Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Saturday July 12, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Built Motor Discussion

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-07-2007, 03:10 PM   #26
Cosie Convert
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 13627
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Edinburgh UK
Vehicle:
96 Type RA
8.32@173mph Street Legal!

Default

I guess I'm not too far away when using funny fuels trapping at 161mph on an H pattern box, no flat shifting.

No Nitrous used on this run, 1st was all about wheelspin, 2nd gear hooked up and it took off faster than anything I have experienced to date then it started to misfire in 3rd and finally lifted the heads clean off the block in 4th, crossing the line on 1 cylinder !

Oh the fun you can have during R&D

That is a 500bhp Skyline in the other lane !


http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...02111749674272

Better resolution version but smaller

http://tinypic.com/player.php?v=54l1utt&s=1

Andy
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Cosie Convert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 05:06 PM   #27
Homemade WRX
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 33782
Join Date: Mar 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: 3MI Racing LLC
Vehicle:
96 bastard child
search FIRST, then PM!!!

Default

congrats andy!!

I look forward to seeing the video when I get home...work computer is still dial up
Homemade WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2007, 04:38 PM   #28
charliew
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 125304
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Crawford, TX.
Default head porting

A Phase II sonic thickness checker with an additional long small head probe is a little less than 900.00 if I remember correctly and a good homade flow quick flow bench is about 1200.00 to 1400.00 depending on where you get the vaccum motors and materials. Wittmer 25 and I are starting on our own heads and really appreciate Shvrdavid and everyone else's input. I'm going to be guessing but to do a reasonable mild port job not including the valve job and checking flow as you go takes about 30 hours with a good selection of expensive porting tools. Balancing the ports seems to be really time consuming. I have only been observing after building the bench and head holding fixture and getting all the porting stuff such as flap wheels, carbide cutters, straight and taper rolls and cross buffs. You will need lots of long arbors and lots of patience with a steady hand.
Charliew
charliew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2007, 04:49 PM   #29
kheff46
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 66739
Join Date: Jul 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Medina, Ohio
Vehicle:
2002 WRX wagon
silver

Default

subscribe!

finally people with true aspirations for our community(and not natural aspiratins!

--keith
kheff46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2007, 04:55 PM   #30
IllNastyImpreza
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36333
Join Date: May 2003
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: East Kingston NH
Vehicle:
DIY project: life
I need more TIME!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charliew View Post
A Phase II sonic thickness checker with an additional long small head probe is a little less than 900.00 if I remember correctly and a good homade flow quick flow bench is about 1200.00 to 1400.00 depending on where you get the vaccum motors and materials. Wittmer 25 and I are starting on our own heads and really appreciate Shvrdavid and everyone else's input. I'm going to be guessing but to do a reasonable mild port job not including the valve job and checking flow as you go takes about 30 hours with a good selection of expensive porting tools. Balancing the ports seems to be really time consuming. I have only been observing after building the bench and head holding fixture and getting all the porting stuff such as flap wheels, carbide cutters, straight and taper rolls and cross buffs. You will need lots of long arbors and lots of patience with a steady hand.
Charliew

wow, I did't know it was so expensive to get started

I guess I might just do some more reasearch, and just grind down as much I can can "safely"... take some pictures and ask advice
IllNastyImpreza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2007, 08:37 PM   #31
mikeis300
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 149526
Join Date: May 2007
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: portland metro area
Vehicle:
2002 aps dr65 hybrid
9.1x1 built block/heads

Default

you can call esx and they will be more than happy to tell you about their 2400hp 2.5 fully closed deck w/tit sleaves, meth, bult heads, ect...
mikeis300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 08:31 PM   #32
700hp
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 104164
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: columbus ohio
Vehicle:
'95 Impreza 800+hp
9.1 152mph

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeis300 View Post
you can call esx and they will be more than happy to tell you about their 2400hp 2.5 fully closed deck w/tit sleaves, meth, bult heads, ect...
I hope you are kidding.
700hp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 08:49 PM   #33
datrip
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 95304
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
Red

