8psi on stock B16?
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx, USA
Re: (cameron4776)
find a reputable tuner. go to one that is well know not a jackass with a dyno, someone who has lots of experience and broad knowledge. find the guy that can quote "e bitch slap you" with knowledge of fuel and ignition maps and thermodynamics etc... if you show up and he is like yo dog whats poppin oh you wanna race them homies in them mustangs..... walk away.
seriously just find the one closest to you that you have heard the name alot, see if they have a really well put together race car that stays together, look at some examples of their work.
forget what retard above is saying about trying to prove everyone wrong about PSI. PSI is important to an extent but not where this conversation is concerned the total output of the engine in the end is more of a breaking point, for years we have seen stock motors take more and more power with proper tuning and there have been so many break throughs in management systems and learning of what you can or cannot do. so basically take it to good tuner, use a good management system, and dont go retarded on beating it and boosting it. b series vtec safe limit on stock internals is right around 300. non vtec you prob wanna stay around 250-275. the more efficient your setup is the higher you can take that.
seriously just boost the damn thing stay under 300 to the ground and it will be ok if DONE RIGHT!
that is cliff notes this whole damn thread
seriously just find the one closest to you that you have heard the name alot, see if they have a really well put together race car that stays together, look at some examples of their work.
forget what retard above is saying about trying to prove everyone wrong about PSI. PSI is important to an extent but not where this conversation is concerned the total output of the engine in the end is more of a breaking point, for years we have seen stock motors take more and more power with proper tuning and there have been so many break throughs in management systems and learning of what you can or cannot do. so basically take it to good tuner, use a good management system, and dont go retarded on beating it and boosting it. b series vtec safe limit on stock internals is right around 300. non vtec you prob wanna stay around 250-275. the more efficient your setup is the higher you can take that.
seriously just boost the damn thing stay under 300 to the ground and it will be ok if DONE RIGHT!
that is cliff notes this whole damn thread
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
From: portage, IN, usa
Re: 8psi on stock B16? (cameron4776)
well I am running about 15 on my stock b16 and I am runnign just firn my car throws a check engine light once and while but is nothing it says it a miss fire but I have had every thing checked and torn apart it's just the factory ecu acting out but you can make nice power I think better than a LS. 
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
From: Carlisle, PA, USA
Re: (agrn93ls)
Originally Posted by agrn93ls
forget what retard above is saying about trying to prove everyone wrong about PSI. PSI is important to an extent but not where this conversation is concerned the total output of the engine in the end is more of a breaking point, for years we have seen stock motors take more and more power with proper tuning and there have been so many break throughs in management systems and learning of what you can or cannot do. so basically take it to good tuner, use a good management system, and dont go retarded on beating it and boosting it. b series vtec safe limit on stock internals is right around 300. non vtec you prob wanna stay around 250-275. the more efficient your setup is the higher you can take that.
One needs to understand volume and pressure when boosting a motor. So let's take a ballon as an example. Let's say the tensile strength of said ballon is 25 PSI. When you fill the ballon with air, the pressure exerted on the rubber of the ballon increases. Let's say at 1000 ml of air, you reach the 25 PSI treshold of the rubber in the ballon. The more volume of air you add, the pressure increases exponentially on the ballon. Will the ballon handle increases in volume, sure. But we all know what happens when the volume of air increases the pressure to a point that the ballon can not take the pressure, it pops.
Let's apply this logic to an engine cylinder. First let's get a working definition of forced induction. Forced induction happens with you add a gas compressor to the air intake, thereby increasing the quantity (volume) of oxygen available for combustion. Now we've established that, we can apply what we've learned about the ballon. Boost pressure added to a cylinder increases air volume, set forth by our definition, which in turn increases pressure within the cylinder. Once you exceed the strength of what the materials of the cylinder can hold, pop. This is why stock motors can only handle so much PSI, they don't have strengthened materials to support the increased volume.
Moreover, I think everyone is confused on the cause and effect issue here. Combustion is the cause, and HP is the effect. If you increase combustion or make it more efficient, the effect is more HP. One can not prove that HP is the cause and the effect is more combustion. Therefor, how can one state that HP is the first, and only, factor to consider? The pressures exerted within the cylinder is what will intun cause the motor to fail, not HP. There's a reason everyone keeps stating 300 or so HP to stay around. IT'S BECAUSE THAT'S ABOUT ALL A STOCK MOTOR WILL HANDLE. Yes, tuning, fuel management all play a factor. But even with the best tune you could possibly have, once you break the treshold of the parts involved, i.e., too much pressure within the cylinder, you break the parts.
I hope I made it as simple as possible. I know Honda-Tech is known for bandwagoning, but stop and think before you post anything. The logic of staying in a certain HP level when boosing your car and forget about PSI doesn't hold any water. HP doesn't cause parts to fail, the forced exerted on them does. Once many of you can graspe this concept, then give you input. Until then, try to bash me all you want. I'm the only one who has stated, based on simple known characteristics of engine dynamics, why I'm saying whay I'm saying, not because it's the latest trend.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,211
Likes: 0
From: fl, usa
Re: (Specail Ed)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Specail Ed »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
One needs to understand volume and pressure when boosting a motor. So let's take a ballon as an example. Let's say the tensile strength of said ballon is 25 PSI. When you fill the ballon with air, the pressure exerted on the rubber of the ballon increases. Let's say at 1000 ml of air, you reach the 25 PSI treshold of the rubber in the ballon. The more volume of air you add, the pressure increases exponentially on the ballon. Will the ballon handle increases in volume, sure. But we all know what happens when the volume of air increases the pressure to a point that the ballon can not take the pressure, it pops.
Let's apply this logic to an engine cylinder. First let's get a working definition of forced induction. Forced induction happens with you add a gas compressor to the air intake, thereby increasing the quantity (volume) of oxygen available for combustion. Now we've established that, we can apply what we've learned about the ballon. Boost pressure added to a cylinder increases air volume, set forth by our definition, which in turn increases pressure within the cylinder. Once you exceed the strength of what the materials of the cylinder can hold, pop. This is why stock motors can only handle so much PSI, they don't have strengthened materials to support the increased volume.
Moreover, I think everyone is confused on the cause and effect issue here. Combustion is the cause, and HP is the effect. If you increase combustion or make it more efficient, the effect is more HP. One can not prove that HP is the cause and the effect is more combustion. Therefor, how can one state that HP is the first, and only, factor to consider? The pressures exerted within the cylinder is what will intun cause the motor to fail, not HP.
HP doesn't cause parts to fail, the forced exerted on them does. Once many of you can graspe this concept, then give you input. Until then, try to bash me all you want. I'm the only one who has stated, based on simple known characteristics of engine dynamics, why I'm saying whay I'm saying, not because it's the latest trend. </TD></TR></TABLE>
whats the mass of the air within this imaginary ballon @ 25psi ??? or are you saying that air density doesnt matter
air + fuel + spark = heat
heat + cyl. volume = pressure rise
pressure * S.A. = Force
force * crank arm length = torque
torque * rpm = power
if you follow the chain then you will realize that combustion doesnt result it hp. hp is the result of torque over time.
also how about this as a test go take an air compressor an fill up one cylinder with air until it "pops" then report back to us how much psi it took
im sure you will find it takes a shitload. its torque that stresses the parts in a motor.
One needs to understand volume and pressure when boosting a motor. So let's take a ballon as an example. Let's say the tensile strength of said ballon is 25 PSI. When you fill the ballon with air, the pressure exerted on the rubber of the ballon increases. Let's say at 1000 ml of air, you reach the 25 PSI treshold of the rubber in the ballon. The more volume of air you add, the pressure increases exponentially on the ballon. Will the ballon handle increases in volume, sure. But we all know what happens when the volume of air increases the pressure to a point that the ballon can not take the pressure, it pops.
Let's apply this logic to an engine cylinder. First let's get a working definition of forced induction. Forced induction happens with you add a gas compressor to the air intake, thereby increasing the quantity (volume) of oxygen available for combustion. Now we've established that, we can apply what we've learned about the ballon. Boost pressure added to a cylinder increases air volume, set forth by our definition, which in turn increases pressure within the cylinder. Once you exceed the strength of what the materials of the cylinder can hold, pop. This is why stock motors can only handle so much PSI, they don't have strengthened materials to support the increased volume.
Moreover, I think everyone is confused on the cause and effect issue here. Combustion is the cause, and HP is the effect. If you increase combustion or make it more efficient, the effect is more HP. One can not prove that HP is the cause and the effect is more combustion. Therefor, how can one state that HP is the first, and only, factor to consider? The pressures exerted within the cylinder is what will intun cause the motor to fail, not HP.
HP doesn't cause parts to fail, the forced exerted on them does. Once many of you can graspe this concept, then give you input. Until then, try to bash me all you want. I'm the only one who has stated, based on simple known characteristics of engine dynamics, why I'm saying whay I'm saying, not because it's the latest trend. </TD></TR></TABLE>
whats the mass of the air within this imaginary ballon @ 25psi ??? or are you saying that air density doesnt matter
air + fuel + spark = heat
heat + cyl. volume = pressure rise
pressure * S.A. = Force
force * crank arm length = torque
torque * rpm = power
if you follow the chain then you will realize that combustion doesnt result it hp. hp is the result of torque over time.
also how about this as a test go take an air compressor an fill up one cylinder with air until it "pops" then report back to us how much psi it took
im sure you will find it takes a shitload. its torque that stresses the parts in a motor.
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx, USA
Re: (Specail Ed)
Originally Posted by Specail Ed
Ha, you contradict yourself in this very statement. You say, "forget what retard above is saying about trying to prove everyone wrong about PSI." But then further in your statement you say, "so basically take it to good tuner, use a good management system, and dont go retarded on beating it and boosting it.<U></U>" If you're advising this guy that he shouldn't go "boosting it," then how can you say that PSI doesn't matter? I think it's time for a basic physics lesson so everyone can see what I'm talking about and hopefully shed a little light on why PSI is an extremely important factor to consider when boosting a stock motor.
One needs to understand volume and pressure when boosting a motor. So let's take a ballon as an example. Let's say the tensile strength of said ballon is 25 PSI. When you fill the ballon with air, the pressure exerted on the rubber of the ballon increases. Let's say at 1000 ml of air, you reach the 25 PSI treshold of the rubber in the ballon. The more volume of air you add, the pressure increases exponentially on the ballon. Will the ballon handle increases in volume, sure. But we all know what happens when the volume of air increases the pressure to a point that the ballon can not take the pressure, it pops.
Let's apply this logic to an engine cylinder. First let's get a working definition of forced induction. Forced induction happens with you add a gas compressor to the air intake, thereby increasing the quantity (volume) of oxygen available for combustion. Now we've established that, we can apply what we've learned about the ballon. Boost pressure added to a cylinder increases air volume, set forth by our definition, which in turn increases pressure within the cylinder. Once you exceed the strength of what the materials of the cylinder can hold, pop. This is why stock motors can only handle so much PSI, they don't have strengthened materials to support the increased volume.
Moreover, I think everyone is confused on the cause and effect issue here. Combustion is the cause, and HP is the effect. If you increase combustion or make it more efficient, the effect is more HP. One can not prove that HP is the cause and the effect is more combustion. Therefor, how can one state that HP is the first, and only, factor to consider? The pressures exerted within the cylinder is what will intun cause the motor to fail, not HP. There's a reason everyone keeps stating 300 or so HP to stay around. IT'S BECAUSE THAT'S ABOUT ALL A STOCK MOTOR WILL HANDLE. Yes, tuning, fuel management all play a factor. But even with the best tune you could possibly have, once you break the treshold of the parts involved, i.e., too much pressure within the cylinder, you break the parts.
I hope I made it as simple as possible. I know Honda-Tech is known for bandwagoning, but stop and think before you post anything. The logic of staying in a certain HP level when boosing your car and forget about PSI doesn't hold any water. HP doesn't cause parts to fail, the forced exerted on them does. Once many of you can graspe this concept, then give you input. Until then, try to bash me all you want. I'm the only one who has stated, based on simple known characteristics of engine dynamics, why I'm saying whay I'm saying, not because it's the latest trend.
ah so you say PSI is so important but yet you say when volume increases so does PSI and everyone else has been trying to state that........ so who's bashing who
you are trying to over brain this guy that dosen't need all your over explaining his general question.
you say a give amount of over powering the components breaks parts and bandwaggoning cant apply, fine but the "bandwaggoning" of how much power you can generally run on a given motor is the result of trial and error and common feedback of daily turbo vehicles, so its safe to say that if you stick around that area you are generally safe especially when OP want a basic answer to a basic question.
edited for my misreading. some things left the same
Modified by agrn93ls at 11:57 AM 11/15/2007
Modified by agrn93ls at 12:29 PM 11/15/2007
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
From: Carlisle, PA, USA
Re: (tony413)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tony413 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
whats the mass of the air within this imaginary ballon @ 25psi ??? or are you saying that air density doesnt matter
air + fuel + spark = heat
heat + cyl. volume = pressure rise
pressure * S.A. = Force
force * crank arm length = torque
torque * rpm = power
if you follow the chain then you will realize that combustion doesnt result it hp. hp is the result of torque over time.
also how about this as a test go take an air compressor an fill up one cylinder with air until it "pops" then report back to us how much psi it took im sure you will find it takes a shitload. its torque that stresses the parts in a motor.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Of course density matters. Why do you think HP numbers are different at sea level or high altitudes? The less dess the air, the less HP you make. What do you think the purpose of forced induction is? To increase the volume of air in a cylinder which increases it's density, ultimately making the engine's combustion more efficient, inturn making more HP.
Here's a better defintion of torque and HP:
Torque is a measure of the ability of an engine to do work. It's a component of, but not the same as, the (horse) power of the engine, which is the rate at which work can be done. I'm not sure where you were going with your torque idea. Wheel torque has nothing to do with stress in the motor. Wheel torque causes stress on the parts invovled in getting the torque to the ground, i.e. clutch, transmission, axles and so on. I'll agree that torque is exerted on those moving parts does come from the crankshaft. But explain to me how the forces of that crankshaft will cause engine damage. How will the torque on the crank cause rings to go bad, or head gaskets to blow? The pressure inside the cylinder is what causes it to fail.
One thing you're not taking into consideration with your little cylinder pressure test is compression. If you compress the air inside the cylinder, you infinitely increase the chance of something breaking. Solely filling a cylinder with air will take a lot of PSI to make it "pop." However, compress the air inside and you don't need nearly as much PSI in that cylinder.
whats the mass of the air within this imaginary ballon @ 25psi ??? or are you saying that air density doesnt matter
air + fuel + spark = heat
heat + cyl. volume = pressure rise
pressure * S.A. = Force
force * crank arm length = torque
torque * rpm = power
if you follow the chain then you will realize that combustion doesnt result it hp. hp is the result of torque over time.
also how about this as a test go take an air compressor an fill up one cylinder with air until it "pops" then report back to us how much psi it took
im sure you will find it takes a shitload. its torque that stresses the parts in a motor.</TD></TR></TABLE>Of course density matters. Why do you think HP numbers are different at sea level or high altitudes? The less dess the air, the less HP you make. What do you think the purpose of forced induction is? To increase the volume of air in a cylinder which increases it's density, ultimately making the engine's combustion more efficient, inturn making more HP.
Here's a better defintion of torque and HP:
Torque is a measure of the ability of an engine to do work. It's a component of, but not the same as, the (horse) power of the engine, which is the rate at which work can be done. I'm not sure where you were going with your torque idea. Wheel torque has nothing to do with stress in the motor. Wheel torque causes stress on the parts invovled in getting the torque to the ground, i.e. clutch, transmission, axles and so on. I'll agree that torque is exerted on those moving parts does come from the crankshaft. But explain to me how the forces of that crankshaft will cause engine damage. How will the torque on the crank cause rings to go bad, or head gaskets to blow? The pressure inside the cylinder is what causes it to fail.
One thing you're not taking into consideration with your little cylinder pressure test is compression. If you compress the air inside the cylinder, you infinitely increase the chance of something breaking. Solely filling a cylinder with air will take a lot of PSI to make it "pop." However, compress the air inside and you don't need nearly as much PSI in that cylinder.
Man U FTW
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 11,973
Likes: 2
From: Phoenix, AZ
...i dont see this arguement going anywhere
Specail Ed, you've been trying to convince us how it is "impossible" to run over a certain PSI on a stock block. There are countless examples of stock block B series doing what you claim "impossible." I'm glad you're trying to back up your claims, but your logic doesn't make a lot of sense in THIS context. Boost is more or less a measure of restriction
Read this:
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Um, if you flow more air into the same volume, pressure will increase. The only way to flow more air into the same volume and keep pressure constant is to increase volume. The difference in volume because of the compressor and it's housing is relatively minimal. The difference lies on the exhaust side and how much room the turbine can make in the engine. It's all been discussed and written out. There is no reason for half thoughts on this topic any longer.</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">You have air sitting on both sides of the engine. One is good air, ie the intake. The other is ****, the exhaust. With a turbo'd system, we stick a huge restriction on the exhaust side. The restriction causes reversion. Reversion causes VE to drop. VE is volumetric efficiency. Basically running 90% VE on a 1 L engine is like running 100% VE on a .9L engine. So your theoretical volume is decreasing. If you increase your volume, by decreasing reversion, you're making more room for air to come from your turbo.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Specail Ed, you've been trying to convince us how it is "impossible" to run over a certain PSI on a stock block. There are countless examples of stock block B series doing what you claim "impossible." I'm glad you're trying to back up your claims, but your logic doesn't make a lot of sense in THIS context. Boost is more or less a measure of restriction
Read this:
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Um, if you flow more air into the same volume, pressure will increase. The only way to flow more air into the same volume and keep pressure constant is to increase volume. The difference in volume because of the compressor and it's housing is relatively minimal. The difference lies on the exhaust side and how much room the turbine can make in the engine. It's all been discussed and written out. There is no reason for half thoughts on this topic any longer.</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">You have air sitting on both sides of the engine. One is good air, ie the intake. The other is ****, the exhaust. With a turbo'd system, we stick a huge restriction on the exhaust side. The restriction causes reversion. Reversion causes VE to drop. VE is volumetric efficiency. Basically running 90% VE on a 1 L engine is like running 100% VE on a .9L engine. So your theoretical volume is decreasing. If you increase your volume, by decreasing reversion, you're making more room for air to come from your turbo.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx, USA
Re: (Schister66)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Schister66 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...i dont see this arguement going anywhere </TD></TR></TABLE>
X2
X2
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,211
Likes: 0
From: fl, usa
Re: (Schister66)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Schister66 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...i dont see this arguement going anywhere </TD></TR></TABLE>
this is H-T when does it ever read the sig
this is H-T when does it ever read the sig
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
From: Carlisle, PA, USA
Re: (agrn93ls)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by agrn93ls »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
you also say efficiency dosen't equal more combustion, bullshit the more efficient the burn equals more efficient combustion equals more power.
Modified by agrn93ls at 11:57 AM 11/15/2007</TD></TR></TABLE>
I've said all along the efficiency does cause better combustion. I'm not trying to go over anyone's head here. The guy asked "if 8 psi would be a safe number to run" on his stock B16. Everyone added that psi isn't the real factor, but HP is, yet no one has gone to any extent to explain to this guy what he needs to do to get the HP levels you all feel that he should go with. No one asked his turbo set up or fuel delivering system. Maybe he has a crappy, inefficient turbo. Is it safe to recommend 300 HP to this guy if he's running a small DSM turbo? I'm sure the turbo could make 300 HP, but at what boost levels would he be at to achieve this? The point I've been trying to make all along is that until one understands turbo efficiency, they need to understand the forces that applied by boost pressure to an engine's cylinder. Since we don't know what turbo he's running or how he's tuning his car, telling this guy 300 HP is a reasonable goal is not very good advice. Telling him to stay within a certain boost pressure is. At least then if he's running an efficient turbo, staying within a given boost level should put him right near the HP numbers that we all know are possible from that motor. But if he's running a s@#tty turbo, aiming for a reasonable HP level could cause motor failure.
you also say efficiency dosen't equal more combustion, bullshit the more efficient the burn equals more efficient combustion equals more power.
Modified by agrn93ls at 11:57 AM 11/15/2007</TD></TR></TABLE>
I've said all along the efficiency does cause better combustion. I'm not trying to go over anyone's head here. The guy asked "if 8 psi would be a safe number to run" on his stock B16. Everyone added that psi isn't the real factor, but HP is, yet no one has gone to any extent to explain to this guy what he needs to do to get the HP levels you all feel that he should go with. No one asked his turbo set up or fuel delivering system. Maybe he has a crappy, inefficient turbo. Is it safe to recommend 300 HP to this guy if he's running a small DSM turbo? I'm sure the turbo could make 300 HP, but at what boost levels would he be at to achieve this? The point I've been trying to make all along is that until one understands turbo efficiency, they need to understand the forces that applied by boost pressure to an engine's cylinder. Since we don't know what turbo he's running or how he's tuning his car, telling this guy 300 HP is a reasonable goal is not very good advice. Telling him to stay within a certain boost pressure is. At least then if he's running an efficient turbo, staying within a given boost level should put him right near the HP numbers that we all know are possible from that motor. But if he's running a s@#tty turbo, aiming for a reasonable HP level could cause motor failure.
