Wisemen and knowledgable tumers , 14000 rpm cfm? [Merged 7-7] STUPID high

[95redgsx]

who does head porting for 50-80$ ?

 

[Gamble97]

who makes larger valves for $150? Mine were $250

 

[sp00ln]

raise my rev limit to +9500 rpms (free. I have dsmlink)

Is there anyway to do that without DSM link?

 

[1SloColt]

I'd stay with a 2.0L and build it as well. I don't know if I'd shift at 9500 cause the stock trans sure as hell won't like it. My buddies built 2.0L FP3 cams, t4 35r car made peak power at 7800 rpm, and he normally shifts around 9k rpm, but he runs a 2g trans so quite a bit easier than on a stock 1g trans most likely. I actually think the car will pull hard up to 9k with the 2x cams but it would be ineteresting to see how the magnus fairs with its smaller plenum. That'll be one helluva powerband though with the spool of the 60-1. Considering it probably spools around 4100-4300rpms and shifting at +9k, that'll make for an awesome powerband. SRT4s are already envious of a stock motor 4g63 powerband, they'd be scared of something like you're shooting for

 

[dsm-onster]

OH! yea. Guys. I know i need a shep tranny. But at the horsepower level i plan on running via a stroker or via a "revver", you'll need a shep tranny for the strength and durability. So i didn't list it, as no matte what i'm getting a shep stage 4.

I was trying to low ball the stroker costs to find some reason to merit going to a stroker. To do both, you need a shep-like tranny. To do both you need a high flowing turbo. To do both at the horsepower level that merits either path, you need forged internals.

1slocolt, that's exactly my goal, to scare those hot srt-4s that have rarely lost a race on the interstate or a roll .

I will be going AWD though anyway. I'm working on getting a 1g body (minus bock and tranny). I was going to get a shep stage 4 and drop it in. Since I'll need an AWD tranny as is.

 

[dsm-onster]

Is there anyway to do that without DSM link?

You can burn a chip.

 

[dsm-onster]

Here's Swordfish's dyno results:
__________________________________________________________________________

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

Looking at the FP2 cam dynorun (red), his power drops off about 50 horsepower starting a 6500 rpms going to 8500. And this jives with the intake mani testing where the 1g intake loses about 4-5 lbs/min after 6000 or so rpms... So I think the drop off is really becasue of the intake not the cams here... I have FP2Xs, so I have a broader power band. A little more at a sooner rpm and a little more at a later rpm. That would certainly stretch my power band even higher.

In that intake mani test, from what I remember, the Magnus picked up real good at about 5,000 rpms staying even w/ the 1g intake until the 1g dropped off. This is where the Magnus picked up even more!

So, I'm supposing the 2Xs will be fine for my goal. Why carve out more volume when you can just use the volume youhave more times? It's like spending 10 minutes looking for a 2.5 gallon bucket to put a fire out, when you have a 2 gallon bucket and a water hose in hand.

Does anyone have a link of the intake testing that actually works?

 

[1SloColt]

Yeah the magnus is a great manifold, should suit those cams well.

SRT-4s have the ability to make 400whp on pump and trap 120mph rather easily, but their powerband is a little short. For some reason they actually don't trap that high for the times they put down either, at least IMO, but I guess I'm comparing two totally different creatures.

 

[out there]

since you're planning to build (and you're obviously pretty serious) a 4g63 to rev to the 10k neighborhood, have you considered different gearing? somewhere in the future i decided this would be a great car for drag racing and daily driving: if you can have custom gearing so that shifting out of first (at 10k) drops you down to 5k in second, into third at 6k-ish, fourth at 6k-ish and into fifth at some rpm to be later determined because you'll only need it for the highway.
think about it, with a setup that has full spool by 4500 and pulls until 9-10k, why not take advantage of the whole band? nearly peak torque for 4k+ rpms? ¡yes please! this is where having a lighter flywheel and double-synchro'd tranny will be helpful, because that will be a lot of energy that needs to be dispersed in every shift, especially the first two

 

[92GSXBaltimore]

what is your reason for wanting to run the revs that high if the power is going to drop off after about 7500-8000rpms?

 

[Dark_Horse]

Your 60-1 will have stopped making power long before you hit 10,000RPM. Yeah a 60-1 is a good sized medium turbo, but think bigger. IMHO even an SC-6176 is too small to make 10,000rpm necessary...If you've got some $$ to spend, check out a Garrett GT37R.

Other thought, if this is going to be a drag only car, why not get FP3x cams? If the FP3 cams are a good 25whp above the FP2 cams above 5,000rpm, I'd ASSume the FP3x would outshine the FP2x by a good deal also.

 

[dsm-onster]

what is your reason for wanting to run the revs that high if the power is going to drop off after about 7500-8000rpms?

