96ekb20

update 7/20/2016

a drag car/ extreme weekend warrior. shooting for 7-800whp. would love to end up hitting low 9s.


now block is to be a darton sleeved a1 block. @83mm with arias flat tops and thick turbo pins. rods crower i beams

turbo s366 cast wheel

fuel system looking to be 450 on e85 2200cc boush injectors stocklines

top end is complete gsr head supertech 85 springs ti retainers stock ports skunk 2 pro 1's preformer x intake 68mm tb

2.5" piping, thread stone 10c intercooler, ram horn manifold, 38mm gate, 3" dp and exhaust.

starting on a new build and at a cross road. i have a 10:1 ls short block with devcon from top of water pump whole 3/8" thick and at the top. wiseco pistons eagle rods.

i have two chioces run a ls head ported crowler 404 cams and valve train to support them eldbrock performer x intake 68mm tb arp head studs
or
a gsr head stock ports and 85lb springs and ti retianers with stock gsr cams obx intake still got to get studs...

the biggest thing is going lsv would put me to 11.2:1 compression vs the ls would be 10.3:1 its daily driven dont mind only running 8psi daily and plan to have a e85 race tune for what ever the set up will take. thanks for input. if i need to post turbo set up i can.

2kdrift

what compression calc are you using? I dont think a gsr head would bump the compression up that much, the c speed calc shows about a .7 increase - a b16 head would be about a .3 increase

11:1 is completely safe anyway so basically comes down to vtec vs non debate, I would think the higher comp + vtec would be much more fun for the street

and as you know 8 psi means nothing as you didnt state your turbo

cruizinmax

iTrader: (2)

I would run the vtec head for sure. I have a 11.5:1 gsr at about 300hp. Normally run e85 but have a pump gas tune too just in case. Took 10psi on a Gt2871r.

96ekb20

block is decked .010 and head is 41cc. i have a gt30 with the big .70 ar cold side and 61mm compressor wheel my exhaust wheel is still 56mm .63 ar big tube ram horn 38mm gate 660hp thread stone center intercooler gram 1000s aem 320 pump stock fuel lines. the only intake i have for the gsr is a obx sheet metal one.

96ekb20

did it make 300 on the pump or the e85 tune.

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

It can be done on 93 if you know what you're doing.

cruizinmax

iTrader: (2)

I actually haven't dynoed the car. I trapped 116 in a full weight EK hatch. That was on e85. I didn't tune for max power on pump gas. I just have that tune for road trips.

96ekb20

lol i trapped 118 @ 12.2 burning the clutch out the car with the old set up. im in nor cal nothing over 91 at the pumps. im still putting my old b20 set up into another block to shoot for my 11 goal stock cams why this is being built. im content with not pushing alot of power when on pump gas as id just be using it for the same as cruizinmax daily driving and road trips and what not. when at the track ill change fuel.

96ekb20

so would the higher compression lsv make techaniclly more over all power since i guess my turbo is kinda small would it beable to push more power then say on a 10:1 or 9;1 motor same set up? or will it still fall off around 400?

96ekb20

also is it even worth trying to use the obx intake ?

cruizinmax

iTrader: (2)

Nice! I'm pretty happy with my setup. I know it has a lot more in it if I want. I'm running a internal gate and going through a Apexi world sport exhaust.

I tuned a buddy of mines 00 si a few years back. Had a bone stock b16 and made like 390 on e85 and he broke in to the 11's on drag radials.

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

I'll keep it simple for you.... Nope.

Geis

Awww the infamous obx intake.

96ekb20

ya i figured it wasnt a great intake was a freebie from a friend.

so like i had said before shodan what would the two different set ups do? more compression make more power sooner/ easyer? since my turbo is a gt30 with the bigger comp housing that was offered and 61mm wheel what do you think the turbo could push. but can it make more then the lower compression LS set up?

i know it will have a better power band and more useable power out of boost. but will/can the more compression make a turbo that only flows x make more then it normally would or does the air flow only give you so much power?

also which head gaskit should i be going with keep seeing alot of oem stuff.

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

96ekb20

so what would you say that turbo maxs out at?

what is the boost range on that turbo?

i figured thats what the difference would be between more or less comp and vtec vs non vtec

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

You mean the GT3040R? I've never seen them make more than about 515whp maximum.

