Let's talk motors
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
From: Coral Springs, FL
Let's talk motors
Hey guys,
Well I am currently maxed out on my stock turbo/motor and am planning a build for January.
I am thinking of doing a MAP 2.4 with a twin-scroll T4 6266 for a pretty decent street setup. Do you all think this is good for a fast DD build or is this a little too much?
If this is too much, I was thinking of a 2.0L with a 6262 but I know lag will be an issue.
Power goals are around 600whp on pump with nice spool characteristics for the street.
Help me out gentlemen!
Well I am currently maxed out on my stock turbo/motor and am planning a build for January.
I am thinking of doing a MAP 2.4 with a twin-scroll T4 6266 for a pretty decent street setup. Do you all think this is good for a fast DD build or is this a little too much?
If this is too much, I was thinking of a 2.0L with a 6262 but I know lag will be an issue.
Power goals are around 600whp on pump with nice spool characteristics for the street.
Help me out gentlemen!
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
From: Coral Springs, FL
i have a good core, has 10,000 miles not planning on blowing it so I am able to send it back to them. I would rather order a bottom end, built and ready to go so my car has as little down time as possible.
2.0 will have the best longevity with the biggest powerband. Just a daily driver or will it see any track time? Stroker is better for road course while 2 liter is better for drag. It all depends on your use of the car.
Trending Topics
How is the 2.0 best for longevity? And you mean longest power band? I thought general theory was the 2.4 makes the most power and torque but lacks about 1krpm vs the 2.0
On a larger turbo the extra rpm on the 2.0 will make higher power. As far as longevity goes the stroker has more of an angle on the rods producing a greater load on the side wall of the block. 2.0 just has a better rod ratio.
But as far as spool goes 2.4 will outspool the 2.0 all day.
My vote is to shoot for a meaty powerband. One of my favorite powerband cars on here is ChrisCarey's car.
MAP 2.5 liter with a MAP EF4. Yet stock turbo power down low. My dream dynochart.
http://www.maperformance.com/hosted/ef4-25.jpg
My vote is to shoot for a meaty powerband. One of my favorite powerband cars on here is ChrisCarey's car.
MAP 2.5 liter with a MAP EF4. Yet stock turbo power down low. My dream dynochart.
http://www.maperformance.com/hosted/ef4-25.jpg
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
From: Coral Springs, FL
Yea, I've spoken to MAP a bunch about it, as far as track time, the car doesnt really see any track time at all....
MAP will be doing the build and sending me the assembled bottom end to swap in to my car.
MAP will be doing the build and sending me the assembled bottom end to swap in to my car.
You realize that it's entirely possible to put an upgraded turbo on your stock engine and make a substantial amount more power than the "390" you make now and save you a ton of cash. Have you raced this car at all with the current power level? I'd be interested in trap speed etc....
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
From: Coral Springs, FL
I completely realize I can do a stock frame turbo on the car, thing is I want more than 400tq and to put a small turbo on the car i would have to delay the boost and make a laggier setup to preserve the block, I would rather do it right, buy a new block and not worry about my "ticking time bomb" of a motor.