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx, USA
Re: (Specail Ed)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Specail Ed »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I've said all along the efficiency does cause better combustion. I'm not trying to go over anyone's head here. The guy asked "if 8 psi would be a safe number to run" on his stock B16. Everyone added that psi isn't the real factor, but HP is, yet no one has gone to any extent to explain to this guy what he needs to do to get the HP levels you all feel that he should go with. No one asked his turbo set up or fuel delivering system. Maybe he has a crappy, inefficient turbo. Is it safe to recommend 300 HP to this guy if he's running a small DSM turbo? I'm sure the turbo could make 300 HP, but at what boost levels would he be at to achieve this? The point I've been trying to make all along is that until one understands turbo efficiency, they need to understand the forces that applied by boost pressure to an engine's cylinder. Since we don't know what turbo he's running or how he's tuning his car, telling this guy 300 HP is a reasonable goal is not very good advice. Telling him to stay within a certain boost pressure is. At least then if he's running an efficient turbo, staying within a given boost level should put him right near the HP numbers that we all know are possible from that motor. But if he's running a s@#tty turbo, aiming for a reasonable HP level could cause motor failure. </TD></TR></TABLE>
i fully agree. and i edited my post for what you just quoted, i removed that because i misread.
I've said all along the efficiency does cause better combustion. I'm not trying to go over anyone's head here. The guy asked "if 8 psi would be a safe number to run" on his stock B16. Everyone added that psi isn't the real factor, but HP is, yet no one has gone to any extent to explain to this guy what he needs to do to get the HP levels you all feel that he should go with. No one asked his turbo set up or fuel delivering system. Maybe he has a crappy, inefficient turbo. Is it safe to recommend 300 HP to this guy if he's running a small DSM turbo? I'm sure the turbo could make 300 HP, but at what boost levels would he be at to achieve this? The point I've been trying to make all along is that until one understands turbo efficiency, they need to understand the forces that applied by boost pressure to an engine's cylinder. Since we don't know what turbo he's running or how he's tuning his car, telling this guy 300 HP is a reasonable goal is not very good advice. Telling him to stay within a certain boost pressure is. At least then if he's running an efficient turbo, staying within a given boost level should put him right near the HP numbers that we all know are possible from that motor. But if he's running a s@#tty turbo, aiming for a reasonable HP level could cause motor failure. </TD></TR></TABLE>
i fully agree. and i edited my post for what you just quoted, i removed that because i misread.
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,992
Likes: 0
From: Nashville, TN, U.S.A
Re: (Specail Ed)
Please please please stop talking Specail Ed. I am not going to be sarcastic in the least bit during this post. You are very far from the truth and almost on the opposite spectrum. So far away that I question if you are trolling. If you are please stop because a lot of people read these post just trying to learn and misinformation like this gets spread around.
For you to say <TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Specail Ed »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Wheel torque has nothing to do with stress in the motor. Wheel torque causes stress on the parts invovled in getting the torque to the ground, i.e. clutch, transmission, axles and so on. I'll agree that torque is exerted on those moving parts does come from the crankshaft. But explain to me how the forces of that crankshaft will cause engine damage. How will the torque on the crank cause rings to go bad, or head gaskets to blow? The pressure inside the cylinder is what causes it to fail. </TD></TR></TABLE>
really is very very very bad. Torque is DIRECTLY (D-I-R-E-C-T-L-Y) related to internal pressures (1000+psi and NOT 40psi of boost dumb ****!). Heat makes this pressure. I really am not going to waste more time on this subject with you.
Tell you what. Go try your theory out. As someone stated go fill that cylinder with 100psi of air (A compression test will yield higher
) and see if the motor blows. Then try <U>our</U> theory of higher internal pressures causing damage (Since internal pressure DOES make torque...don't even try to argue that) Go ahead and crank your <u>stock</u> integra to 44* of timing at WOT and report back....according to you nothing bad should happen since their is no boost, only a **** load of internal pressure creating power at the wrong crank angle.
Quite simply, I have never had to "report" someone to a moderator so this will be a first time. I don't wish for you to get banned, but I do hope for deduction in points. This lunacy of yours and your trying to prove a stunningly misinformed proposition just boggles my mind. We have told you again and again the "why" you are wrong, but you won't stop. I beg a moderator to help so that people can get the right information.