Default

LOL, that will be the day. 700hp, what are your exact numbers and did you use nitrous at all?
A question to all, is the lower disp of the 2.0 but added with a stroker kit making 2.2 or a stroked 2.2 a better option for a shot at 1000+ WHP than a 2.5 or a stroked 2.5l? I mean for a Dyno queen it seems the 2.0 should do as well as any but with more lag, unless enough laughing gas was added along with meth.
Cosie Convert, nice video man what was the times on that run as I couldnt make them out...even with the engine failure?
datrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 09:05 PM   #34
700hp
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 104164
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: columbus ohio
Vehicle:
'95 Impreza 800+hp
9.1 152mph

Default

^ I made 678whp and 634 trq on my old sti. My new car has a fully built 3 litre H6 motor that I hope to make over 800hp at the wheels with. not quite 1k but we will see how everything goes. I am getting dyno'd this weekend in st louis at Axis power racing by Clark turner. If you don't see anything on monday about it than you know the trip wasn't a success.

Alex
700hp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 09:24 PM   #35
Homemade WRX
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 33782
Join Date: Mar 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: 3MI Racing LLC
Vehicle:
96 bastard child
search FIRST, then PM!!!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by datrip View Post
A question to all, is the lower disp of the 2.0 but added with a stroker kit making 2.2 or a stroked 2.2 a better option for a shot at 1000+ WHP than a 2.5 or a stroked 2.5l? I mean for a Dyno queen it seems the 2.0 should do as well as any but with more lag, unless enough laughing gas was added along with meth.
simply put, [cliche] there is no replacement for displacement [/cliche] unless the smaller engine can outflow the bigger engine based on VE's and rpm
and for a drag/top end motor you are going in the wrong direction with all that stroke talk

Last edited by Homemade WRX; 11-13-2007 at 12:24 AM.
Homemade WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 09:40 PM   #36
MartinSTi05
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 145145
Join Date: Apr 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Rockford, Il
Vehicle:
2006 wrx STi

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Homemade WRX View Post
simply put, [cliche] there is no replacement for displacement [/cliche]
and for a drag/top end motor you are going in the wrong direction with all that stroke talk
I don't know if you would care to let us in as to why that is the case. My theories revolve around the fact that extra stroke also means more piston speed, and the fact that a larger bore helps with un-shrouding.
MartinSTi05 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 09:46 PM   #37
Homemade WRX
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 33782
Join Date: Mar 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: 3MI Racing LLC
Vehicle:
96 bastard child
search FIRST, then PM!!!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinSTi05 View Post
I don't know if you would care to let us in as to why that is the case. My theories revolve around the fact that extra stroke also means more piston speed, and the fact that a larger bore helps with un-shrouding.
more stroke means a higher MEAN piston speed, yes...
at what rpm is the piston dwelling/rod ratio happiest or most efficient? what cylinder flow conditions are changed with a given short rod vs long rod setup?

I do agree 100% with the bigger bore helps with deshrouding/improving headflow but also can hinder combustion speed...so its a balancing game to find ideal.

some will argue that short rod's inceased dwell at bdc allows the charge to build in the cylinder and larger displacement (in our case) will give more power...others will arger that having better dwell at tdc allowing for better scavenging and better/more precise cam timing at higher speeds, less frictional loss from rod angularity, high rpm redline (do to that piston accelerations) and more constant volume combustion will make more power...
guess it depends on how you want to make power

I'm just trying to do more with less...I'm an engineer and love efficiency

Last edited by Homemade WRX; 11-12-2007 at 10:01 PM.
Homemade WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 10:53 PM   #38
datrip
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 95304
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
Red

Default

That is my goal, more with less. Then again with any build one wants the best for his/her buck. So is the short throw better for the 1000hp goal or is the longer? Seems like the longer would have a heck of a time at high rpms, which is where I would expect to see 1000hp come in at.
datrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 11:04 PM   #39
Homemade WRX
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 33782
Join Date: Mar 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: 3MI Racing LLC
Vehicle:
96 bastard child
search FIRST, then PM!!!

Default

well...that's what I'm trying to find out...just have hit some bumps in my build process.
if only my pockets were deeper

give me a 6 weeks or so for my 35r setup...it'll be a nice x-mas present/b-day present to myself
Homemade WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 11:08 PM   #40
datrip
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 95304
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
Red

Default

Now thats the kind of presents im talking about but what size engine are you mating that 35r to? 2.0l with 35r is some serious lag, then again 2.2 isnt alot better but you could feel the difference of the few hundred rpm spool up difference. This a DD or an all out race car your building?
datrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 11:11 PM   #41
Homemade WRX
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 33782
Join Date: Mar 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: 3MI Racing LLC
Vehicle:
96 bastard child
search FIRST, then PM!!!

