50 trim not that fast. please bring some ideas.

[rhamlinii]

First off, way to go dragging up a 5month old post with an off-topic and inflamatory reply to criticizm not even remotely directed toward you

Second off, Dan became a "wiseman" 12/24 with was after this post was made.

Third strike gets you sent back to the minors, thanks and please drive thru

First, I read what I read and commented on it.

Second, I wasn't talking to you, so why comment on something that wasn't directed towards you.

Third , your dry sarcasm isn't needed, but thanks anyway. Anthing esle can be sent to me via PM,email, or aim. Thanks, and have a nice day.

 

[97gstnick]

When it is made bigger, it flows more. But high flow doesn't always mean good flow. When it flows more, if it doesn't flow properly it creates turbulence. Haven't you seen all those adds for the 'tornados' that you put in the intake to reduce turbulence and "guide" air in? Same principal.

yea, i understand the principal. but i dont see this being true. yes it is possible, but to me not probable. i think of it more of a justification someone made to convince people why they would not do it because they were to lazy or either to cheap to try. i have not see hard evidence proving the turbulance idea, therefore i will not support it. bring the evidence and i will be very happy to be enlightened.

 

[larsrya8]

i have not see hard evidence proving the turbulance idea, therefore i will not support it. bring the evidence and i will be very happy to be enlightened.

Call up some machine shops, ones with lots of 4G63 experience (FFWD, Polk, etc). Port matching the intake ports to accomodate bigger runners isn't something you should do on a whim. They'll be able to tell you if the porting is a good or bad idea. The flow of a head is a lot more complicated than you seem to realize.

 

[97gstnick]

Call up some machine shops, ones with lots of 4G63 experience (FFWD, Polk, etc). Port matching the intake ports to accomodate bigger runners isn't something you should do on a whim. They'll be able to tell you if the porting is a good or bad idea. The flow of a head is a lot more complicated than you seem to realize.

is there a website i can visit to view pictures and explanations in detail about the flow characteristics of a head? i dont want to call and bug anybody.

 

[Waredtalontsi]

Ok so what are the final results????

 

[97gstnick]

about what?

 

[sweet97]

Hey Nick I checked yoiur mods and if the link is tuned properly you should be makling decent power. If I would suspect anything on your list it would be the RS49T. I would pull the intake pipe and check the shaft play. I had the RS60T and went through mine really quick, lots of shaft play. I sold the replacement, which had a nice tight shaft, and it lasted the new owner 3 weeks who has since gone through 2 more and is on his 4th.
I also saw your wishlist had the Crower stage 4's and an SMIM. I run those cams and a JM SMIM. Power really kicks at 6000rpm's and I shift at 8500rpm's. Something to consider. I have a built motor. If possible try another turbo. Mark

 

[97gstnick]

i checked my turbo, its fine. maybe you were running too long of a return line? that was the cause of failure for my first rs49t. but besides that, i dont know why i am not making a lot of power. i know i am a little over 300 at the wheels, but should i be more? i trap at 103 with a boggin launch and missing 2 gear.

 

[sweet97]

What rpm do you shift at?
How much timing advance above 5000 rpm's?
How much boost?
Do you know your AFR's?
You can check www.dsmtimes.org for some cars with similar traps and get an idea of times and possibly what turbo's they are running. The turbo is capable of flowing 49lbs/min, doesn't the link give you the airflow? You should be easily making 400+ at the crank with 40lbs/min on some good fuel. I believe your set-up should rev to 7500rpm's with about 23psi and at least 18* timing advance with an a/f ratio in the mid 11's.
Those turbonetics turbo's soured me. I went to a Holset while waiting for my RS60T replacement and did much better. My best on the Scanmaster which gets it's info from the ECU like a logger would net me 120mph traps and times varied with driving from a best of 11.68 to mid 12's. I would be curious to hear the answers to the questions I posed at the beginning in this post. Thanks, mark

 

[97gstnick]

