Notices
Evo X Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine builds to the best clutch and flywheel.

Cost of 500 wHP ?

 
Old Mar 23, 2019, 02:55 PM
  #16  
Newbie
 
NFSEvolutionGSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orlando
Posts: 57
Liked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by letsgetthisdone View Post
100% wrong.
Based on what? That isn't a terrible answer. His definition of reliability may be different than yours.

In general, likelihood of failure and power output are positively correlated. You might get lucky. You might throw a rod. Both have happened and will continue to happen.
NFSEvolutionGSR is offline  
Old Mar 23, 2019, 03:00 PM
  #17  
Newbie
 
NFSEvolutionGSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orlando
Posts: 57
Liked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by xclusive_evo View Post
I spoke to someone at E-specs and they told me all i needed from stock to 500HP was a turbo, cooler, air flow, tune and clutch. Said car will be good for everyday driving.
Yes, I always recommend a cooler for higher HP builds. I prefer YETI, but Pelican tests theirs on Grizzly bears...and that is kind of badass.
NFSEvolutionGSR is offline  
Old Mar 25, 2019, 09:55 AM
  #18  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
letsgetthisdone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 11,996
Liked 661 Times in 625 Posts
Originally Posted by NFSEvolutionGSR View Post
Based on what? That isn't a terrible answer. His definition of reliability may be different than yours.

In general, likelihood of failure and power output are positively correlated. You might get lucky. You might throw a rod. Both have happened and will continue to happen.
The power number has nothing to do with reliability, its the torque. You'll lunch a motor way a faster on a stock turbo that you could force to make 450wtq at 3800-4k rpm but runs out of air up top and still only makes 400whp. As opposed to a turbo kit that makes 400wtq at 4500 or 5000rpm, and 375wtq at 8k rpm which would be 571whp. Or if you just back the stock turbo down to only make 400wtq on the hit that setup will live too but it will still only make 400whp up top since the turbo is out of air, etc. It's not a matter of luck, it's a matter of good tuning and a proper setup for the goals.

So, yes, saying something like "the stock motor is unreliable past 500whp" is indeed wrong. Especially since, stock for stock, the 4b11 is stronger than the 4g63.
letsgetthisdone is offline  
Old Mar 25, 2019, 10:53 AM
  #19  
Newbie
iTrader: (4)
 
MannyEvoX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New York
Posts: 56
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by letsgetthisdone View Post
stock for stock, the 4b11 is stronger than the 4g63.
Yeah try telling that to a die hard 4g63 fan. I've never heard anyone make that statement before actually, I've thought nowadays people realize that the 4b11 is just as strong as a 4g63 or close to it. So is the 4b11 stronger or just more reliable? Or maybe both? Everyone thinks because the 4g is a closed deck cast iron block it's a lot stronger than a 4b. So what makes a 4b "stronger"?
MannyEvoX is offline  
Old Mar 25, 2019, 12:06 PM
  #20  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
letsgetthisdone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 11,996
Liked 661 Times in 625 Posts
The stock rods will fail before the open deck is a concern. That being said, the rods in the 4b11 are slightly shorter and have a more substantial beam than 4g63 rods. Making them stronger. The block also uses 4 bolt mains and a more substantial girdle.

Like I said, stronger when compared stock for stock. Once you have a built engine, the 4b11 does require being sleeved to stay together and keep up with the 4g with max effort level stuff past 650-700whp or so. To say one is substantially better than the other means the person saying it really probably doesn't know much. English Racing has the Evo8 with a 4g63 running 7's, and the EvoX with the 4b11 ran an 8.11 at TX2k19, knocking on the 7 second door in a heavier car. They're both great engines.
letsgetthisdone is offline  
Old Mar 25, 2019, 02:56 PM
  #21  
Newbie
 
NFSEvolutionGSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orlando
Posts: 57
Liked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by letsgetthisdone View Post
The power number has nothing to do with reliability, its the torque.
You do understand that Power is a function of Torque, right?

P = T ω

P = power (W)

T = torque or moment (Nm)

ω = angular velocity (rad/s)

But, I understand what you are saying. My original point was that there are too many variables to really answer the question being asked. There are hundreds of possible "right" answers.
NFSEvolutionGSR is offline  
Old Mar 25, 2019, 03:28 PM
  #22  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
letsgetthisdone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 11,996
Liked 661 Times in 625 Posts
Originally Posted by NFSEvolutionGSR View Post
You do understand that Power is a function of Torque, right?

P = T ω

P = power (W)

T = torque or moment (Nm)

ω = angular velocity (rad/s)

But, I understand what you are saying. My original point was that there are too many variables to really answer the question being asked. There are hundreds of possible "right" answers.
Consider my post included power, torque, and RPM, I'd say, yes, I fully understand what horsepower is.

