Mike1023 Rebuild for stock turbo record of 2008!
Jan 8, 2008, 01:02 PM
#18
im going to disagree with that since i was running that boost for a good amount of time and had it all logged and dyno. and a/f and timing was good.
i going more to wear and tear. and not replacing the necessary part.
we brake it down if you push the stock motor to the limits and do not replace parts more often then this would happen. i seen and heard stories of stock motors go for what reason they had non. and they were on a safe tune and low boost. just how motors are built, some stronger then others. and granted to what i pushed my car to and had 60k miles is a very respectable number.
i going more to wear and tear. and not replacing the necessary part.
we brake it down if you push the stock motor to the limits and do not replace parts more often then this would happen. i seen and heard stories of stock motors go for what reason they had non. and they were on a safe tune and low boost. just how motors are built, some stronger then others. and granted to what i pushed my car to and had 60k miles is a very respectable number.
Jan 8, 2008, 01:14 PM
#19
Mike is a funny dude. I know him personally/ i met with him once or twice, I even lost against him in drag race, back then in spring valley./ He is much better in person then on the net.
So don't bother him. He is a good guy after all. I think he just cant take the offensive opinion thru the net.
So don't bother him. He is a good guy after all. I think he just cant take the offensive opinion thru the net.
Last edited by Robevo RS; Jan 8, 2008 at 01:17 PM.
Jan 8, 2008, 01:52 PM
#20
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 2,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
im going to disagree with that since i was running that boost for a good amount of time and had it all logged and dyno. and a/f and timing was good.
i going more to wear and tear. and not replacing the necessary part.
we brake it down if you push the stock motor to the limits and do not replace parts more often then this would happen. i seen and heard stories of stock motors go for what reason they had non. and they were on a safe tune and low boost. just how motors are built, some stronger then others. and granted to what i pushed my car to and had 60k miles is a very respectable number.
i going more to wear and tear. and not replacing the necessary part.
we brake it down if you push the stock motor to the limits and do not replace parts more often then this would happen. i seen and heard stories of stock motors go for what reason they had non. and they were on a safe tune and low boost. just how motors are built, some stronger then others. and granted to what i pushed my car to and had 60k miles is a very respectable number.
did you really think that you were iconic by being the first person to log 30 psi on 93 without problems? Yes the AFR and timing gods approved, but the internals were screaming for help the whole time.
Jan 8, 2008, 01:55 PM
#21
Sounds like "hear/say". There area ton of people in the MKE area with high milage that have been running safe tunes at safe boost levels and never have problems. Running high boost on the stock motor with 93 only will eventually cause catastrophic failure.
did you really think that you were iconic by being the first person to log 30 psi on 93 without problems? Yes the AFR and timing gods approved, but the internals were screaming for help the whole time.
did you really think that you were iconic by being the first person to log 30 psi on 93 without problems? Yes the AFR and timing gods approved, but the internals were screaming for help the whole time.
Jan 8, 2008, 01:55 PM
#22
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NNJ
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is absolutly idiotic to bash Buschur or Al for the failure of this motor. It is clear that Mike was not looking for reliability. He was looking to push his car to the limits and set some records. And sure enough he did.
Of course the tune was very aggressive, of course he was running a hell of a lot of boost on pump gas. Everyone knows this, its not like Big Al or Buschur would suggest to all their customers that this is what they should do.
I know Mike well and have been with him for nearly two years of intense racing. I would say of the 60,000k miles, about half were spent under full boost, lol.
Aside from the possibility of a bad tank of gas, I don't think there was any single factor that caused the motor to go. When you drive the car a lot, drive it hard, and push it to its limits constantly --- its only a matter of time.
Jan 8, 2008, 01:58 PM
#23
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 2,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
look im not trying to make this be a show down and hit people. yes, i did say one of the main reason could have been the boost levels and what not. but was crazy how long the motor last with the amount of racing on it with out any replacement parts. there for im leading more to the gas that was sold to me was not 93.
Jan 8, 2008, 02:26 PM
#25
Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: ohio
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Al or BR will not tune cars that aggresive unless the owner wants it that way. It would make for some very bad business if they did that and all our cars died. You think thats how BR has stayed in business for what 15 yrs? You actually proved it even more how strong the 4g63 is, 30 pounds on 93 for that many miles. Good luck on your goals.