...Waiting for mod and very upset
For you to say <TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Specail Ed »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Wheel torque has nothing to do with stress in the motor. Wheel torque causes stress on the parts invovled in getting the torque to the ground, i.e. clutch, transmission, axles and so on. I'll agree that torque is exerted on those moving parts does come from the crankshaft. But explain to me how the forces of that crankshaft will cause engine damage. How will the torque on the crank cause rings to go bad, or head gaskets to blow? The pressure inside the cylinder is what causes it to fail. </TD></TR></TABLE>
really is very very very bad. Torque is DIRECTLY (D-I-R-E-C-T-L-Y) related to internal pressures (1000+psi and NOT 40psi of boost dumb ****!). Heat makes this pressure. I really am not going to waste more time on this subject with you.
Tell you what. Go try your theory out. As someone stated go fill that cylinder with 100psi of air (A compression test will yield higher
) and see if the motor blows. Then try <U>our</U> theory of higher internal pressures causing damage (Since internal pressure DOES make torque...don't even try to argue that) Go ahead and crank your <u>stock</u> integra to 44* of timing at WOT and report back....according to you nothing bad should happen since their is no boost, only a **** load of internal pressure creating power at the wrong crank angle.Quite simply, I have never had to "report" someone to a moderator so this will be a first time. I don't wish for you to get banned, but I do hope for deduction in points. This lunacy of yours and your trying to prove a stunningly misinformed proposition just boggles my mind. We have told you again and again the "why" you are wrong, but you won't stop. I beg a moderator to help so that people can get the right information.
...Waiting for mod and very upset
Man U FTW
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 11,973
Likes: 2
From: Phoenix, AZ
Re: (adseguy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by adseguy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I beg a moderator to help so that people can get the right information.
...Waiting for mod and very upset </TD></TR></TABLE>
i dont see this arguement going anywhere
Specail Ed, you've been trying to convince us how it is "impossible" to run over a certain PSI on a stock block. There are countless examples of stock block B series doing what you claim "impossible." I'm glad you're trying to back up your claims, but your logic doesn't make a lot of sense in THIS context. Boost is more or less a measure of restriction
Read this: Thanks to NowType
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by NowType »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Um, if you flow more air into the same volume, pressure will increase. The only way to flow more air into the same volume and keep pressure constant is to increase volume. The difference in volume because of the compressor and it's housing is relatively minimal. The difference lies on the exhaust side and how much room the turbine can make in the engine. It's all been discussed and written out. There is no reason for half thoughts on this topic any longer.
Furthermore...
You have air sitting on both sides of the engine. One is good air, ie the intake. The other is ****, the exhaust. With a turbo'd system, we stick a huge restriction on the exhaust side. The restriction causes reversion. Reversion causes VE to drop. VE is volumetric efficiency. Basically running 90% VE on a 1 L engine is like running 100% VE on a .9L engine. So your theoretical volume is decreasing. If you increase your volume, by decreasing reversion, you're making more room for air to come from your turbo. </TD></TR></TABLE>
...Waiting for mod and very upset
</TD></TR></TABLE>i dont see this arguement going anywhere
Specail Ed, you've been trying to convince us how it is "impossible" to run over a certain PSI on a stock block. There are countless examples of stock block B series doing what you claim "impossible." I'm glad you're trying to back up your claims, but your logic doesn't make a lot of sense in THIS context. Boost is more or less a measure of restriction
Read this: Thanks to NowType
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by NowType »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Um, if you flow more air into the same volume, pressure will increase. The only way to flow more air into the same volume and keep pressure constant is to increase volume. The difference in volume because of the compressor and it's housing is relatively minimal. The difference lies on the exhaust side and how much room the turbine can make in the engine. It's all been discussed and written out. There is no reason for half thoughts on this topic any longer.
Furthermore...
You have air sitting on both sides of the engine. One is good air, ie the intake. The other is ****, the exhaust. With a turbo'd system, we stick a huge restriction on the exhaust side. The restriction causes reversion. Reversion causes VE to drop. VE is volumetric efficiency. Basically running 90% VE on a 1 L engine is like running 100% VE on a .9L engine. So your theoretical volume is decreasing. If you increase your volume, by decreasing reversion, you're making more room for air to come from your turbo. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
