC
    4.5L Twin Turbo SVO
    Project GTFD

  12. #87
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,126
    Quote Originally Posted by CMac89 View Post
    Yes, there will be a HP difference when going turbo because you aren't driving a blower, but you still assume the same risk. Since the turbos are spooling around 2800-3200 rpm, that's still far below the 5200 HP / TQ crossover point, so cylinder pressures are still a concern for turbos.

    Part of the point I was trying to make is that this group has good awareness about limits of how much one can overdrive the blowers and they have a mechanical inefficiency posing as a safety-net built in to them that prevents too much boost being ran. With a turbo, you push a couple of buttons in your car, or you get out and turn the boost controller and you go from a pet to a monster in seconds. So using a fuel that can't handle a monster, but can feed a pet only is a recipe for disaster.

    I'm sure Dave has experience repairing detonated engines because of pump gas at levels even lower than 400rwhp. Considering magnitude of affect, there are many other engines that get destroyed because of pump gas being non-robust for their power levels. It's all too common.
    So everything you say makes sense, which is what I would expect from you. Is there a formula for other grades of fuel. I am running only 100 octane unlead at this time. What would be the HP limit on that. I know timing and other factors apply, just a rough guess

    Ken

    93 SC Whipple powered 11.648 @ 119.6
    Twin Turbo, air intercooled..yet to see

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina
    Posts
    575
    thanks for the replies! I'm not sure I can see that it is worth the effort/expense to convert to a turbo (in my case) if I only want to run pump gas. E85 is very hit or miss around here, so it is not practical to switch fuel in my case. If 15-17psi (or 375-400whp) is the approximate octane limit of pump gas, and you are already there, why convert? or am i missing something? It seems that this turbo set up is a cheaper way to get to where Im currently at :-)
    Any idiot can make a Mustang fast...
    It takes a special idiot to make a Thunderbird fast!!!
    89 SC 4.3 stroker 384rwhp 473ftlbs
    Best ET 13.085 Best MPH 106.6... got some work to do!
    2016 V6 M90 Dyno Champ 2016 Mod 1 Runner Up

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Ottawa, Ohio
    Posts
    5,379
    Where you are at now you'll need to switch fuel or run snow methonal injection kit like most of us and up the boost. I've always run pump 93 and alky injection as E85 is non existent in my area, and yes made 506 on pump 93. Then would be the decision to find a twin screw or resort to the dark side.
    SCCoA Member#: 2515
    1990 SC AOD 2.1L Kenne Bell
    11.676 @ 121.35 mph
    506hp/478tq
    My Garage

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    St. Charles, MO
    Posts
    20,766
    Quote Originally Posted by rzimmerl View Post
    Where you are at now you'll need to switch fuel or run snow methonal injection kit like most of us and up the boost. I've always run pump 93 and alky injection as E85 is non existent in my area, and yes made 506 on pump 93. Then would be the decision to find a twin screw or resort to the dark side.
    Same here, making right around 500 rwhp with 93 octane and methanol injection using the 2.3 whipple at about 21 pounds of boost. Could make more power switching to E85, but it's not widely available in the STL area. I already did the turbo thing and while I agree that the power they make is very impressive, it's not all peaches and cream. Takes some time to sort out the combo and managing the extra heat under the hood is also something to consider. That said, it's really cool, when you can smoke the tires from a 70 mph roll on the highway.

    David
    1991 SC AOD 4.2..2.3 Whipple..........10.910 @ 125.61
    2016 SRT Challenger Hellcat...............707HP/650TQ

    My Garage

Similar Threads

  1. Want a ride in my new 700 HP SC at the road course???
    By Burbank95sc in forum Non Technical Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-06-2006, 01:10 AM
  2. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04-08-2005, 06:16 PM
  3. V6FC2 event finally in the new MMFF
    By V6Sprout in forum Non Technical Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-19-2004, 11:54 AM
  4. SC's in the new issue of MM&FF
    By HBK94SC in forum Non Technical Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-26-2003, 08:00 PM
  5. New supercoupe owner in the ranks!
    By Hibuckhobby in forum Super Coupe Club of the Midwest
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-13-2001, 09:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •