3240

That's actually a pretty good number for 91 octane at 22 psi boost for such a large turbo.. that's the good thng about a stroker..

FYI, if you're not making power at 8000rpms (your graphs show that), why do you want to go there ? Gearing ?? I really do not understand why people like high rpms with the associated increase in risk..

Like you mentioned, what's so bad about making 500hp at 5200rpms ??

Most of the track evos (I mean track.. circuit tracks ) run 2.2 and they ran max of 8000rpms for longevity .. again .. if there's no reason to go there, then don't go there

And you just made my day by putting up that chart .. as I'm thinking of going big or going home !!

 

3240,
Based on the above post - I think its safe to assume that you do not realize those numbers are impossible and that Torque, HP and RPM are all mathematically and directly related.................and no offense but I DID puke over your Quest for a few hundred RPM and I think 94AWDcoupe was actually just a sympathetic puker.

JDB

 

So what's your magic formula? Prove to me that the numbers are impossible intead of spewing (puke joke) meaningless garbage.


I'm not after a couple of hundred RPM's. I'd like to see if 8500 is possible vs the 7500 that I run today. That's fairly significant. The purpose of this post is to learn. If 8500 rpm's isn't going to work then I'm not going to do it. Again, I'm just rying to learn. I've spent 7 months having this car built and have enjoyed it and I like to continuing pushing the limits a bit to see what can be accomplished. The crank being built for me is going to be knife-edged, thermal treated, nitrite treated, balanced, etc. (RNR, chime in.) Even if I don't increase the rev limit this seems like a worthwhile addition to a built motor.

Again, please feel free to tear apart my dyno charts. I know what dyno's vary which is why I included a near stock Evo run (for comparison sake). If the numbers are impossible, and you may be right, explain why?

 

Fourced,

While you're at please explain why the SCC tested Toda Evo dyno chart is also a mathematical impossibility. It put down to the wheels running a 3037 turbo:

-------------SCC TODA Evo (3037 turbo) ----------My Toda Evo (3240 turbo)
--------------------HP Torque ---------------------------HP Torque
At 3500 rpms--- 170 225 ------------------------------130 200
At 4500 rpms--- 275 330 ------------------------------290 330
At 5000 rpms ---350 375 ------------------------------450 480

Wow! The "math" looks almost identical. When you consider the fact that these were done on different days with different dynos I'd say that you're wrong. The math looks good. Prove me wrong.

 

This is rediculous. You want to know if it works or not. This weekened through next wee Boost Solutions is turning up the rev limiter to 8500 and tuning the car on there 2.4L. So far at 7500rpms and not tuning the AEM and not tuning the cams gears and with not using there NOS they made over 700whp. Once this is all done they are planning to hit the 900-1000whp mark. All this done all the way up to 8500rpms. There is a post in there forum talking about it. So lets just find out and go from there. Personally i am not a professional tuner like David or a awsome machinest like Darkhorse but its hard for me to believe that you wont be able to rev out to 8500rpms with a properly built stroker kit.

Darkhorse made a very good point about the figure skater. What size pistons are you running with that 100mm crank? How square is your setup? You have to run like 87mm pistons to get to 2.38 liters or what you would call a 2.4 right? So thats what .60 over pistons? And everything has been blueprinted and balanced right? You have you head fully built correct?

All i can say is i cant wait to see if Boost Solutions proves everybody wrong or blows everything up. We will find out soon!!!

Chris

 

The dimensions of the kit are posted on the Toda web site. The head is a stage ??? buily by AMS (I think that they use Forrestor). The engine is fully built balanced and blueprinted. Every spec and dimension was recorded by Kleemann as they put it together, it took them months just to build the engine.


What's so ridiculous about this? I talk to George all the time and have sourced many parts from him. His advice has been invaluable. He does agree that 8500rpm's isn't a problem but I'm hoping to find someone from the DSM community who'd tried it on a 2.3l stroker to get their input. So far no luck so it's all talk either way. I hope the Boost Solutions dyno pull goes well, but a couple of dyno pulls doesn't mean that the engine will last for more than a couple of runs. I'm still undecided, it'd be great to hear from someone who's tried it and been running it for awhile.

Your last sentence sums up my concern which is the original reason for my post.

 

When I drove the One-Lap car at Pueblo and PPIR the lag compaired to "regular" altitudes was very noticable. One day in Kansas it spooled very fast the next day in Co. "WTF happened to the car!"

