T66 power - super unleaded / solid lifters
#203
Advanced PassionFord User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yum,
just read about your top speed run with your old engine
what kind off gearing are you going to use for your new attempt as your engine seems to hit a brick wall at 7100k??does this become an issue for top speed run's??If so how do ye get around it?
sorry if its a stupid question but Iam not big up on this top speed stuff
just read about your top speed run with your old engine
what kind off gearing are you going to use for your new attempt as your engine seems to hit a brick wall at 7100k??does this become an issue for top speed run's??If so how do ye get around it?
sorry if its a stupid question but Iam not big up on this top speed stuff
#205
Justin,
Rod had the same issue with one of his earlier engines, and they had to alter the gearing with different tyres / wheels etc, to get it spot on . So Dave may have to do something similar if he finds that it won't pull beyond a certain rpm barrier . However, although the power tales off, it is still making significantly more than his T38 engine, so it is all in perspective .
Rod had the same issue with one of his earlier engines, and they had to alter the gearing with different tyres / wheels etc, to get it spot on . So Dave may have to do something similar if he finds that it won't pull beyond a certain rpm barrier . However, although the power tales off, it is still making significantly more than his T38 engine, so it is all in perspective .
#206
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by justin.e
Yum,
just read about your top speed run with your old engine
what kind off gearing are you going to use for your new attempt as your engine seems to hit a brick wall at 7100k??does this become an issue for top speed run's??If so how do ye get around it?
sorry if its a stupid question but Iam not big up on this top speed stuff
just read about your top speed run with your old engine
what kind off gearing are you going to use for your new attempt as your engine seems to hit a brick wall at 7100k??does this become an issue for top speed run's??If so how do ye get around it?
sorry if its a stupid question but Iam not big up on this top speed stuff
Once car is back on the road will will be able to see 8k+. We run out of time at the dyno to see above 7100 and now know why this happened and have now sorted that issue out. Shame that we might have seen a bit more power
#207
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
Once car is back on the road will will be able to see 8k+. We run out of time at the dyno to see above 7100 and now know why this happened and have now sorted that issue out. Shame that we might have seen a bit more power
#208
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
Once car is back on the road will will be able to see 8k+. We run out of time at the dyno to see above 7100 and now know why this happened and have now sorted that issue out. Shame that we might have seen a bit more power
Yes thanks
#210
Testing the future
good post this. interesting and entertaining reading for any outsider
if it affects torque, it obviously affects power by the same amount in percentage terms as they are a direct factor of each other
whatever the arguments are, the owner of the engine obviously had some requirements to his builder/mapper that he is happy with. if he uses the engine on track, his requirements may well have been a lot different to a road users (i.e. wants power to hang on at the top end vs. lower end torque). perhaps that may explain some things?
and has a few missing " ' "
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Also, as you know it affects the torque correction more than the power.
whatever the arguments are, the owner of the engine obviously had some requirements to his builder/mapper that he is happy with. if he uses the engine on track, his requirements may well have been a lot different to a road users (i.e. wants power to hang on at the top end vs. lower end torque). perhaps that may explain some things?
Originally Posted by ballin
rod your sig is too big
#211
Mike you still didnt answer why you think Jullian Godfrey is a no no...i know you dont like hi comp BUT i am sure he would build what you asked..BUT he dynoes them and has many many customers so surely you cant argue that what he does wont be reliable?
#212
Originally Posted by foreigneRS
good post this. interesting and entertaining reading for any outsider
if it affects torque, it obviously affects power by the same amount in percentage terms as they are a direct factor of each other
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Also, as you know it affects the torque correction more than the power.
#213
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
Once car is back on the road will will be able to see 8k+. We run out of time at the dyno to see above 7100 and now know why this happened and have now sorted that issue out. Shame that we might have seen a bit more power
Yes thanks
#214
Originally Posted by Bosch-Man
Mike you still didnt answer why you think Jullian Godfrey is a no no...i know you dont like hi comp BUT i am sure he would build what you asked..BUT he dynoes them and has many many customers so surely you cant argue that what he does wont be reliable?
#215
Did Someone Mention TUV
iTrader: (1)
Mike,
Thanks for taking the time to try and explain things, but i still dont understand or grasp what you are saying? Daves old engine made 470 bhp with a max of 430 lb/ft i think using a T38 at 2.3 bar. Regardless of what dyno you use or what setup the dyno runs surely a T66 turbo pushing 2.3 bar with the correct cams and inlet will make over 500 lb/ft? I dont see how it cant tbh. Maybe i am missing something here but I shy away from asking questions about others engines for reasons that have already been said, but i started it so i will keep asking until i understand.