What rpm do you shift at?
How much timing advance above 5000 rpm's?
How much boost?
Do you know your AFR's?
You can check www.dsmtimes.org for some cars with similar traps and get an idea of times and possibly what turbo's they are running. The turbo is capable of flowing 49lbs/min, doesn't the link give you the airflow? You should be easily making 400+ at the crank with 40lbs/min on some good fuel. I believe your set-up should rev to 7500rpm's with about 23psi and at least 18* timing advance with an a/f ratio in the mid 11's.
Those turbonetics turbo's soured me. I went to a Holset while waiting for my RS60T replacement and did much better. My best on the Scanmaster which gets it's info from the ECU like a logger would net me 120mph traps and times varied with driving from a best of 11.68 to mid 12's. I would be curious to hear the answers to the questions I posed at the beginning in this post. Thanks, mark

i shift around 7000
i cant run much more than 16-17 degress of timing. i start to knock. it sucks
around 20-21 psi
my stock o2 is around 1.00 volt. i know, its rich. but i was trying to keep knock down.
i flow around 35lbs/min i think. i would have to do a current log to see.

 

[sweet97]

Nick you are only flowing like a big 16G so no wonder you are not happy. My guess is you are getting rich knock, yeah running rich will cause knock. You should not tune by o2's but at WOT to make power your o2 should be around .86-.88 and still be safe. What octane fuel? You need more boost and timing and less fuel. You are making around 375hp at the crank with 35lbs/min and at 18% loss for a FWD that puts you at about 310hp at the wheels, not good. I am not a pro tuner but you do need to lean the afr's. less than .85v is the danger zone depending on octane. You could run 20* timing advance and at least 25psi with afr's around the high .8x's and you will be much happier. 93 octane? I am not surprised that the motor is not breaking up above 6000rom's with that rich a mix. That is insanely rich. Start slow and get the numbers closer to what I recommended and you will begin to see positive results. I was running 30psi and 18* timing advance with about .85volts on the o2 and my a/f in the high 11's on a good amount of 112 added to the 93 pump. You are way too conservative.
1. I would start with boost-set it at 25psi
2. Lean it a little to start.
3. Add some timing, 2* at a time to reach 20-22degrees. At least 18-20*.
You have 100HP available that you have not tapped into. Each 1lb/min of flow is good for about 10.5HP. Mark

 

[larsrya8]

That's what we've been telling him on the DSMLink forums. His tune is very conservative. But if that knock problem won't go away when he leans it out, I don't know what else he can do to continue running safely.

 

[97gstnick]

yes, i am very conservative.. but i will lean it out a bit and see if i will be able to put a little bit more timing. i just cant wait to get my intake manifold. but feel like i need to get my car running real good first.

 

[97gstnick]

is it even possible to make 400whp with a 50 trim and stock intake manifold and stock cams? i thought most people who have 400whp have smim and cams???

 

[sp00ln]

Nick you are only flowing like a big 16G so no wonder you are not happy. My guess is you are getting rich knock, yeah running rich will cause knock. You should not tune by o2's but at WOT to make power your o2 should be around .86-.88 and still be safe. What octane fuel? You need more boost and timing and less fuel. You are making around 375hp at the crank with 35lbs/min and at 18% loss for a FWD that puts you at about 310hp at the wheels, not good. I am not a pro tuner but you do need to lean the afr's. less than .85v is the danger zone depending on octane. You could run 20* timing advance and at least 25psi with afr's around the high .8x's and you will be much happier. 93 octane? I am not surprised that the motor is not breaking up above 6000rom's with that rich a mix. That is insanely rich. Start slow and get the numbers closer to what I recommended and you will begin to see positive results. I was running 30psi and 18* timing advance with about .85volts on the o2 and my a/f in the high 11's on a good amount of 112 added to the 93 pump. You are way too conservative.
1. I would start with boost-set it at 25psi
2. Lean it a little to start.
3. Add some timing, 2* at a time to reach 20-22degrees. At least 18-20*.
You have 100HP available that you have not tapped into. Each 1lb/min of flow is good for about 10.5HP. Mark

.85v is supposidly real lean for a 2g. I would suggest .94v's to start. I dont know if he can flow more than 35lbs/min without cams.