My whole last post was about the reasons why I felt that it would NOT drop off at 7500-8000 rpms...

 

[Dark_Horse]

Oh, and http://206.124.12.138/INTAKE/ is the link to the intake manifold test.

 

[staticbrainwash]

A buddy of mine has a TRE race trans and he puts that thing through just about everything you can think of. I'd look to them for a trans, as i hear sheps (although amazing) has issues with constant abuse (although any trans will). It's just my understanding TRE is a smidge better.

 

[dsm-onster]

Your 60-1 will have stopped making power long before you hit 10,000RPM. Yeah a 60-1 is a good sized medium turbo, but think bigger. IMHO even an SC-6176 is too small to make 10,000rpm necessary...If you've got some $$ to spend, check out a Garrett GT37R.

Other thought, if this is going to be a drag only car, why not get FP3x cams? If the FP3 cams are a good 25whp above the FP2 cams above 5,000rpm, I'd ASSume the FP3x would outshine the FP2x by a good deal also.

I have an AGP RS60T.

Straight from AGPs website:

RS60
Now were getting into the big turbos. A RS60 can make well over 500whp, support 32psi, and be a nasty turbo. Full boost is around 4100 on a 2.0L. This is a good race turbo but on pump gas is much less efficient than the 50trim. You wil need a built motor to take advantage of the extra power this turbo will make. At 30psi it will make 40-50hp more than the 50 trim but at 20psi will usually make less. This turbo is only recommended if you have a built motor and care more about race performance than street performance.

-60 lb/min compressor
-60-1 compressor wheel
-76 trim T31 (stage 3) turbine wheel
-T04E (3" inlet, 2" outlet) polished compressor housing.
-Setup for manifold mounted or O2 mounted external wastegate
(internal wastegate optional)
​

60 lbs/min X (approx.)10.5hp per 1 lbs/min = 630 crank horsepower... My current goal is to get over 500whp. I seriously doubt that I can do that with an 8500 rpm rev limit. . . As well, it would be nice to run 28 psi instead of 32 or so. it gets exceedingly more intricate to tune super high boost.

Very crude but:

10,000 rotations per minute X 2.0L = 20,000 L/min
8,700 rotations per minute X 2.3L = 20,000 L/min

Guys run 60-1s on strokers all the time. I doubt taking their stroker 1000 rpms higher would run the turbo out of breath. Besides, like you pointed out, I don't have FP3s. However, I am worried about my hotside though. I probably will net significant gains by going to a .63 a/r pte turbine housing, as the bullseye housing has an a/r of around .55 (or so they told me).

 

[dsm-onster]

Oh, and http://206.124.12.138/INTAKE/ is the link to the intake manifold test.

Thanx

 

[dsm-onster]

A buddy of mine has a TRE race trans and he puts that thing through just about everything you can think of. I'd look to them for a trans, as i hear sheps (although amazing) has issues with constant abuse (although any trans will). It's just my understanding TRE is a smidge better.

HAHA! that's funny. I heard the same thing about TRE.

I like TRE. I just heard excellent feedback concerning Shep's customer service...

 

[1SloColt]

I think you can make 500whp on a 60-1, but that will be close to its limits. Buddy of mine makes 494whp on a t3 60-1 but he's got the works, built 2.0L, shearer tubular manifold, S cover, FP2s, 3.5" exhaust, Large plenum intake manifold, and this was on 29psi. He said he was running out of turbo at that point.

Other thought, if this is going to be a drag only car, why not get FP3x cams? If the FP3 cams are a good 25whp above the FP2 cams above 5,000rpm, I'd ASSume the FP3x would outshine the FP2x by a good deal also.

FP3x cams will most likely make more peak power but torque makes a car move, and I'm not totally positive that those cams are gonna produce the torque an FP3 produces on a 2.0L. Those cams are just so aggressive that they might not make shit for torque on a 2.0L, kinda similar to a crower 415. I've seen the 415s make great peak power but the torque was absolutely awful. I'm talkin to a few guys now to see what they think the 3x might do in a 2.0L, but I guess I should just go ahead and call FP.

I actually think the bullseye housing should be fine for any high HP application. I run it with a p-trim wheel and the turbo does pretty good around 21psi, and it really didn't pick up too much between 21 and 24psi, but after 24psi the car felt like it picked up horsepower exponentially for every 1psi increase, which basically says the housing and turbine wheel like that higher boost where the added exhaust is needed. If the housing was too small then it definitely wouldn't work well with that large p-trim wheel. I saw one of slowboy's shop cars last weekend at the GMU meet and he runs a bullseye housing with his holset. Made over 700whp on boost alone, so that tells me the housing is plenty large to support serious power.

