60-1 users, what supporting mods?

[Slowboy]

Wow! Thanks Mike for your insight! When you DO run and get numbers at the track with the 430AWHP EVO-16G powered DSM, please, submit the timeslip so we can all see it. Till then...

Have a lovely day.

Sorry, in case you missed the post, we used the Evo III 16g to BREAK IN a motor. So, just because you cannot do it, does not give you the right to speak.

MGH

 

[green92gsx]

With regards to the 60-1, Nate was running out of gas around the 500 WHP mark with his, we switched to 750's and all is well.

I'm not trying to start anything here but I was under the impression that he was running out of fuel from the 38psi boost spikes that were mentioned in his 515hp thread.

 

[Slowboy]

I'm not trying to start anything here but I was under the impression that he was running out of fuel from the 38psi boost spikes that were mentioned in his 515hp thread.

No sir.

Damn internal WG's.

It would spike for about 1/2 second and fall off to 28 PSI quickly, however at that brief instant, the dynapack did show 13.5:1 even on the 750's. Once the boost was down to 28 PSI the graph is high 12's AFR's.

With that being said, the 750's are plenty for our bolt on 35R at 40 PSI.

MGH

 

[diambo4life]

So, just because you cannot do it, does not give you the right to speak.

MGH

Excuse me? Have YOU done it? No! Use your own advice. Again, when I see track numbers (ie. an ET with a MPH in case you cannot read) with the supposedly "430AWHP" Evo-16G powered car, I will recant my statement. I don't want to hear "..if we did this, or when we do this.." statements. Talk about bench dynoing.. We are not even talking about E16G's here. It's the 60-1.

FWIW, I'm not really impressed with your turbos that have to be run at some 38-42psi to make real power - but that's another thread and topic altogether.

 

[Slowboy]

Excuse me? Have you done it? No! Use your own advice. Again, when I see track numbers (ie. an ET with a MPH in case you cannot read) with the supposedly "430AWHP" Evo-16G powered car, I will recant my statement. I don't want to hear "..if we did this, or when we do this.." statements. Talk about bench dynoing.. We are not even talking about E16G's here. It's the 60-1.

FWIW, I'm not really impressed with your turbos that have to be run at some 38-42psi to make real power - but that's another thread and topic altogether.

We have made 400.3 WHP on an EVO III 16g. Yes, we have done it. Why do I have to take it to the track in the middle of the winter when I have a 100k dyno here?

So, its not really a "bench dyno" when I have one here, now is it?

Evo III 16g dyno

PS... I went 12.01 @ 115.00 MPH in a 16g car before you owned a DSM.

Yes, this is about the 60-1.... and Nate made 513 WHP. Do you think you need 30 PSI to make this type of power with a 60-1.... YES SIR. Especially on Nate's motor, in a bolt on turbine housing Can we make more with external gate and larger a/r turbine housing? You bet, that would be simple!

Not impressed with 38 PSI 639 WHP run on a GT35R in a .48 a/r housing? No big deal, the people who really matter were impressed. Considering no one else has come close to that type of # in a Mitsubishi turbine housing, and 99% of the experts I talk to, claim we have a record in that size housing. Want to argue it, have at it! I have all day just for you.

MGH

 

[gimmie11s]

400 whp on a STROKER. thats a little different. Note that the thing is making 37X ft/lbs of torque. You can thank the stroker for that, not your tuning or the E16G.


FWIW, 115 mph is nowhere near 400 whp either; especially if the car was lightened at all.

Another interesting thing is that according to your posted 400.3 whp E16G graph, the power does not come on until ~4500 rpm.... are you sure this was with a 16g and a Stroker? something doesnt seem to add up....

i would guess a stroker combined with a 16g would begin ripping your head off around 3-3100 rpm... not 4500.

 

[Slowboy]

400 whp on a STROKER. thats a little different. Note that the thing is making 37X ft/lbs of torque. You can thank the stroker for that, not your tuning or the E16G.


FWIW, 115 mph is nowhere near 400 whp either; especially if the car was lightened at all.

Another interesting thing is that according to your posted 400.3 whp E16G graph, the power does not come on until ~4500 rpm.... are you sure this was with a 16g and a Stroker? something doesnt seem to add up....

i would guess a stroker combined with a 16g would begin ripping your head off around 3-3100 rpm... not 4500.

The motor has nothing to do with how much airflow a turbo is capable of. So, the fact its a stroker has little to nothing to do with the power from the turbo. Torque, yes.... extra displacement is cool.

115 MPH no where near 400 WHP is correct, who said anything about that? I did that six years ago on a small 16g, WAYYY before I owned, or even had the car on a dyno. Check up on the story a little bit before posting crap.

Power not until 4500? Not correct. However, the fact we were only running 7 second sweeps trying to seat the rings, shows a little different on the dynopack.

BTW, at 7.5:1 compression, you would be correct, spool up is still a little slow.

Please read the dyno graph a little closer, you would see we did not start the pull until 3k.

MGH

 

[gimmie11s]

why was the choice made to go 7.5:1? was this using a combo of factory parts or some custom forged pieces?

 

[Slowboy]

why was the choice made to go 7.5:1? was this using a combo of factory parts or some custom forged pieces?

7.5:1 Banadized pistons

Most of the reasons we like them are listed on this page.

MGH

 

[DSM90AWD]

Just an FYI:

400HP on 2.4L = 167HP/L >> SBR EVO 16G, MAFT, Stg3 head, CompCams
330HP on 2.0L = 163HP/L >> AMS stock 6-bolt/head with HKS Cams and 2G MAF

Seems like believable #s to me, though linking that DynoSheet to the E16G in your catalog seems wayy misleading to me as Nates setup (not mentioned on that link) is an atypical 16G application.

