K24/K20 vs. 4G64 max rpms???
The problem with all this garbage is that people sit on here and argue about engineering calculations and garbage. I'm in school for engineering...it's all bull**** and no one knows what they're talking about because no one has ever done with they just sit around and read books all day and do a few supporting experiments.
That's great for an estimate but it doesn't tell you what the motor can do. I'll let you know what happens when I put a FP Black or hta35r on my 2.5L and have a reason to take it to 9k.
The last time my car was on a BW S366 we took it to 82-8300 ish on the dyno. It saw 8500 on the street with no ill effects - so I'll see when I get to the next milestone. If a rod comes through the block at 9k+ then obviously a limit has been found.
That's great for an estimate but it doesn't tell you what the motor can do. I'll let you know what happens when I put a FP Black or hta35r on my 2.5L and have a reason to take it to 9k.
The last time my car was on a BW S366 we took it to 82-8300 ish on the dyno. It saw 8500 on the street with no ill effects - so I'll see when I get to the next milestone. If a rod comes through the block at 9k+ then obviously a limit has been found.
Supporting Experiments...
well i read the whloe thread up to the part where everyone started arguing about swapping motors and bashing on each other, but i have no way shape or form know anything about this but a thought came up in my mind while reading would the compression of the two motors have any effect? Just saying my .02 i really have not the slightest clue.. ahahah from what ive been reading it seem that the honda motors are running a higher compression??
well i read the whloe thread up to the part where everyone started arguing about swapping motors and bashing on each other, but i have no way shape or form know anything about this but a thought came up in my mind while reading would the compression of the two motors have any effect? Just saying my .02 i really have not the slightest clue.. ahahah from what ive been reading it seem that the honda motors are running a higher compression??
I believe Mikeys LR2.4 is a 10:1 CR anyways which is pretty high. Vettes are NA and I think the new ones run 11.5:1 just to give you an idea.
Yeah the Hondas run a higher CR because it gives them more power but I doubt the increased cylinder pressure has any affect on RPM, I mean an NA or lightly boosted K series running 12.5:1 is gonna have a high cylinder pressure but so is a 4g64 running 30psi of boost.
I believe Mikeys LR2.4 is a 10:1 CR anyways which is pretty high. Vettes are NA and I think the new ones run 11.5:1 just to give you an idea.
I believe Mikeys LR2.4 is a 10:1 CR anyways which is pretty high. Vettes are NA and I think the new ones run 11.5:1 just to give you an idea.
The problem with all this garbage is that people sit on here and argue about engineering calculations and garbage. I'm in school for engineering...it's all bull**** and no one knows what they're talking about because no one has ever done with they just sit around and read books all day and do a few supporting experiments.
You have a lot to learn and many more books to read.
The difference has been stated already. The cylinder head. The valvetrain does't hurt either!
Last edited by R/TErnie; Jun 18, 2010 at 12:14 PM.
Anyways back on topic. How would the head flow keep the bottom end together at higher rpms? Thats is the only real differnce anyone has mensioned.
Last edited by MR Turco; Jun 18, 2010 at 12:31 PM.
Heres a interesting point, k24 dont make tq like a 4g64 does.
Also I just decided to do a little vid searching for turbo k24's and they dont make power like a 4g64 does. At 30psi on a bw 368 a k24 made 714whp and 551wtq. Now it doesnt say if there running race gas or e85 but people hit 700awhp on smaller turbos than that. Aaron made over 700awhp with a 35r series turbo.
Also I just decided to do a little vid searching for turbo k24's and they dont make power like a 4g64 does. At 30psi on a bw 368 a k24 made 714whp and 551wtq. Now it doesnt say if there running race gas or e85 but people hit 700awhp on smaller turbos than that. Aaron made over 700awhp with a 35r series turbo.
...and sure I'll read books all day long, I'll bull**** my way through college with A's because none of the moron's know anything. Math is "theory" based and applied to something which tends to yield reliable results but it isn't perfect and isnt exact - ESPECIALLY in cases where you have 100 different variables, like this.
In this case, there are so many varialbe's that you can change that NOTHING is going to prove you can rev your motor XXXX rpm besides getting a round-a-bout safe number. But what will is when I put my car on the dyno and do it - just like everyone questions the stroker motors being good to ~8k instead of calculating it before I put it on, I rev'ed it until I felt like stopping.
The only way you know for sure that something will do it, is to see it be done
Headflow isn't the main discussion though, If it becomes unefficient it's going to stop making power, not make a rod come through the block for the most part. Now the valvetrain could do that but the real argument wasn't based upon that, everyone just bases it upon piston speed and that at x amount of rpm it's going to fail.
Last edited by MR Turco; Jun 21, 2010 at 05:04 AM.
Stock motor is still holding strong.
My FP Black mysteriously took a crap but everything is repaired and I'm taking my down time to make a few upgrade changes. Even though its already been achieved I would still like to break into the 9's with my stock block setup if possible. I'll be back out at the end of July.This is a very informative thread. I plan on going with a 2.4LR when I'm done with my stock block.
No **** the valvetrain doesn't hurt. You're going to need one rev'ving over 9k. Look at everyother stroker thread and see if the argument is the cylinder head.
...and sure I'll read books all day long, I'll bull**** my way through college with A's because none of the moron's know anything. Math is "theory" based and applied to something which tends to yield reliable results but it isn't perfect and isnt exact - ESPECIALLY in cases where you have 100 different variables, like this.
In this case, there are so many varialbe's that you can change that NOTHING is going to prove you can rev your motor XXXX rpm besides getting a round-a-bout safe number. But what will is when I put my car on the dyno and do it - just like everyone questions the stroker motors being good to ~8k instead of calculating it before I put it on, I rev'ed it until I felt like stopping.
...and sure I'll read books all day long, I'll bull**** my way through college with A's because none of the moron's know anything. Math is "theory" based and applied to something which tends to yield reliable results but it isn't perfect and isnt exact - ESPECIALLY in cases where you have 100 different variables, like this.
In this case, there are so many varialbe's that you can change that NOTHING is going to prove you can rev your motor XXXX rpm besides getting a round-a-bout safe number. But what will is when I put my car on the dyno and do it - just like everyone questions the stroker motors being good to ~8k instead of calculating it before I put it on, I rev'ed it until I felt like stopping.
The only way you know for sure that something will do it, is to see it be done - therefore this discussion is pointless because everyones just beating eachother off on how many equations they can look up on google or how "much" they know.
Headflow isn't the main discussion though, If it becomes unefficient it's going to stop making power, not make a rod come through the block for the most part. Now the valvetrain could do that but the real argument wasn't based upon that, everyone just bases it upon piston speed and that at x amount of rpm it's going to fail.
