Notices
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results Discuss vendor and member dyno tuning techniques, results and graphs.

Buschur Racing's first 2.4 L engine build, results inside.

Old Jan 7, 2010, 04:40 PM
  #16  
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (38)
 
ChrisCarey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 1,956
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
It is indeed the same connecting rod, but the stroke is 100mm compared to 88mm in the 2.0l so the rod ratio changes from 1.70 in the 2.0l to 1.50 in the 2.4l platform...
Old Jan 7, 2010, 04:44 PM
  #17  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
l2r99gst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 3,499
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by ChrisCarey
It is indeed the same connecting rod, but the stroke is 100mm compared to 88mm in the 2.0l so the rod ratio changes from 1.70 in the 2.0l to 1.50 in the 2.4l platform...
Yuck. OK, just wasn't sure if Dave wasn't using a longer rod or not.
Old Jan 7, 2010, 04:46 PM
  #18  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (20)
 
red03evo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fairfax
Posts: 982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good stuff David.

Congrats to the owner of the car.
Old Jan 7, 2010, 04:50 PM
  #19  
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (38)
 
ChrisCarey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 1,956
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by l2r99gst
Yuck. OK, just wasn't sure if Dave wasn't using a longer rod or not.
He certainly could be sir, I'll let him chime in regarding this particular build. The information I provided was with the standard rod length and 100mm stroke...
Old Jan 7, 2010, 04:55 PM
  #20  
Newbie
 
galant306m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ChrisCarey
It is indeed the same connecting rod, but the stroke is 100mm compared to 88mm in the 2.0l so the rod ratio changes from 1.70 in the 2.0l to 1.50 in the 2.4l platform...
Ill stop talking! (non sarcastic remark)

I should explain more i guess when i talk, just know when i ordered new rods they were the same for the 63 and the 64 so by saying different crank the stroke would have to be different, if that makes more sense?
Old Jan 7, 2010, 05:12 PM
  #21  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (15)
 
xRoguex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,666
Received 11 Likes on 9 Posts
100 mm manley billet crank is used.
Old Jan 7, 2010, 05:45 PM
  #22  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
norcalSRTrida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: pleasanton, ca
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ch53avitech
I'm guessing the MAP products were already on the customers car.

The spool rate is really impressive. I'd like to see a FP HTA86 or similar on in there. Someone is going to be a happy customer.
coming from an SRT where we had a 2.4...no you dont. turbos of that size/nature need a higher rev than 7500 imo in order to be competitive.

i had a 6262 on my 2.4 srt. 7500 wasnt cuttin it.. 8k was much better. but w/ the Rod angle ratio the way it is, 8k is pushing it kinda...

strokers are good for these stock-frame style turbos. for these 70+ lb/min turbos id stick to a long rod 2.2 or 2.0 setup and take advantage of the power up top...
just my 2c coming from a background similar to this block/rev limit.
Old Jan 7, 2010, 06:52 PM
  #23  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (53)
 
David Buschur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Received 32 Likes on 14 Posts
This build should be good for 9,000 rpm with the billet crank and parts chosen.

At this power level on our dyno the car will run 10.80-10.90's with a good driver and traction.

As I mentioned, I wasn't having the best of luck with the fuel. I did, I'd guess, 12 dyno runs in 3rd gear and then did one in 4th. The knock got worse as I guessed it would. I dumped some old race gas we had just to see if it would help at al and pulled one more time in 4th, knock counts dropped to nothing and this is the resulting sheet. I didn't pull it past 7500 because with the timing curve that was in it, the power was starting to fall.

Next week, Monday, we are going to drain both sides of the tank completely and then put some good fresh fuel in it from Shell here and throw it back on the dyno.

I'd really like to see what the car makes at 30 psi if I can get it there. Honestly, I don't think it's going to make it to 30 psi but we will see.

There are many reasons a car can't run high boost on pump gas and this car has some parts on it I don't normally use in our builds. Right now 25 psi was pushing it. Even at 25 psi if I can get the timing into a curve I like the power will climb and I am guessing substantially based on how low the timing is now.

BTW, there will be no reason for a build at this power level to go to the 9,000 rpm that it is expected to hold up to. I will rev it higher if the need arrises when it is tuned again.
Old Jan 7, 2010, 06:52 PM
  #24  
EvoM Moderator
iTrader: (10)
 
scheides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,827
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 6 Posts
Crazy that boost doesn't seem to build much sooner than on a 2.0L, but torque is through the roof! Badass power and torque for pump gas.
Old Jan 7, 2010, 06:55 PM
  #25  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
kouzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
congrats on the build guys!

cant wait to see this block on a big turbo and stand alone!
Old Jan 7, 2010, 07:08 PM
  #26  
Newbie
 
galant306m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
may i ask how you did the timing? I need good way to check mine and see if it is right.
Old Jan 7, 2010, 07:18 PM
  #27  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Gordian79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rockland
Posts: 839
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good stuff.I never understood why people are so obssesed with how high a stroker revs if its making peak power at xxxx rpm why should you rev way past it.You always want to keep your motor pulling towards peak power going down the track.for sure you dont want it where power is on the decline.
Old Jan 8, 2010, 06:46 AM
  #28  
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (22)
 
tscompusa2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: pa
Posts: 5,375
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
OMG @ those numbers on 25 psi and pumpgas/mix

Last edited by tscompusa2; Jan 8, 2010 at 06:49 AM.
Old Jan 8, 2010, 07:20 AM
  #29  
Newbie
 
nabilsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: lebanon
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what are the numbers?? I cant see the graph its black on my screen, you got me all excited guys.
Old Jan 8, 2010, 07:25 AM
  #30  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
SloRice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: West Chester, OH
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
444wtq, 433whp, peak torque at 4000RPM, 25psi tapering to 22-23psi, 93 octane.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Buschur Racing's first 2.4 L engine build, results inside.



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:12 AM.