Also my .02.. this thread is not about SBR 16Gs or pistons so why is it? I assume you know where the PM button is

 

[sweet97]

I'm getting conflicting info on the 60-1. At what rpm are you guys using one getting 20-22 psi? AGP clams 30PSI by 4000 RPM which seems a bit of an exageration, huh? How about some real numbers. Thanks, Mark
PS: I understood the 60-1 flows a lot of air at low PSI. Perhaps the motor should be set up for such a scenario.
Stock intake, high flowing FMIC, etc. Mark

 

[gimmie11s]

i get full boost by ~4100 rpm. the 60-1 wheel wont make any huge numbers (500+) unless its moving 30 psi or more. thats how most large compressors are though.

 

[pboglio]

Apparantly, Slowboy DID put down 400 w.h.p. in a DSM. If you have evidence that he falsified, altered, or otherwise misrepresented the data, then provide that evidence. If not, then give it a rest already.

For those nitpickers, just look at that graph, the engine picked up 150 lb-ft of torque in the span of 800-900 rpm. Thats gotta feel like getting hit by a truck. The entire graph never dips below 200 lb-ft of torque.

You've got an excellent source of experimental data here, ask questions in a nice and polite way and you might benefit from it.

 

[sweet97]

i get full boost by ~4100 rpm. the 60-1 wheel wont make any huge numbers (500+) unless its moving 30 psi or more. thats how most large compressors are though.

What boost do you hit at 4100?? Thanks, Mark

 

[redrkt]

I'm getting conflicting info on the 60-1. At what rpm are you guys using one getting 20-22 psi? AGP clams 30PSI by 4000 RPM which seems a bit of an exageration, huh? How about some real numbers. Thanks, Mark
PS: I understood the 60-1 flows a lot of air at low PSI. Perhaps the motor should be set up for such a scenario.
Stock intake, high flowing FMIC, etc. Mark

The 60-1 does flow alot of air at low psi, this is why there are problems with compressor surge with it on our engines. It also flows alot of air at high pressure. For example, it can work well at lower pressures with big displacement engines that will flow alot of air, and it also works well on small displacement engines running high pressure to flow alot air.

Of course it is a good idea to setup your engine to flow more air by replacing the stock restrictive components. You can optimally modify your engine/turbo setup for lower boost if you want, but your hp output will be limited by the lower boost. And if your hp goal is quite a bit short of what the 60-1 is capable of supporting @ 30+ psi, then you would be better off going with a smaller turbo instead. With small displacement engines like ours, eventually we have to increase boost pressure to flow more air through the motor to make more hp; this is our replacement for displacement so to speak.

 

[sweet97]

I have the usual 3" exhaust. True ColdAirIntake. High flow Spearco FMIC. I am going to rebuild a 6 bolt I have. Was thinking stroker but have heard the don't last very long due to excessive friction. What is compressor surge? Mark

 

[redrkt]

I am going to rebuild a 6 bolt I have. Was thinking stroker but have heard the don't last very long due to excessive friction.

What do you mean "excessive friction"? Strokers last just as long as a 2.0 if properly built. Where did you get that information?

 

[sweet97]

I got the info from a guy whoworks with DSM's near Syracuse, N.Y. I took the friction as coming from the angle of the rod/piston. I will look to see if i still have the email. A stroker sounds like the way to go with the 60-1.I understand spool 500RPM's sooner is common.

 

[redrkt]

Does "this guy" own a shop that works on Dsm's or anything? Or is he just a guy that's into Dsm's like the majority of us on this board?

The "side loading" of the piston is a little greater on the stoker compared to the 2.0 due to the rod angle and pin placement in the piston, but it's hardly something that would be detrimental to the engines longevity or reliability. 2.4's come from the factory with this rod ratio and last a very long life without any major problems. There are custom pistons made for the 2.3 that take these things into consideration as well. If you have a stroker built i recommend you at least get the pistons from Magnus Motorsports, and have them or another reputable shop build it.

A stroker is an awesome supporting mod for any big turbo like the 60-1. Better spoolup and boost recovery between shifts, and it's less likely to have problems with compressor surge.

 

[sweet97]

They own a shop but do not build motors. They have been o Buschur severaltimes and have them build their2.0motors now. I believe the problem was reving the 2.3 to very high rpm's like one might do a 2.0. I am still considering a stroker. Mark

 

[98TalonTSi]

I wouldn't think there is really a need to run a stroker out to as high an RPM as a 2.0.
You make the power earlier and hold it through a RPM band probably longer, providing the setup is proper.

 

[sweet97]

Buschur racing is one of those saying that strokers do not last. I still think a stroker reved to 2.0 levels is the problem. Mark

 

[95AWD_TSI_TALON]

I am on 7.5:1cr and on my 60-1 I was hitting 26psi around 4500rpms. view moy mods list to see my set-up. was on walbro and 850's then. Not the cell and aeromotive.
Matt

 

[overdoseheroin]

i know a kid with a 60-1 on a 1g awd and he rund a 255lph hp pump, 750 injectors, SAFC and Blowthru setup tuned and it f-in rips.

 

[sweet97]

Matt that was very acceptable. I see you like high boost with the 7.5. Do you think in my case I wold be better off with a higher compression to get into boost rpm's quicker? I have a 6 bolt to build and don't know what way to go. I have heard that strokers fail early. I would think a stroker wth it's 8.8:1 would do the 60-1 well. Thanks, Matt