BR, 2.4, high hp/high rpm build?
Evolving Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 291
Likes: 2
From: Belgium
I know, that's why i said that if any T3 turbo can do it, that would be the pt67-65.
Just saying that if the pt67-65 still makes power at 10k on a 2.0L engine it wouldn't necessarly be making power at 9k on a 2.4L engine.
Celica2evo said in his 2.1L build (built & tuned by Buschur) which uses the HTA3586 that it was meaningless to run his engine more than 8500rpm as it wasn't making anymore power... that's on a 2.1L engine, not a 2.4L
Just saying that if the pt67-65 still makes power at 10k on a 2.0L engine it wouldn't necessarly be making power at 9k on a 2.4L engine.
Celica2evo said in his 2.1L build (built & tuned by Buschur) which uses the HTA3586 that it was meaningless to run his engine more than 8500rpm as it wasn't making anymore power... that's on a 2.1L engine, not a 2.4L
Account Disabled
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx
http://www.kidzuku.com/StrokeOrNot.pdf This is quite good reading.
I can't answer questions on longetivity or anything else. This will be the first one we built and until I build it, test it and see how long it lives I can't say.
The 2.0 builds we've done will go over 10,000 rpm without an issue. The 2.1's technically will rev even higher than that and so far seem to be working out very well. The 2.3's I recommend a maximum rev limit of 8500 rpm.
The truth of the matter is 1 in about 4,000 EVO owners need an engine that goes to 10,000 rpm. Maybe even less than that. I believe in setting the rev limiter about 50 rpm higher than the RPM required to cross the finish line in 4th gear in the 1/4 mile. So if your car can do that at 7500 rpm then you need a rev limiter set about 7550.
The 2.0 builds we've done will go over 10,000 rpm without an issue. The 2.1's technically will rev even higher than that and so far seem to be working out very well. The 2.3's I recommend a maximum rev limit of 8500 rpm.
The truth of the matter is 1 in about 4,000 EVO owners need an engine that goes to 10,000 rpm. Maybe even less than that. I believe in setting the rev limiter about 50 rpm higher than the RPM required to cross the finish line in 4th gear in the 1/4 mile. So if your car can do that at 7500 rpm then you need a rev limiter set about 7550.
I can't answer questions on longetivity or anything else. This will be the first one we built and until I build it, test it and see how long it lives I can't say.
The 2.0 builds we've done will go over 10,000 rpm without an issue. The 2.1's technically will rev even higher than that and so far seem to be working out very well. The 2.3's I recommend a maximum rev limit of 8500 rpm.
The truth of the matter is 1 in about 4,000 EVO owners need an engine that goes to 10,000 rpm. Maybe even less than that. I believe in setting the rev limiter about 50 rpm higher than the RPM required to cross the finish line in 4th gear in the 1/4 mile. So if your car can do that at 7500 rpm then you need a rev limiter set about 7550.
The 2.0 builds we've done will go over 10,000 rpm without an issue. The 2.1's technically will rev even higher than that and so far seem to be working out very well. The 2.3's I recommend a maximum rev limit of 8500 rpm.
The truth of the matter is 1 in about 4,000 EVO owners need an engine that goes to 10,000 rpm. Maybe even less than that. I believe in setting the rev limiter about 50 rpm higher than the RPM required to cross the finish line in 4th gear in the 1/4 mile. So if your car can do that at 7500 rpm then you need a rev limiter set about 7550.
With that being said and since you have had the oppertunity to test or drive both what do you see the RPM's hitting in the 1/4 on the various set ups?
2.0, 2.3, 2.1
David, i understand what you say about the rev limiter, but dont we need the high rev limiter for the 1st gear when launching?
The thing you said is easy to calculate with one of the gear calculators out there.
I am also assuming that the cost could be less, like your 2.1 since the 4g64 block is much cheaper than the 4g63, right?
If this moves ahead and tested then it could definitely be the best street/strip solution out there and since is built by Buschur Racing then it will perform no matter what!
The thing you said is easy to calculate with one of the gear calculators out there.
