Interesting guesses. I'm debating on who I want to retune the car. RPM would likely cut me a deal but they are far away and I wasn't pleased how they handled a friends car. TTP is on my list but I will cry a bit since they use a mustang dyno so lower numbers may be a result. I could always jump on a dynojet later to see the difference though. I would just like an apples to apples comparison though.
Matt - Why would I see less boost with a better ring seal? 140 traps may be possibru especially if I may some more power, drive the car better and drop a lil weight.
Interesting guesses. I'm debating on who I want to retune the car. RPM would likely cut me a deal but they are far away and I wasn't pleased how they handled a friends car. TTP is on my list but I will cry a bit since they use a mustang dyno so lower numbers may be a result. I could always jump on a dynojet later to see the difference though. I would just like an apples to apples comparison though.
Matt - Why would I see less boost with a better ring seal? 140 traps may be possibru especially if I may some more power, drive the car better and drop a lil weight.
I am saying with your much better flowing heads your X psi will be a much higher power rating from the much higher flow than my X psi and ****** flow. So my hope is that you will need less psi to make the same if not more power than you did previously. So assuming the crappy ring seal was killing you, that pullied 20psi will net you higher gains this time round.
lulz, round.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KirkEvil
repo bigals turd gen and part it out to a loving home
In theory, better ring seal (with no other changes) will give you slightly more power and definitely control the oil 10x better (or more). Boost might change slightly - maybe 1/2 psi or less.
But changing the cam profile will either let more air into the heads (lowering boost slightly), or it may even stay the same - with no other changes. You might also have more bleed off with a larger cam.
Not like I'm an expert, but I'll guess 760/695 as your number.
__________________
1984 Camaro: 350 Auto, Global West Suspension, Baer Brakes, CTW Wheels
1989 GTA: Bolt-on L98. Global West Suspension, full Magnaflow exhaust, Wilwood Brakes, CTW Wheels
I am saying with your much better flowing heads your X psi will be a much higher power rating from the much higher flow than my X psi and ****** flow. So my hope is that you will need less psi to make the same if not more power than you did previously. So assuming the crappy ring seal was killing you, that pullied 20psi will net you higher gains this time round.
lulz, round.
That made more sense. I agree the ring seal will contain more of the "bang" than before. Maybe I will actually put this bottom end to the test.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Huryk
In theory, better ring seal (with no other changes) will give you slightly more power and definitely control the oil 10x better (or more). Boost might change slightly - maybe 1/2 psi or less.
But changing the cam profile will either let more air into the heads (lowering boost slightly), or it may even stay the same - with no other changes. You might also have more bleed off with a larger cam.
Not like I'm an expert, but I'll guess 760/695 as your number.
The cam lift is actually rather similar. It is going from a 224/236 115 to a 229/239 112. Lloyd was spot on with his cam spec before so while he says I might lose a bit down low, I should make it up considerably up top. After I informed him of the ring sealing problem, his comments were more definitive in gaining power all across the board.
What everyone is forgetting is that the piston was contacting about 37% of the surface area in the bore (I rounded, shoot me) and that the increased friction of a circular bore will thus slow the piston's travel time down considerably. This, as obvious as it sounds, will slow the car down significantly. Sure, you might gain a +5hp per circular bore but you will slow the rotating assembly which is never a good thing.
What everyone is forgetting is that the piston was contacting about 37% of the surface area in the bore (I rounded, shoot me) and that the increased friction of a circular bore will thus slow the piston's travel time down considerably. This, as obvious as it sounds, will slow the car down significantly. Sure, you might gain a +5hp per circular bore but you will slow the rotating assembly which is never a good thing.
Interesting thoughts. I'm still a bit amazed the pistons looked as good they did.
What everyone is forgetting is that the piston was contacting about 37% of the surface area in the bore (I rounded, shoot me) and that the increased friction of a circular bore will thus slow the piston's travel time down considerably. This, as obvious as it sounds, will slow the car down significantly. Sure, you might gain a +5hp per circular bore but you will slow the rotating assembly which is never a good thing.
There is always a tradeoff. For instance the V10 in the LFA is the fastest revving motor in a production car. But for it's size and number of pistons, it's volumetric efficiency is down 5 or 6% compared to the 458 Italia's 8 cylinder and even a really nice 570hp H/C/I LS3.
My point is that being able to rev fast is not be all end all. Now if Brian's engine picks up 40hp just from the improved ring sealing, it will easily overcome the increase in friction - at least in 3rd gear and above. Couple that with a little better breathing from the updated cam profile and (maybe) some more boost, no contest...
A 383 with 20lbs of boost doesn't need to rev like a banshee to move the car - area under the curve does that on its own. Amen
__________________
1984 Camaro: 350 Auto, Global West Suspension, Baer Brakes, CTW Wheels
1989 GTA: Bolt-on L98. Global West Suspension, full Magnaflow exhaust, Wilwood Brakes, CTW Wheels
- Filled trans with oil
- Mounted a/c compressor, belt tensioner
- Installed new header collector gaskets and resealed y-pipe connection
- New custom front brake lines installed - Courtesy of Adam
- Vacuum line and other accessory connections made/ Fittings tightened / Things hid - Courtesy of Matt
- Cooling system plumbed
- Wiring harness run and all connections made sans a couple items
- Silly 4" 120 deg blower inlet mounted
What's left:
- Connect fuel lines to rail (bought new clips for safety which should be here in a couple days)
- Install brake master, fill will fluid, checks for leaks and bleed
- Extend the Hobbs switch wire from passenger to drivers side
- Finish blower intake
- Reconnect ground and power wires
- Connect charge pipes from blower to intercooler
- Mount new catch-can and run hoses
- Re-install rad fans
- Reconnect methanol lines
- Install battery
- Check all connections (Vacuum, wiring, etc)
- Prep fire extinguisher and bake depression brownies
A couple quick engine shots. Matt did a great job cleaning things up. It's still busy but it looks worlds better than it did before.
Not a great pic but Adam did a great job with the lines. The K can now be dropped (I hope not) without having to remove the brake lines.
Guess I better make a checklist to check the checklist. I tried to connect the fuel lines late on Sunday and noticed they didn't want to click in easily. I got one to click (or so I thought) and when I jiggled it, the line popped off.
I ordered new plastic clips but should the piece be inserted into the fuel line prior to connecting it to the rail or vice versa?
So this happened today. Battery was a little low on charge but within about a minute of running, the car found idle pretty well. In certain points of the video, I only gave it a slight amount of throttle (10%) which brought it up to around 2.2k. Sounds louder in the video. It may be just me but I think the engine is even smoother than before.
The brakes are bled and I just need to make a few minor adjustments to the suspension, toss the wheels on and take this thing for a ride to start breaking it in. Big thanks to all the folks who helped get the car this far. I am a real happy guy.
