Has anyone had any experience with both rods on the same set up? Curious of the differences that we're noticed and how you liked each one. Previously had turbo tuff rods until the car spun a bearing and interested in going to the Carrillos.

 

Carillo makes badass parts. I'd put money that they are close to equivalent with the turbo tuffs. They definitely are not the same as the cheapo chinese eagle or manley hbeams.

What are your power/torque goals, and target rpm range on what stroke?

 

no way you are gonna get an answer that proves anything. they are beyond a doubt great rods. if you like them try them.

 

It's easy to make a strong rod (e.g. Turbo Tuff)

It's easy to make a lightweight rod (e.g. rebranded Chinese H-beams)

It isn't easy to make a strong, lightweight rod (e.g. Carillo, Oliver, Arrow, etc.), which is a factor of design, manufacturing process, and metallurgy.

That being said, unless you're doing something to generate extraordinary stresses, a top-tier H-beam rod like Carillo should endure for the life of the engine.

 

Car was around the 700~ area on a 2.3L and 37r.
Going to a 2.0LR. Had a lot of issues with this last motor and kind of left a bad taste in my mouth.
Long story short got screwed over on a "virgin" block and a used set of rods and have had nothing but problems with this motor.
Now have a virgin block and crank sitting here.

 

This is a very good point. Thank you.

 

Exactly what Ted B said. And it doesn't appear you're going for super crazy 4 digit numbers. The carillos will do well.

 

Has anyone had experience between the two motor types?

 

What two motor types?

I've seen carrillo hbeams take 9,500rpm in a 377ci twin turbo LSX making 1850whp on C12 in a sand car through an albins transaxle and 935 cv's and 37" tall dyno tires (lots of parasitic loss). That car does wheelies at 135mph in the sand dunes with paddles on.

They're quality parts. I wouldn't hesitate to run them.

 

2.0LR vs the 2.3L
I assume the 2.3 will make quicker torque but is it really that noticeable?
Or is having the RPM more enjoyable?

Im going 2.0LR now but just curious about all of this. I definitely could have used the RPM to go through the traps at the track.

 

Doesn't really what you use imo once your past 800crank, unless your changing bearings yearly or earlier, its just going to suck.

 

300-500rpm faster boost threshold with 2.3 over 2.0. and yes, noticeable torque gains. You have to weigh the differences for yourself if you want faster trap speed, or more fun street car. You could also split the difference with an English Racing SLR2.2. The increase stroke will get quicker spool and more torque, but the 94mm crank can still rev over 9k with 153mm rods.

 

I've run both in cars that make over 1000hp. Never broke a turbo tuff....have broken several Carrillo H beams after a fair amount of abuse. They are great rods, but they aren't going to handle the same abuse at very high power levels. They are great for a 600-700hp car. I really don't even like the turbo tuff above 1000. We usually use aluminum up there.

 

Yes, I doubt Carrillo had the inertia and torque loading of a 1000hp 4-cyl in mind when designing their lightweight H-beam rods. They do make custom I-beams for extreme loads, although they don't advertise them, ostensibly because most street and race applications won't need them.

 

Which version? They offer three versions of the rod. They increase in price with strength. Pro A, Pro SA, and Pro H...