Default

no, I'll be right around the same size as a EJ257 actually...and my rod ratio is longer than anything out on the market

most "long rods" that you find are actually 1.66-1.677:1 pending which builder you choose (be it there are reasons and limitations for that.) and an EJ20 is 1.74...

Last edited by Homemade WRX; 11-13-2007 at 12:22 AM.
Homemade WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 11:14 PM   #42
datrip
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 95304
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
Red

Default

intersting, 2.2 bored to 2.5? I like the sound of that, should be a low end tq monster with killer spool
datrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 11:15 PM   #43
datrip
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 95304
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
Red

Default

Will upper RPM power be there though? Can the right cam gain that much ground?
datrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2007, 12:20 AM   #44
Homemade WRX
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 33782
Join Date: Mar 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: 3MI Racing LLC
Vehicle:
96 bastard child
search FIRST, then PM!!!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by datrip View Post
intersting, 2.2 bored to 2.5? I like the sound of that, should be a low end tq monster with killer spool
I never said that...I'm doing something rather off the wall...

as for the other commment, an engine is simply and air pump and I've designed on that is known to work better at higher rpms...getting the cams and manifold dialed in will be key part to making it breath though.
I've already got my base cams chosen and am running cam gears and no avcs just for helping to find a more ideal LSA.
Homemade WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2007, 01:32 AM   #45
NITROS
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 41561
Join Date: Aug 2003
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Chicago
Vehicle:
04 GT3076 2.1
Stroker = Broken 3rd

Default

P&L put down 9xx on their dragcar before the heads(i think) got messed up. They are still working on it.
NITROS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2007, 02:00 AM   #46
hotrod
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 14141
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: 13.239@102.85 @ 5800 ft on 13T
Vehicle:
2002 Impreza WRX
e85forum.net

Default

Quote:
well, I think finding "what works" and what doesn't is still where the subie community is right now. We really only have 5 years focused on them stateside (neglecting playing with 2.5RS's pre-02) and Rigoli and MRT are the only major shops that I can think of that had been trying to make monstrous power (and MRT not so much, they still primarily rallied).
the 4g63/4 community has had 20+ years of running basicallyeither a 2.0 or s 2.3...a 1.7 or a 1.5 rod ratio...that then makes it fairly easy to focus on what cam profiles and manifolds work well together on the given motors and for what purpose. They also really have been large on making big power longer.
I would have to agree with that generalization. The Subaru community not too many years ago thought a PE1820 turbo was big, then GT35R etc. But we still are not (in general) running the monster turbos that some of the high end Honda's etc. are running.

More importantly we are still learning how to keep the basic engine alive.
Oiling and bearing problems seem to be the current barrier for many high power builds. The basic block and internals are capable of going to 1000 hp with top end rods etc. But the thing that differentiates us from the Honda, DSM and other groups is the fine details.

Still looking for the right porting/cam combination.
Still looking for the right piston/ring package
Still looking for the means to reliably run the engine to 9,500 rpm with big boost.
Still looking for someone to manufacture a true racing quality ignition system for the engines that run coil on plug, that does not cost a small fortune.
Detonation control is still a challenge for many, and I am sure there are some tricks left to be learned in that area, aside from just throwing fuel octane at the problem.

Still limitations on large injector availablity as many stop at saturated injector sizes instead of going to the big peak and hold injectors needed to make serious power. You need to deliver over 350 l/hr of gasoline to make 1000 hp. Not many have the fuel system to do that.

Tuning options are maturing with some of the top end stand alone packages and open source and commercial reflashes reaching the point that they can really push the tune to the edge.

Still issues in the drive train regarding transmission, clutches, drive lines and axles gear sets to make and control 1000+ hp.

Once you get into the 1000 hp range and can keep the engine and drive train alive for more than 1 or 2 passes then you need to work on basic chassis setup which most folks are simply ignoring in favor of big power numbers.