There aren't variables other than OEM engines tend to follow the 10/90/10 rule. 10% blow up, 90% make around average power for the setup, and 10% make more than expected for the setup. You spec the right parts and 550whp+ is perfectly fine on a stock 4b11. The 10% that blow up are more likely to meet an earlier demise on a 400whp/400wtq stock turbo E85 setup than they are with say a Vband 5858 at 550whp/400wtq. So, again, to make a blanket statement of, "4b11's are unreliable past 500whp," is simply wrong.
letsgetthisdone is offline  
Old Mar 25, 2019, 05:50 PM
  #23  
Newbie
 
NFSEvolutionGSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orlando
Posts: 57
Liked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by letsgetthisdone View Post
So, again, to make a blanket statement of, "4b11's are unreliable past 500whp," is simply wrong.
Okay, so two things.

1). Nobody said that. What was actually said was: "I think reliability takes a nose dive when over 400 whp". You said that that was "100% false"...then you brought up a 10/90/10 rule, which I would like to point out doesn't add up to 100%. I am being a dick, but I thought that that was funny. I am not arguing that these cars CANNOT be reliable. I never said that that wasn't a possibility. What I said was: "In general, likelihood of failure and power output are positively correlated. You might get lucky. You might throw a rod. Both have happened and will continue to happen." I simply pointed out a correlation. There is room in there on both sides.

2). Are you willing to make the claim that stock 4B11's are reliable past 500whp? That seems like a really bold statement.
NFSEvolutionGSR is offline  
Old Mar 26, 2019, 09:36 AM
  #24  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
letsgetthisdone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 11,996
Liked 661 Times in 625 Posts
Originally Posted by NFSEvolutionGSR
Okay, so two things.

1). Nobody said that. What was actually said was: "I think reliability takes a nose dive when over 400 whp". You said that that was "100% false"...then you brought up a 10/90/10 rule, which I would like to point out doesn't add up to 100%. I am being a dick, but I thought that that was funny. I am not arguing that these cars CANNOT be reliable. I never said that that wasn't a possibility. What I said was: "In general, likelihood of failure and power output are positively correlated. You might get lucky. You might throw a rod. Both have happened and will continue to happen." I simply pointed out a correlation. There is room in there on both sides.

2). Are you willing to make the claim that stock 4B11's are reliable past 500whp? That seems like a really bold statement.
Oops, I punched the 9 instead of the 8. It's not like they're right next to each other or anything.

I can tell you don't have a lot experience building these cars. Neither does 2006evo9er or however he has it spelled.

I'd rather have a car with a 5858 at 550whp then a stock turbo car at 400whp. So, yes, I'm saying it's more reliable. For many reasons. Modifying anything is a risk. An arbitrary cut off at X whp is incorrect. Plain and simple.
letsgetthisdone is offline  
Old Mar 26, 2019, 12:10 PM
  #25  
Newbie
iTrader: (4)
 
MannyEvoX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New York
Posts: 56
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by letsgetthisdone View Post
I'd rather have a car with a 5858 at 550whp then a stock turbo car at 400whp. So, yes, I'm saying it's more reliable. For many reasons. Modifying anything is a risk. An arbitrary cut off at X whp is incorrect. Plain and simple.
I think nowadays especially with the internet and kids on youtube and stuff everything has got all twisted up. Like you said, modifying anything is a risk but people don't see that, they only see numbers. It's already been proved many times that the X can make over 500whp and still be reliable and there's just too many variables. Like one guy on youtube has the same turbo kit as me and made close to 700whp on his stock block, he had a good tune, all supporting mods and took care of his car and I don't recall him ever having any issues.
MannyEvoX is offline  
Old Mar 26, 2019, 02:58 PM
  #26  
Newbie
 
NFSEvolutionGSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orlando
Posts: 57
Liked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by MannyEvoX View Post
made close to 700whp on his stock block


Me again...

There is only one more teeny little issue that I want to raise. I see power figures thrown around a lot on these forums, and no times... Now, I am not a fan of drag racing. I don't understand the point, especially in cars like these. I also don't make outrageous power claims. None of what I have built is meant for that sort of thing. However...in for time slips? I doubt some of these people claiming 550WHP (or 700WHP for that matter) are really making it. Notice I said some, not all.
NFSEvolutionGSR is offline  
Old Mar 26, 2019, 03:10 PM
  #27  
Newbie
 
NFSEvolutionGSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orlando
Posts: 57
Liked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by letsgetthisdone View Post
Oops, I punched the 9 instead of the 8. It's not like they're right next to each other or anything.
They are indeed right next to each other, but I don't belueve (whoops) that you didn't mean to do that.

Originally Posted by letsgetthisdone View Post
So, yes, I'm saying it's more reliable.
Okay, fair enough. I leave you with this:


NFSEvolutionGSR is offline  
Old Mar 27, 2019, 09:39 AM
  #28  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
letsgetthisdone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 11,996
Liked 661 Times in 625 Posts
You can believe whatever you want.
letsgetthisdone is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.