 

[sweet97]

Just a comment on the Crower 415's. I changed out my HKS 272's for the Crowers and they pull like mad. First time I experienced torque steer with my AWD '93. Never had the car on the dyno so I have no specs there but pull and driveability are great. Mark
I also have a Bullseye turbine(Holset/HX-35/40) and have concerns about it's flow at boost over 25psi. Again I need dyno time but have not seen big gains in times and speed with a Scanmaster doing the numbers from 24psi to 30psi. This was on 110 leaded. My only tune tool is the MAF-T.
My experience with the RS60T was a short life for both the original and I heard the replacement that I sold, because I had the Holset by then, lasted only 3 weeks. I didn't take the RS60T over 24psi. It did spool quite quick and made good power for the time it worked.
Dropping revs below 6000 between shifts would lose too much spool in my experience. I'm shifting at 8500 until I see where power falls off on the dyno. It does pull to 9k rpms easily but it is not a drag car per say.

 

[dsm-onster]

I think you can make 500whp on a 60-1, but that will be close to its limits. Buddy of mine makes 494whp on a t3 60-1 but he's got the works, built 2.0L, shearer tubular manifold, S cover, FP2s, 3.5" exhaust, Large plenum intake manifold, and this was on 29psi. He said he was running out of turbo at that point.

And now I'm pissed. I wanted this to be my last turbo purchase . But mayby I have room to upgrade my turbine housing a/r, and exhaust mani, . . .

FP3x cams will most likely make more peak power but torque makes a car move, and I'm not totally positive that those cams are gonna produce the torque an FP3 produces on a 2.0L. Those cams are just so aggressive that they might not make shit for torque on a 2.0L, kinda similar to a crower 415. I've seen the 415s make great peak power but the torque was absolutely awful. I'm talkin to a few guys now to see what they think the 3x might do in a 2.0L, but I guess I should just go ahead and call FP.

This is the exact reason why I grabbed a set of FP2Xs. I never had thought stroking was worth the investment. I thought prices wouldcome down. But the Hype has kind of plained things off. I believed that the 2Xs would have been great for my set up at low boost. And wouldn't have mand a peaky finess-like engine when I decide to really go to the edge. Here I'm looking to make a streetable "revver".

I actually think the bullseye housing should be fine for any high HP application. I run it with a p-trim wheel and the turbo does pretty good around 21psi, and it really didn't pick up too much between 21 and 24psi, but after 24psi the car felt like it picked up horsepower exponentially for every 1psi increase, which basically says the housing and turbine wheel like that higher boost where the added exhaust is needed. If the housing was too small then it definitely wouldn't work well with that large p-trim wheel. I saw one of slowboy's shop cars last weekend at the GMU meet and he runs a bullseye housing with his holset. Made over 700whp on boost alone, so that tells me the housing is plenty large to support serious power.

Excellent proof. Remember that I have a T3 stage 3 wheel. The more I think about it the more I think that I should have gone with a larger turbine wheel before I bought. But You live and learn. Remember a larger wheel flows more so a larger housing is not neccesary. And then it does more with the exhaust gasses that it is given.

 

[dsm-onster]

Just a comment on the Crower 415's. I changed out my HKS 272's for the Crowers and they pull like mad. First time I experienced torque steer with my AWD '93. Never had the car on the dyno so I have no specs there but pull and driveability are great. Mark

So I'm looking at your profile and you're running stock bore/stroke and you have a drivable street car w/ 415s. Are you like me and believe that anything is srivable if you can pour pump gas in it . Awesome. I may look at the FP3. Or especially the 3Xs, if my goals are shot down like a skeet.

I also have a Bullseye turbine(Holset/HX-35/40) and have concerns about it's flow at boost over 25psi. Again I need dyno time but have not seen big gains in times and speed with a Scanmaster doing the numbers from 24psi to 30psi. This was on 110 leaded. My only tune tool is the MAF-T.

Well, since I am absolutely unfamiliar with the Holset beasts, then I'm going to have to go with dyno proof to draw conclusions... But, because of this, I will look long and hard at my turbine housing first if I don't reach the goal here. I have a great turbine wheel but small . I should have gone p-trim.

Dropping revs below 6000 between shifts would lose too much spool in my experience. I'm shifting at 8500 until I see where power falls off on the dyno. It does pull to 9k rpms easily but it is not a drag car per say.

This is my take on the whole journal bearing vs. ball bearing controversy. Many say that the bb option is just not worth it. But, say your shifting isn't absolutely optimum every time (we all are imperfect). This is where the BB shines... between shifts when you just realized theres a race going on. OR, you just couldn't grab that shift at the right rpm number on the track (where who knows what the he!! is on the line)...