Larry

Last edited by hotrod; 11-13-2007 at 02:55 AM.
hotrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2007, 05:32 PM   #47
charliew
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 125304
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Crawford, TX.
Default 1000hp

I'm having a hard time trying to understand how people can try to compare a transverse mounted application to an inline application. I've always thought the 20% drivetrain loss in an inline drive train for performance applications was too much handicap to compete with transverse mounted applications. Sooo how can 1000 in a subaru ever hope to compete with 800 or 900 or 1000 in an evo?
Charliew
charliew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2007, 06:56 AM   #48
wrxsti.l
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 156973
Join Date: Aug 2007
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Vehicle:
2002 ADM WRX STi
STi Black/Blue

Default

For all those asking, TRP (Tony Rigoli Performance) has not hit 1000whp on their cars (not on any cars they drag anyhoo).

But you don't really "1000hp" to run good times anyhoo - one of the EJ20 cars ran a 8.341 1/4 mile and "only" had 618whp

BTW, the most popular (or at least abundant) dyno in Australia is the Dyno Dynamics 4WD "rolling road" dyno - not the hub dynos that are popular in the States. Basically it is hard to get an accurate reading with high hp on these dynos. However if you use those 1/4 m calculators around, you can get a rough idea of the power Rigoli is really making (at least 750whp - but I can only guestimate the weight of the car, as I am sure it is lightened).

Anyhoo, just thought I'd clear that one up
wrxsti.l is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2007, 08:01 AM   #49
700hp
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 104164
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: columbus ohio
Vehicle:
'95 Impreza 800+hp
9.1 152mph

Default

^ Not quite true. The Rigoli's for some reason seem to like posting low dyno #'s. Anyone will tell you that you cant go 8.3 in the qtr with 618 hp in a 2500lb vehicle. I talked to Sam Rigoli on the phone and he said that when they were running these times they had upped the boost on this turbo from when they had dyno'd and then added a 200hp shot of NAWZ. He estimated they were putting out somewhere in he 1100 flywheel hp range to achieve these times.
700hp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2007, 09:51 AM   #50
wrxsti.l
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 156973
Join Date: Aug 2007
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Vehicle:
2002 ADM WRX STi
STi Black/Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 700hp View Post
^ Not quite true. The Rigoli's for some reason seem to like posting low dyno #'s.
Not at all. They dyno them on dyno dynamic awd dynos - which are 10-20% less then hub dynos at best. Unsure if you have used a DD dyno, but you can loose 100whp just by strapping it down wrong. Then you can loose another 100hp from traction problems with high hp cars coming onto boost violently. Thats an easy 200hp that the DD can be out with before looking at anything else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 700hp View Post
Anyone will tell you that you cant go 8.3 in the qtr with 618 hp in a 2500lb vehicle.
My point exactly. As I said, the DD dynos are not good for giving an accurate power figure - hence TRP make much more then the DD results suggest. Also, I can tell you now that the car that ran 8.3 WAS NOT factory weight. It had a lot of weight reduction going on. From memory, it was gutted, no interior carpet, panels or seats, no sound deadening, one seat, etc. Then there is the removal of engine parts no longer needed.

Maybe not with 618, but with weight reduction to a point well below 2500lbs and some nos, you wouldn't need too much more power anyhoo

Quote:
Originally Posted by 700hp View Post
I talked to Sam Rigoli on the phone and he said that when they were running these times they had upped the boost on this turbo from when they had dyno'd and then added a 200hp shot of NAWZ. He estimated they were putting out somewhere in he 1100 flywheel hp range to achieve these times.
With the turbo sizes they are running there is no wonder

Still, even with nos, 1100hp at the fly is only about 900whp (give or take 50hp).
wrxsti.l is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any clips of how knocks sounded like on a EJ motor? kgb Engine Management & Tuning 22 10-14-2010 07:24 AM
Timing Belt needed - any EJ motor, used preferable Fitz New England Impreza Club Forum -- NESIC 19 12-31-2007 08:40 PM
any one know what size threads the head bolts are on a EJ motor mellow65 North West Impreza Club Forum -- NWIC 2 11-01-2007 04:49 PM
AMS evo hits 1000+whp.. chadblock Proven Power Bragging 114 07-22-2006 01:03 AM
WTB: SOHC passenger side front timing belt cover off any EJ motor DeusExMachina New England Impreza Club Forum -- NESIC 6 08-29-2004 08:29 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.