 

[larsrya8]

is it even possible to make 400whp with a 50 trim and stock intake manifold and stock cams? i thought most people who have 400whp have smim and cams???

Cams would definitely help. A SMIM probably would help some as well. I would get the cams first, and a 1G TB if you don't already have one. See what you're working with at that point, before you shell out big bucks for a new manifold. The stock cams and TB are holding back your flow at this point.

 

[97gstnick]

Cams would definitely help. A SMIM probably would help some as well. I would get the cams first, and a 1G TB if you don't already have one. See what you're working with at that point, before you shell out big bucks for a new manifold. The stock cams and TB are holding back your flow at this point.

thats what i was thinking. i didnt think i could really flow much until i got some cams and a smim. i have a q45 throttle body that is going on the jm smim that i will be ordering soon. then cams later.

 

[larsrya8]

Personally, I would do the cams first. Your stock cams are not "out-flowing" the stock manifold, and you'll see much more immediate gains from the cams. The SMIM may or may not hurt your low-end torque (depending on who you listen to), and probably won't help your overall top-end flow since that is currently restricted by the stock cams. And you'll be out $500 or so for the manifold, when you could spend considerably less than that on some FP cams.

I'm thinking bang-for-buck with this one. It's up to you.

 

[97gstnick]

Personally, I would do the cams first. Your stock cams are not "out-flowing" the stock manifold, and you'll see much more immediate gains from the cams. The SMIM may or may not hurt your low-end torque (depending on who you listen to), and probably won't help your overall top-end flow since that is currently restricted by the stock cams. And you'll be out $500 or so for the manifold, when you could spend considerably less than that on some FP cams.

I'm thinking bang-for-buck with this one. It's up to you.

hmmm, maybe your right. i guess i thought i heard the stock intake manifold limits power up top and i thought i would be able to solve that power loss feeling above 6000rpm by going with a smim first.

 

[hellotbone]

My Magnus SMIM definately gave my car more top end pull. Then the cams was another gain ontop of that I did it in stages mani first then cams. The manifold does add quite a bit of mid and top though.

 

[DSM90AWD]

hmmm, maybe your right. i guess i thought i heard the stock intake manifold limits power up top and i thought i would be able to solve that power loss feeling above 6000rpm by going with a smim first.

I'd go cams first. Definitely a better $/hp mod than a SMIM at this point.
On my car (albeit a 1G) adding FP2 cams (similar to 272s) improved my 1/4 mile times by .4sec and 5mph with no other changes

 

[blcknspo0ln]

Just to give you more hope and some perspective, at 21 psi on little to no street tune at all (didn't even plug in the logger this time) I trapped 110 mph with the worst launch ever. I'm completely convinced that the car will trap 112-113 with a better tune. Numbers wise, I made 293/262 @ 16 psi! Safe to say you definitely have more room to grow.

Keep your head up

 

[sweet97]

One of our wisemen, andymoraitis ran 12.57 at 109mph with a big 16G(not an EVO), 550cc inj's, a 3" turbo back exhaust and an EPROM ECU with DSMchips for tuning. Oh also a Walbro 190, not rewired. No MAFT, NO DSMlink, not even an AFPR. Everything internal stock. He has a 2G. All of his tuning was with the chips. I am 1G myself so I will back off and let the experienced guys with 2G's make the suggestions. Good luck, Mark

 

[97gstnick]

My Magnus SMIM definately gave my car more top end pull. Then the cams was another gain ontop of that I did it in stages mani first then cams. The manifold does add quite a bit of mid and top though.

thats good to hear. haha. because im going to be buying the manifold first. i already bought the q45 throttle body so i am getting the manifold next. then cams, and hopefully i will be able to pull close to 120mph traps then.

 

[fwdeclipse]

.85v is supposidly real lean for a 2g. I would suggest .94v's to start. I dont know if he can flow more than 35lbs/min without cams.

I have stock cams and intake manifold and with a e316g on a cold day have logged 38.5lb/min so you should be able to get more than 35lb/min with a 50 trim.