|
300rwkw good or bad?June 23 2006 at 11:31 PM No score for this post | Anonymous (no login) from IP address 220.101.94.240 |
| Hey guys just dynoed my car.FJ20 just with forgies the rest of the engine is internally standared.Custom exhaust manifold and turbo,injectors,computer, pump etc etc.On 25psi made 300rwkw with a fat as mixture. |
|
| Author | Reply |
Dave (no login) 210.49.155.30 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 23 2006, 11:46 PM |
Does "fat as mixture" mean a fully sick awesome mixture or do you mean with a safe, rich mixture?
Sounds like a good result in anyones book! |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 202.93.98.93 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 23 2006, 11:53 PM |
What do you call "safe" rich mixture , I call 10:1 filty rich and 12-12.5:1 good . A "rich " mixture is no safer than the correct mixture , lean mixtures do the damage . Actually very rich mixtures promote detonation . |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 220.101.94.240 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 24 2006, 12:15 AM |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Boosted frog (no login) 220.245.180.133 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 24 2006, 10:47 AM |
Post the dyno sheet.
10.5 is a bit rich for 25 psi. You dont need to go that low though many tuners do. Its costing you a bit of power. Aim for 11-11.5.
So yeah rich. Whos the tuner?
400rwhp....is it good? Dam straight. What fuel? |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 220.101.94.240 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 24 2006, 5:47 PM |
fuel was c16 and i am tuning the car myself |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Gareth (no login) 203.29.152.23 | tuningNo score for this post | June 25 2006, 10:18 AM |
300kw is great but with what turbo... if its a fairly small turbo.. thats awesome, if its a big lung you got hangin off the side, there should be plenty more in it. lean it out to 11 - 11.5 as frog has said, and what ignition timing are you running? should be able to run 16-20 degress.
Gareth |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 202.93.98.93 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 26 2006, 1:41 PM |
25lbs is LOT of boost for 400Hp , you can get the same for less on pump fuel with the right bits . |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 220.101.93.39 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 26 2006, 5:44 PM |
what power have you made with "THE RIGHT BITS" on a FJ20 with no internall work but the forgies. |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 202.93.98.93 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 26 2006, 9:07 PM |
I didn't have to because I watched others do it . You would be surprised what a good used internally std FJ20ET can crank out . The tune has to be perfect and the fueling/ECU/intercooling/everything downstream of the exhaust ports made to suit but its not rocket science so don't think your Neil Armstrong .
200 Hp per litre is easy from a big bore short stroke engine with a DOHC 16 valve head that actually works . The fact that these things are very robust and have reasonably aggressive for production camshafts makes it a straightforward process .
Provided the inlet system can pass/pump/intercool without loss 42-44Lbs air its no sewat . A half reasonable 1.5" bore steam pipe manifold and a turbo capable of passing and using 26 odd Lbs exhaust flow and bobs your uncle .
You need to understand that high boost does not necessarily mean high airflow . Boost pressure is actually a measure of resistanceto airflow into the engine nothing more . If the restrictions in the system are removed the flow goes up and the pressure down - simple physics .
Allen Engineering in Mallala (SA) did similar sort of Hp about 12 yrs ago with a HKS exhaust manifold and a TO4B turbo . From memory ignition was a MSD 6a , ecu an Autronic SMC and injectors I think Rochesters . A friend of mine did it 7 yrs ago with a steam pipe manifold and his own hybrid bush bearing turbo .
If you can get similar inlet and exhaust manifold pressure in your engine with the 42 odd Lbs airflow and effective support systems its a walk in the park . Now that 100 octane pump fuel is available its easier now than its ever been .
I too am interested to know what turbo and support systems you have to warrant that boost level . Less boost means less fuel rail pressure and more advance because a higher detonation threshold allows more efficient combustion .
Cheers .
|
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 220.101.93.39 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 26 2006, 10:09 PM |
so how much power have you actually made? |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 202.93.98.93 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 26 2006, 10:47 PM |
The most power I've had is 4020 (3000Kw) from a GE 7FDL V16 turbo diesel , to self load test these things you don't need a dyno . Four of them in a row work even better . |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 220.101.93.39 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 27 2006, 5:47 PM |
well, it looks like YOUR Neil Armstrong!! |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 202.93.98.93 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | June 27 2006, 8:30 PM |
Nope , the yanks have had them for ages , Neil as well . |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 220.101.93.152 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | July 12 2006, 10:23 PM |
Mate,to me it sounds like your a profesor,what have you built or are just one of those guys that reads to many books? |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (no login) 202.93.98.93 | Re: 300rwkw good or bad?No score for this post | July 16 2006, 11:38 AM |
No not really , my last of 2 FJET's was a torque monster more that a Kw mountain because thats what works in a road car .
The next will be an RB26 headed RB31 with the torque treatment because its also for road . If you know how you can have heaps of torque and good consumption .
The following will be a Daihatsu HDEG De Tomasso 1600 again for road .
I don't build semi race engines for road use because they are expensive and impracticle . If you use all the power you end up dead or in goal , if you don't seriously race it on a circuit or strip what was the point of the exercise . | |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
|
|