Are you dyno numbers corrected? The correction factor works well for HP but is a bit generous for torque. That's because we get hurt more on the top-end (hp) and the correction seems to be set for correcting that. My car made 338hp on 91 which is in line for a sea-level car with my mods but my corrected torque is 360lbft which is a little high in comparison. A bit but maybe relevent

Either way nice numbers I don't know if it's worth spinning it that high (8k) at altitude, it depends how soon you run out of turbo up here in the thin air

gimme' a ride some day?

 

Chronohunter,
The correction factor is 1.24 which may be high, who knows. I also posted my dyno pull from when the car was nearly stock (boost control set at 21psi) in order to provide a good baseline for comparison sake. The correction factor was about the same for almost all three dyno pulls that I've posted. You're right about altitude, it makes a huge difference even in forced induction cars. I have a supercharged Benz that I've run in the 1/4 at Bandimere and in Detroit. Altitude costs me a full second in the 1/4 on that car.

Anytime you'd like to go for a ride send me a PM and we'll meet up. I'm going to try and get up to Bandimere next Wednesday if I can.

 

HP = (rpm x torque) divided by 5252.

It is impossible for one engine to make twice the torque as another at a given RPM yet both engines make essentially the same HP at that same RPM.

The numbers are seriously flawed. Thats all I'm saying.

As for the Puke Joke, It just seems so senseless to take these "MAX ALLOWABLE RPM" claims as "gospel truth" when they are ALL just "guesstimates" and they ALL have the same PISTON SPEED @ X RPM and THE PISTON SPEED is the real killer anyhow.

None are really tested @ the RPM you want for the life expectancy you want.

"Toss" load on the rods is extreme and is heavily influenced by piston and pin weight but "Crank Strength" is the factor that keeps being thrown around and as 94AWDcoupe was pointing out - 100mm is 100mm.

Piston Speed with a 100mm crank will be 5,249 FPM @ 8000 RPM. Of course Its doable, but since some people rate things on the ragged edge and others rate things conservatively, its just foolish to even compare the numbers.

JDB

 

If you get one thing out of this thread I hope it is that the internet while wonderful and very useful can be a very bad source for information. If you are constantly talking to George at BS why don't you just call him and ask him for his advice on the subject and follow it?

Your current dyno chart shows a good amount of power drop off, revving to 8200 will not make it better. So my question is without any drama not trying to flame or anything why do you want to move the rev limiter vs shifting into 5th? 5th is seamless when you shift fast. You will not lose anything.

 

Geo,
You make a good point. Power might drop off to the point that higher revs actually hurt 1/4 mile performance vs shifting into 5th. I have spoken with George about this, he's a proponent of reving a properly built stroker to 8500 rpms but he might change his mind after seeing my latest dyno chart.

Fourced,
Chronohunter pointed out the fact that altitude correction factors while fairly accurate for HP rating tend to inflate torque ratings. This might explain why the torque numbers seem high

Thanks for all of the input.

 

Oh wow that is a good point i didnt even look at that. Yea if you are dropping off power top end already raising the rev limiter really wouldnt help much. In my case i must raise the rev limiter becouse im not hitting peak torque and power until redline. Damn 2.0..HAHA.. JK! Well i hope you will find the answers you are looking for soon enough.

ANd Geo hope i didnt affend you earlier when i made that comment. Its nice to see you guys getting more involved in these forums. Maybe its just me?? But i have noticed you posting more on these kind of things?

Chris

 

[QUOTE=94AWDcoupe]Okay let me explain it to you one more time. No matter who you buy a 100mm crank from you are getting the exact same crank. Toda gets there 100mm crank from mitsubishi, tomie gets there 100mm crank from mitsubishi, AMS gets there 100mm crank from mitsubishi, RNR gets there 100mm crank from mitsubishi. The only stroker kit that doesn't use the factory 100mm crank from mitsubishi is june. QUOTE]

Incorrect, Tomei is also forged as Jun, I do sell both and both are forged, Toda is the stock one from Mitsubishi.

 

Hi guys.

Very interesting discussion so far, but I have a question. There's all this talk about building a bullet-proof 500-600 hp engine with similar amounts of torque. I'm sure it can be done. But how will the transfer case hold up to that torque?

There isn't much point in over-building the engine and still being stuck with an over-stressed T-case. Do these things last?

Emre

 

[QUOTE=Crazy4Cars]You seem to be saying the Mitsubishi crank is NOT forged. Is that what you think?

JDB