I am also assuming that the cost could be less, like your 2.1 since the 4g64 block is much cheaper than the 4g63, right?
If this moves ahead and tested then it could definitely be the best street/strip solution out there and since is built by Buschur Racing then it will perform no matter what!
RPM through the traps isn't dependent on which engine you run, it's based on the HP/weight and trap speeds.
No, I don't agree that 1st gear needs to be wound out differently than 4th. The car doesn't know what gear it's in, the car makes usable power at X rpm through X rpm and the car needs to stay in that area as much as it can to get the job done.
EVO's are kind of unique because the way they are geared seems to work out perfectly with my explanation of the rev limiter. My Mustang on the other hand doesn't. For an EVO though I can't come up with a better example than I have for RPM/rev limiters.
The 4G64 blocks are cheaper used than 4G63's, then you have a high expense from the water pump/head gasket and such. You also need to buy a crank since there's no core being supplied for that either. The engine will be cheaper than building a 4g63 without a core but not by huge margins.
No, I don't agree that 1st gear needs to be wound out differently than 4th. The car doesn't know what gear it's in, the car makes usable power at X rpm through X rpm and the car needs to stay in that area as much as it can to get the job done.
EVO's are kind of unique because the way they are geared seems to work out perfectly with my explanation of the rev limiter. My Mustang on the other hand doesn't. For an EVO though I can't come up with a better example than I have for RPM/rev limiters.
The 4G64 blocks are cheaper used than 4G63's, then you have a high expense from the water pump/head gasket and such. You also need to buy a crank since there's no core being supplied for that either. The engine will be cheaper than building a 4g63 without a core but not by huge margins.
Dave,
You will find that the 2.4 can spool an open-scroll 76mm turbo (with .81 a/r) before 6500... twin scroll at 6k. I have all the info in one of my posts earlier this year. TONS of exhaust velocity.
The car made 800hp with a 76mm and 800hp with a 6262.
I'm sure Toplevel has another complete Long-block for sale if you need one.
You will find that the 2.4 can spool an open-scroll 76mm turbo (with .81 a/r) before 6500... twin scroll at 6k. I have all the info in one of my posts earlier this year. TONS of exhaust velocity.
The car made 800hp with a 76mm and 800hp with a 6262.
I'm sure Toplevel has another complete Long-block for sale if you need one.
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Finland
I know, that's why i said that if any T3 turbo can do it, that would be the pt67-65.
Just saying that if the pt67-65 still makes power at 10k on a 2.0L engine it wouldn't necessarly be making power at 9k on a 2.4L engine.
Celica2evo said in his 2.1L build (built & tuned by Buschur) which uses the HTA3586 that it was meaningless to run his engine more than 8500rpm as it wasn't making anymore power... that's on a 2.1L engine, not a 2.4L
Just saying that if the pt67-65 still makes power at 10k on a 2.0L engine it wouldn't necessarly be making power at 9k on a 2.4L engine.
Celica2evo said in his 2.1L build (built & tuned by Buschur) which uses the HTA3586 that it was meaningless to run his engine more than 8500rpm as it wasn't making anymore power... that's on a 2.1L engine, not a 2.4L
Since I'm doing the 2.4L, anyone interested in a good condition REBUILT Buschur Racing Stage 3 2.0 liter shortblock?? I'm going to have David go through it and sign off that it's in good shape - new bearings, ball hone the cylinder walls and new rings. Has Crower rods and JE pistons.
Shoot me a PM if interested.
Shoot me a PM if interested.
Engine parts came in today, they are NICE. The crank is a work of art. I can't just install it, so it's being hot tanked now, going to check the balance/check it for straightness and then take some measurements. I'm hoping it's as quality as it appears. The Eagle stuff was JUNK and has made me hesitant to use anything other than stock Mitsu cranks.
Engine parts came in today, they are NICE. The crank is a work of art. I can't just install it, so it's being hot tanked now, going to check the balance/check it for straightness and then take some measurements. I'm hoping it's as quality as it appears. The Eagle stuff was JUNK and has made me hesitant to use anything other than stock Mitsu cranks.
