Mikey's Single Scroll FP Black

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jan 20, 2011 | 01:20 PM

#121

JohnBradley

Evolved Member

iTrader: (30)

Joined: Jan 2004

Posts: 11,406

Likes: 78

From: Northwest

Quote:

Originally Posted by R/TErnie

You saw the gasket

The previous runs were on E85 or E98. The "record" run was done on E70... so there's obviously power left on the table there. Also... this time they ran more boost than last time, but last time... it didn't make much more power at higher boost levels.

So given that we're comparing apples to oranges... take my guestimate of 40whp with a grain of salt. I know it made 30whp more boost to boost with less ethanol content. :P

Aaron would be able to speak to this probably better than I would, since he was tuning both setups.

I think it was between E70 and E85. I do not believe E98 and even more timing would gain much, knock V was low and no knock with the upper rpm knock settings factory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full-Race Geoff

interesting project R/Ternie, are your ears still ringing from the sound of your air compressor and die grinder? - this is similar to a drag race team I know who removed the dividing wall from their 42R turbine housing (he said it took ~20hrs of porting).

This is a great test to show how "wall friction" and smallish a/r can effect the maximum possible flow rate. taking nothing away from your accomplishments, if i traded 1000rpm lag for top end power, i would want a lot more than 30hp if i understand the gains correctly (i could be wrong) Who built your long rod 2.4? 10:1 is a great setup for an ethanol build. are you thinking of testing with a tubular long runner singlescroll manifold?

Geoff, it seems it was really only 600 (judging by response time to 29.5psi) and somewhere between 40-45hp from the manifold. At 40psi we got one more psi out the top at peak power and I tacked in 4* more timing to get from 709 to 748. So depending on exactly where we were in total airflow the timing could have been the deciding factor vs the extra pound out the top. For reference it had been a 37psi spike falling to 32 or something at 709 and lower timing Vs the 40 falling to 33 and 4* extra.

Quote:

Originally Posted by R/TErnie

I agree. I'm a huge TS fan, and if there was a larger TS housing available for the stock appearing turbos.... we would've just bolted that on. Yes! The boundary layer plays a huge role... I had a really cool dump tube o2 housing that was a huge failure because of boundary layer issues. (wide but narrow path for dumptube) I did my Junior research project in college on Laminar Fluid Flow in a tube

Interesting stuff!

Mike picked up an estimated 40+whp for the loss in spool. The point wasn't to increase the powerband, the point was to set this record. Which we knew the trade offs of this modification would end up making more peak power than the previous setup. Stating the obvious I assume. lol.

English Racing built LR2.4... 10.5:1 CR.
I think Mike is in the middle of his move to VA... I would think a tubular single scroll manifold would make more power over the stock manifold....just from the collector. I ALSO think that the manifold would make quite a bit of a difference especially since one of the BIGGEST bottle-necks has been removed.

Really nice ear muffs and an electric die grinder

I turn the music way up and wait for the fiance to come in and tell me its time for bed.

And a bunch of my notes on improving VE

I compared Mikey's motor to another 2.4 Black we did and they make the same power at "lower" boost on pumpgas...Mikey at 19.5psi and the other one at 23.7psi though. Cams and stock head vs my setup reproduced on Mikey's 2.4.

aaron