Thanks for taking the time to try and explain things, but i still dont understand or grasp what you are saying? Daves old engine made 470 bhp with a max of 430 lb/ft i think using a T38 at 2.3 bar. Regardless of what dyno you use or what setup the dyno runs surely a T66 turbo pushing 2.3 bar with the correct cams and inlet will make over 500 lb/ft? I dont see how it cant tbh. Maybe i am missing something here but I shy away from asking questions about others engines for reasons that have already been said, but i started it so i will keep asking until i understand.
#216
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by foreigneRS
good post this. interesting and entertaining reading for any outsider
if it affects torque, it obviously affects power by the same amount in percentage terms as they are a direct factor of each other
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Also, as you know it affects the torque correction more than the power.
Yes it fucking is in percentage terms.
The relationship is
BHP = Torque / 5252 * RPM
So if torque increases by 1.3456783% at any point then BHP will increase by 1.3456783% at that point as well
Its IDENTICAL, not similar, not kind of related, not linked tenuously, but IDENTICAL like Nick says.
#217
Originally Posted by Bosch-Man
Mike you still didnt answer why you think Jullian Godfrey is a no no...i know you dont like hi comp BUT i am sure he would build what you asked..BUT he dynoes them and has many many customers so surely you cant argue that what he does wont be reliable?
Any of the engine builders mentioned in this thread are capable of building a good strong reliable road engine.
Anyone dismissing Julian on the grounds he normally builds race engines is totally missing the point that someone who can build an engine correctly for racing can also build one correctly for road use if they wish, just the spec would be different and its not what he specialises in.
#218
I meant from the perspective that the torque curve can change dramatically and increase by say 60lft at it's peak, but the power may only increase by 30bhp at it's peak, because they peak at totally different places . So it's not a direct correlation, to say that if the peak torque increase by 60lb ft, that the peak power would also increase by 60bhp .
#219
Did Someone Mention TUV
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by chip-3door
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by foreigneRS
good post this. interesting and entertaining reading for any outsider
if it affects torque, it obviously affects power by the same amount in percentage terms as they are a direct factor of each other
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Also, as you know it affects the torque correction more than the power.
Yes it fucking is in percentage terms.
The relationship is
BHP = Torque / 5252 * RPM
So if torque increases by 1.3456783% at any point then BHP will increase by 1.3456783% at that point as well
Its IDENTICAL, not similar, not kind of related, not linked tenuously, but IDENTICAL like Nick says.
#220
Testing the future
Mike Rainbird i know perfectly well that an engine dyno measures torque only and calculates bhp (from the engine speed using the formula that chip has posted) that is directly proportional. i am a mechanical engineer ffs. please accept a with some grace
#225
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Mike with regards Phil question about High comp engines and relating it to my own car which runs 8.1-1 am i right (not sure of the exact figure) and we all except that Evo's are fast cars and deliver the power well, why would this not be a popular and plauseable way to build a Cosworth engine ? I once had it explained to me the High comp drive like a natrually aspirated engine of boost then like a forced induction on boost in the crassiest possible way,
Mike
Mike
#227
Originally Posted by CossieRich
Mike,
Thanks for taking the time to try and explain things, but i still dont understand or grasp what you are saying? Daves old engine made 470 bhp with a max of 430 lb/ft i think using a T38 at 2.3 bar. Regardless of what dyno you use or what setup the dyno runs surely a T66 turbo pushing 2.3 bar with the correct cams and inlet will make over 500 lb/ft? I dont see how it cant tbh. Maybe i am missing something here but I shy away from asking questions about others engines for reasons that have already been said, but i started it so i will keep asking until i understand.
Thanks for taking the time to try and explain things, but i still dont understand or grasp what you are saying? Daves old engine made 470 bhp with a max of 430 lb/ft i think using a T38 at 2.3 bar. Regardless of what dyno you use or what setup the dyno runs surely a T66 turbo pushing 2.3 bar with the correct cams and inlet will make over 500 lb/ft? I dont see how it cant tbh. Maybe i am missing something here but I shy away from asking questions about others engines for reasons that have already been said, but i started it so i will keep asking until i understand.
Do people not understand that torque is effectively a product of:
Airflow / rpm
So a 500bhp turbo can make 1000lbft if you get it spooled up by 2500rpm
I fail to see why its viewed as such a black art or why there is so much contraversy over it, Mark's engines make loads of torque because they are setup (cam specs and head specs) to spool the turbo as early as possible, while (educated guess) having minimal lift on overlap to ensure efficient use of the air that the turbo does flow once it gets into the engine.
Ultimately this will result in a slight loss of top end though, as it means you require more boost per BHP at the top end, and if you look at any compressor map you will find that a more moderate amount of boost will allow a small amount more flow.
