BLACKevoLNCR

...wurd

StreetLancer

I wish that doing an oil change right out of the factory would net a 15-30 extra ponies... but, I digress.

Seriously, though, good to see someone who actually gets that a)not everything that the aftermarket part maker says is true, and b) understands upgrade-overlap.

Most of the stuff I'm talking about is pretty general, and just a guess-timation. No where near scientific. Fact is, nobody knows what it'd take to get to 300 since no one has done it yet. No one (I know of) has used the forged internals yet, and no one has seen what the boost limitations are for those new internals. So, it really isn't necessary to argue or debate over it, since the only way to find out is for someone to do it. And God knows how long it could be before we see THAT happen.

iodine23

iTrader: (1)

Well Shiv Pathak has produced an almost 300WHP (I think it's 297) Subaru 2.5RS on completely stock internals. I think it's running around 9psi of boost. But, the point is that you don't necessarily need to go drop a ton of cash to beef up your internals if you're going to push more power. It'll probably make you feel better when tuning the car, though.

Has anyone on this board broken any of the stock internals in a higher HP application?

pearlwhiteoz

iTrader: (1)

what is the correct oreder? my skyline R34 got up to 982 or something..and after i drive it for a while..it got up to 1072
but i just forgot whats the order i should folllow...
sorry i got OT....

StreetLancer

I've seen some fried rings from NOS... I think Rock has some pictures. But, the 2.5 is a wholly different beast... it's a boxer engine, and it's also a much larger displacement. Plus, this car has extrodinarily long con-rods, which makes our torque, but, is the weak link as far as the internals go.

hardcoretuner

Allow me to defend myself
I do realize that you can't just add hp + hp its about how well they work together.
At the time all I was saying is that I feel 150 from both is reasonable and yes to get that you must have 4-2-1 header/downpipe and about a 3 inch exhaust. I was merely saying that its ignorant to think just get one and not the other. Personally I don’t think that the turbo kit gives 100 hp. I have yet to see any dyno results say that. I think it probably gives 60 hp but I have seen a quad tb give a car about 50 so for our car lets say 40 (just to be safe) 2k for a quad tb (40) or 4k for turbo (60). Is 2k worth 20 more ponies? Come on. And if you want 100 ponies from the turbo do the math the kit 4k, piston's 600, cams and valve springs 500. HOWEVER, if you add that to an engine that has a quad tb your also helping the tb as you add power.

For example you put a tb on a car that has a stock intake. The tb will give some power, but, if you put an intake on, the intake will give some power but now the tb can make more power. Not sure I am explaining this well but I try. This relates to the turbo and quad tb like so 10lbs of boost through 1 hole divided 4 ways or, 10 lbs of boost through 4 holes divided none? Think about it. And yes I do realize that someone who knows more than me will reply to this and make me look even stupider. Just be kind when you pick this apart please. lol.

iodine23

iTrader: (1)

Hey, it's only 25% more displacement.

NO2 is a whole different can of worms. That can be cheap, easy HP. And it can also be a very cheap and easy way to fry your engine.

I guess the long rod would be a mixed bag. The advantage is that it will produce a shallower angle when the crank is 90 degress from TDC/BDC. I think that's what gives you the torque. And most of the combustion force will be used to compress the rod down towards the crank rather than trying to bend it. On the flipside you've got more metal there between the piston and the crank, so it'll probably flex more and fail easier.

pjal84

I think it was visualkei who pointed it out the singular biggest problem with this whole idea: How do you solve the disparity between quads loving compression, and turbos fearing it. Quads are only making true power with something like 10.5 + where as the amount of boost you'd be able to run on that setup would have to be really low since I'm doubting even the strongest internals could hold up for long. As for the quads "argument" about more holes + air=power...that's not true. The engine is only going to be using as much as it needs. You still need to do head work etc. to see good gains.

iodine23

iTrader: (1)

Does the quad TB give each cylinder its own tb and separate intake runner? Or is it just 4 tb's filling one common intake manifold? I've never really seen much info on them.... but a lot of people here seem to be talking about them.

zlancer

iTrader: (1)

4 individual throttle body's going to each intake port

HobieKopek

iTrader: (8)

Yep, it's similar to multi carb setups on muscle cars.

hardcoretuner

thats what my main ? was, is it even possible to run a quad tb with a turbo? if it is the piping n stuff has got to be a mess

HobieKopek

iTrader: (8)

Possible? Sure! Practical? Hell no.

iodine23

iTrader: (1)

So 4 tbs per to each intake port times 8 intake ports is 32 tbs? Just kidding.

I'm assuming you meant the 4tbs, one per cylinder, no common manifold (after the TBs, obviously that airbox makes a common plenum).

What's the Lancer redline at? Another way to "boost" HP is to increase the redline (since HP = torque * rpm / 5250). But then you'd really need to make sure your internals were nice and balanced and could handle the extra loading. You also need to make sure your torque curve is not falling off out in that RPM range, otherwise you're offsetting the rpm gain with torque loss.

visualkei72

Quad TB + Turbo has been covered before, pjal posted a link in the 2nd page of the thread. If you care for disappointment, go for it. I think it's pretty damn innovative, but hell, if I had that much $$$ I'd prolly be done by now. Heheh.
Yeah Gran Turismo, no turbo, but buy an intercooler, and you get HP, hahah.

--- Kei