 

[sweet97]

Matt(DSM-onster) I researched the cams. The HKS 272's have 213* duration at .050" lift with lift at the valves being .406"/.386". The Crowers I bought have 218*/216* duration and lifts are .425"/416". Lift helps across the rpm range while duration will change the rpm range to a different power band, in my case a bit higher, about 500rpm's.
The Crowers are VERY streetable and drop straight in just like the HKS. Buschur does not degree cams for his Stage 3 motors which I have. He only uses HKS and the Crowers.
Compared to the 272's I lost 2" of vacuum. Now I have 10" of vacuum instead of the 12" I had with the HKS. Idle is a bit lumpier. Sometimes the 272's had very little lope. Now there is a mean idle! Off boost response is also great so I see no loss of torque. The Crowers do have a flat torque curve so to speak but it's not low, just not peaky and then falling off. The FPx cams require dual springs. When I bought the Crowers I spoke to a guy at SBR who ran the FP4's I believe in his 2.0 and he said the idle was crappy. 220* duration and lifts around .400".
I use the JM SMIM. Bigger plenum than the Magnus and only $450. w/velocity stacks.
The holset flows 70lbs/min. but I am not sure about the turbine as I have also heard about the .55a/r. Of course the a/r is just a ratio that means nothing between different turbine housings from different families. I do bring my 950cc inj's close to 90* IDC at 30psi and wonder what 35psi would do to that number. I may have to raise the base fuel pressure from it's current 40psi-hose off.
I would not have 10,000rpm the goal but the most HP I could make. Go to www.crower.com the Crower 414's in a Buschur 2.0 and I think a BR580 turbo put down 550WHP at between 7000 and 7500rpm's. Get the 415's and try the RS60T and see if you can make the 500whp goal you want. You may have to change the turbo but your goal is quite accomplishable with rpm's much less than 10,000 rpm's which is really pushing the motor to a shorter life. It was difficult for me to read the boost but I think they did the 550HP @ 28psi. Torque was around 425lbs/ft.
The Holset turbine wheel is 2.753 inducer and 2.364 exducer. I have in my notes that the RS60T has an inducer of 2.56 and exducer of 2.23 on the hot side. Not sure what the P-trim size is but WOULD LIKE TO KNOW! Knowing what I do now I would have gone full Garret, maybe the GT35R with a T3 or even a T4 turbine. Would have to research that. Maybe next season! Mark
PS: Started with the 14b, of course, then the EVO III which I thought would be my limit. Then I got hooked by the 50 trim craze and an RS49 from AGP, then the RS60T-looked to good to be true at $699.(?). That died soon after due to a cheap DNP knock off exhaust manifold(welding slag broke off and ruined the turbine wheel) and while waiting for the replacement from Turbonetics 1 year warranty I came across the Holset and here I am. 3 turbo's with the Bullseye turbine. It's a quality turbine and beefy(13lbs) but a larger size turbine housing would be a great option.

 

[1SloColt]

The 76 trim p-trim inducer is 2.92", exducer is 2.542". It'd be really interesting to see what kinda numbers you put down sweet97, I'd like to see if you can output some decent torque. My friends FP3s idle like stock in his 2.0, though he runs an AEM so he can tune out the cams some. Fp4s are barely more aggressive than a FP3, just slightly more lift, so I don't know why they would idle so poorly in a 2.0.

 

[Tom N]

The (x) cams were not designed to be reving that high.

 

[dsm-onster]

The (x) cams were not designed to be reving that high.

Interesting. Where did you hear that. Here's Forced Performance.

FP says:

FPCam2
Compatible with stock springs. Similar to HKS 272 camshaft, but with a greater emphasis on top end power. Gives up a little bottom end torque to the HKS 272 cam and gains power higher in the RPM band.


FPCam2x
Dual valve springs recommended. This "x" version of the FPCam2 increases valve acceleration and valve dwell near max lift to increase torque and widen the power band. Similar to the FPCam3 but not specifically designed with 100mm stroke crankshafts in mind. ​

So here's it's not clear. I've emailed FP to determine what higher in the RPM band means. But no response yet... Should I PM?

The x version of each cam denotes a higher lift and a increased ramp rate. I am supposing no more or less duration. Therefore, the increased ramp rate, where the valve opens to a higher lift quicker, would allow the power band to come on earlier and go off later... The FP3X has been known to push the power band up really high well beyond 8000 rpms. Have a look at the above dyno results with Swordfish's setup. He maintained good power beyond the stock rev limit with a 1g intake mani. If he has a SMIM, he would not have lost the 4-5 lbs/min that his horsepower graph implied. Remember the 1g intake mani loses about 5 lbs/min beyond 6500 rpms...

Of course these are all theories and suppositions. I am looking for more evidence to push this build one way or another. So, thanx for the input.