Personally i think the way mark does it is absolutely perfect for a road going engine, but ultimately if you want the peak bhp you can possibly have, its not the way to get that figure, nasty peaky engines with narrow power bands all at the top end tend to win that one.
#229
Originally Posted by Captain Mike
Mike with regards Phil question about High comp engines and relating it to my own car which runs 8.1-1 am i right (not sure of the exact figure) and we all except that Evo's are fast cars and deliver the power well, why would this not be a popular and plauseable way to build a Cosworth engine ? I once had it explained to me the High comp drive like a natrually aspirated engine of boost then like a forced induction on boost in the crassiest possible way,
Mike
Mike
#230
Originally Posted by Captain Mike
Mike with regards Phil question about High comp engines and relating it to my own car which runs 8.1-1 am i right (not sure of the exact figure) and we all except that Evo's are fast cars and deliver the power well, why would this not be a popular and plauseable way to build a Cosworth engine ? I once had it explained to me the High comp drive like a natrually aspirated engine of boost then like a forced induction on boost in the crassiest possible way,
Mike
Mike
Because the engines are completely different so what works on one doesnt work directly on the other.
Just copying the CR from one motor to another doesnt give the same results.
If your engine was a cosworth motor it would be generating higher EGT's because it would have to have less ignition advance because it would be an old 80s boat anchor with a bore thats too big a stroke thats too small and a cylinder head designed by a couple of blokes in a shed to use on an N/A motor with no consideration for turbo charging it when they designed it.
#231
Originally Posted by CossieRich
Originally Posted by foreigneRS
me i think. doesn't wash with me though. you still need a cap up your ass
I wish i could get a PROPER answer to my question though. Have been asking for 4 pages
What more info would you like that i have given?
#232
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by chip-3door
Any of the engine builders mentioned in this thread are capable of building a good strong reliable road engine.
My old engine was good and strong, just ask all the passengers that had a ride in the car and think that was a good 30+ people and did it have some abuse
#236
Advanced PassionFord User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
Originally Posted by justin.e
Yum,
just read about your top speed run with your old engine
what kind off gearing are you going to use for your new attempt as your engine seems to hit a brick wall at 7100k??does this become an issue for top speed run's??If so how do ye get around it?
sorry if its a stupid question but Iam not big up on this top speed stuff
just read about your top speed run with your old engine
what kind off gearing are you going to use for your new attempt as your engine seems to hit a brick wall at 7100k??does this become an issue for top speed run's??If so how do ye get around it?
sorry if its a stupid question but Iam not big up on this top speed stuff
Once car is back on the road will will be able to see 8k+. We run out of time at the dyno to see above 7100 and now know why this happened and have now sorted that issue out. Shame that we might have seen a bit more power
or you had an engine issue on the dyno?
#237
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Bosch-Man
Mike he does many road engines and as Chip says if he can build a race engine i am sure he is capable of a decent road engine
I would prefer to use Mark over them any day of the week .
You can use the Queen Mother for all i care,i am just saying you are quick to diss on one issue without thinking bigger picture
Hell bring your car over i will build you an engine....we use ass dyno and a Rottweiler to map
#238
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Bosch-Man
Mike he does many road engines and as Chip says if he can build a race engine i am sure he is capable of a decent road engine
I would prefer to use Mark over them any day of the week .
I know people who use both JG and MAD, based on their comments, i would happily use either of them but like Mike i would choose MAD personally as I do not beleive there is any tuner who gives more support to their customers than Mark does, i think the basic ethos MAD seems to have is build a small number of engines for a small number of people and be able to focus on each one with a massive amount of Marks personal time.
Anyone doing it more "commercially" who is practically production lining engines cant put the same level of commitment into each one IMHO, im sure that Harvey does forspecial cases like Mike, but i dont believe that a normal member of the public going to Harvey can possibly get the sort of support from him that people i know (not just the YB lads) have got from MAD
#240
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Originally Posted by chip-3door
Originally Posted by Captain Mike
Mike with regards Phil question about High comp engines and relating it to my own car which runs 8.1-1 am i right (not sure of the exact figure) and we all except that Evo's are fast cars and deliver the power well, why would this not be a popular and plauseable way to build a Cosworth engine ? I once had it explained to me the High comp drive like a natrually aspirated engine of boost then like a forced induction on boost in the crassiest possible way,
Mike
Mike
Because the engines are completely different so what works on one doesnt work directly on the other.
Just copying the CR from one motor to another doesnt give the same results.
If your engine was a cosworth motor it would be generating higher EGT's because it would have to have less ignition advance because it would be an old 80s boat anchor with a bore thats too big a stroke thats too small and a cylinder head designed by a couple of blokes in a shed to use on an N/A motor with no consideration for turbo charging it when they designed it.
Mike