Kevin_White19

My current build is a built 2.0L with Wiseco pistons, Manley Turbo Tuff cons and a polished crank all with ACL bearings. Piping is all AMS with 1100cc injectors and I believe a Walbro 255 pump. Head is stock and I just recently put on an Akrapovic exhaust. Those are the big things I can think of but I may be missing some things. I plan on a 2.4L long block build to go along with a new slightly smaller turbo than my current EF4. Will also be doing a built trans and t-case. Just got a baseline tune that I'm pretty pleased with so I can drive the car until I pull the trigger on the build.

Jaraxle

I am confused. Built motor with an EF4 on 93octane making 350hp ?


~Jaraxle

Kevin_White19

Forgot to mention.. supposedly that dyno is about 15% weak compared to DynoJet but I didn't want to say that because I can't prove it. Before I bought it it was making roughly 410 the new tune just smoothed out fuel mapping and makes peak boost quicker now. Boost is closer to 26psi now as well.

-Kevin

Jaraxle

I am not trying to be a jerk or negative, but that still seems crazy low. What is your baseline on this dyno? If you don't have baseline for your car, perhaps the dyno database has info for a typical EVO baseline. For reference, I made 220hp stock and 402hp (both using VD) with nothing more than a spicy 20G on 93 octane. What did your boost curve look like?

~Jaraxle

Kevin_White19

Yeah totally understand where you're coming from. It's a build bottom end so really the only thing that comes with that is reliability. It's also a conservative tune where full spool hits at 3800 and is limited to about 25-26psi. The statement of the dyno being ~15% off lines up because the before and after power on this dyno was about 350 and on the previous tune the other dyno read 410. This tune is more for smoothing out the fuel mapping/boost and verifying where I'm at with the car. Now I can probably push it to 450-465 before building the head but I'd have to up the boost, increase octane or do some other funky things. Without the built head I'd think the limiting factor quickly becomes Flow in the head as well as things like non ideal swirl and squish from the stock valves and valve float from the springs.

-Kevin

RazorLab

iTrader: (8)

Just don't tell that to ETS who made 1,000hp+ with a stock head.

So yea, not limiting.

Kevin_White19

The head was machines ported by English with +1mm valves, custom manifolds, air to ice bath cooling ungodly boost and race gas. I'd consider that a special case. What would you say the limiting factor becomes with a stock head if not Flow? I mean sure giant turbos are an option (pressure vs velocity would be in your favor to a degree at that point) but I can't imagine Flow restriction doesn't halt power jumps.

Kevin_White19

Also please don't say the limiting factor is money

RazorLab

iTrader: (8)

English racing used a stock port head for 1199whp @ 59psi:

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...n-2-59psi.html

So my point is the head is not a limiting factor for you at way less than even half that power.

Kevin_White19

I think we're arguing two different things here. I'm saying within the limits of a daily it may be. That 1200hp engine does have cam work and valve work so it is not a stock head. (Yes I'm being a bit pedantic). Also that engine is good for about 20 miles before it needs a rebuild. 10,200 rpm is another reason when paired with an insane turbo with disgusting boost level for that massive horsepower. Perhaps my question should be what you believe the limiting factor is in my case as to why it's not pushing 600hp?

RazorLab

iTrader: (8)

Why your car isn't pushing 600hp?

Turbo size, fuel, fuel system, tune, cams, probably other things you haven't listed.

Just fuel, fuel system and tune change will bump your current setup an easy +100whp.

It's not the head limiting you.

You can find 50+ data points on this forum alone to prove it.

I could easily "only" make 350whp on a 70lb/min + turbo too. That's the easy part.

Kevin_White19

Ill take a look I appreciate the input. I figured all increase injectors from 1100s would be a decrease in duty cycle and that to remain ~stoichiometric if you want to increase fuel, you need to increase air and therefore flow which I suppose can be done with just cams. Again I can't backup my assumptions because I don't have internal flow sims stating what the limit is. In my case it's kind of heresay because I'll be doing a long lock build but I'll take into consideration a more heavy duty fuel system than originally intended.

Thanks,
Kevin

RazorLab

iTrader: (8)

Staying stoich has everything to do with ecu tuning and nothing to do with countering with increased airflow.

injector scalar, ipw curve, etc

Jaraxle

I was starting out being gentle with what appeared to be quite poor results.
That has now gone out the window..


Unless the baseline was 50hp at the wheels stock, it seems that you have a built shortblock and massive turbo and not really using either of them. I am also confused why you would start a NEW block build to a 2.4 when your current built block hasn't really been taken advantage of at all You actually stated it was a "baseline" tune, and then your going to call it quits with poor results and tear into it for a 2.4 build with a SMALLER turbo ?

Everything seems


~Jaraxle

Kevin_White19

First that's not how proportionality works and I hope you're using hyperbole. If your dynojet was reading 220 factory my dyno would hypothetically read 190. Original tune when bought read 405. Same tune when on new dyno read 352 if I remember correctly with no changes and a healthy engine. There is where you will find the difference percentage wise. Next I bought the car with the built 2.0 but that is not why I bought it and have always intended on a build because that's what I'd like to do with my car and it will better suit my long term goals. With a 2.4 I can have power on tap and not be solely reliant on a giant turbo for power nor will the lag be an issue. At a later date I can add a larger turbo or a different octane tune for more power.