The turbo doesn't care. The discerned is the boost pressure with VTEC vs. Non vtec, more than static compression.

96ekb20

yes the gt3040r. ok so what boost range would be best for that turbo so i can see what way to go to beable to run it there with my compression choices.

so would a 5858,6262.6466 or a comp 6266 be better for the 600s

seems that if i stay with LS then i should keep my turbo if i go lsv to get a better turbo

Geis

lol, asking the shodan his preference of Precision turbos?
From most builds I've seen, 6262 seems to be pretty standard at that power level (depending on fuel of course)

96ekb20

i know he doesnt like them. i was throwing some sizes out there that ive heard mite do it. but with still like to know what he feels would be best for a drag car with my parts list.

also how to figure out intake size for this power level see all types of intakes? victor x golden eagle( which liter ) ultras bmc.

would like to break high 9s with this as ive been told 600ish should hit high 9s

96ekb20

what psi level do you think itll take to make the 500ish mark

LightningTeg

Just dig through the build threads or Evans tuning dyno forum.

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

DO NOT QUOTE THIS ENTIRE TEXT WHEN CONTRIBUTING YOUR THOUGHTS - IT'S TOO LONG AND LOSES THE MESSAGE IN THE PROCESS

Well, the majority of you know my preferences about suggesting anything Precision. For those that don't, understand that as impartial / partial I may be towards certain manufacturers/designers of turbochargers, I won't even waste my time or energy giving them any credit (at this point anyway,) for their creations; it will only feed their marketing machine that much more.

What I think that 96ekb20 is trying to do is use as little boost pressure for a given turbocharger (giving the implication that he's attempting to only use 91-93 octane level fuel) in order to get maximum peak power as possible, (which means very little) in order to use this for a drag/street purpose to reach 9.99 seconds and below. (If I'm wrong about this 96ekb20, please inform me, as I'm going by your stated content here. )

Pardon me if some of what I'm about to type here resonates as a type of "soap box rant", as that's not my intent, but it does beg the question as to how people on the forums are trying to figure out this "black magic" we know as turbocharger calculation. I'll be honest in saying that even though there are lots of quick entry "turbo calculators" out there from Garrett, Rayjay, musclecar forums, and even just independent builders, that factor in a majority of the math that's needed to help with their calculations, it's still as much art as it is science when determining what turbocharger can behave with certain applications.

Myself, I don't really have much of a "secret" formula as much as I do have a unique way of mathematically including other factors that the quick calculators don't, and at the same time utilize my experience with over countless engine platforms over the last 20 years. If anything, I understand a certain engine's behaviour in their natural form and factor in certain additional attributes that the user may have had done to the engine.(Some are even rough guesses, but they are nontheless calculated guesses that are factored in.)

There are some, honestly, that still escape and surprise me, especially with cam timing events made by a type of VTEC, VVT-i, i-VTEC, or the use of specific camshafts (even if their profile numbers are stated). That really changes the game, and still make turbocharger profiling exciting to me.

But when it comes to using something like compression alone with two completely different behavioural engines as 96ekb20 is proposing, I can only say that regardless of the small changes in the compression, cylinder head flow capability is just as important, if not more, than compression. Attempting to compare an LS head with a bunch of parts and flow services and say it's on the same level as an LS/VTEC is just a premise you don't want to adopt. Lightningteg is really the best documentation of such a real world case to consider, and he can easily attest from his background that the two worlds are completely different. (funny part is, the second time around, he used a smaller overall turbocharger, and created gains in areas he didn't originally expect! ).

Now, is there a direct answer as to "why?", like a Eureka moment that points the finger at the one thing that made a difference? Unfortunately, the answer is no; It's the combination of those factors, most importantly, a better flowing cylinder head that made the biggest difference. Remember, Lightningteg never touched his block to really change static compression. IIRC, he's still at just over 9.5:1 on VTEC, so that really goes a long way over keeping an obsession over the best static compression to be at to get to your maximum efficient effective compression. I'm quite sure someone more qualified than me like Tony-the-Tiger can explain this in written form a bit better.

So, now back to 96ekb20's direct question:

The way I will answer is this: Don't try and pursue that kind of goal the way you're doing by,

1) using PSI to determine max 500whp peak power, and go backwards to find a turbocharger that suits.

2) attempting to use Precision as a "guide" (as acceptable as this practice is used here) to determine if it is indeed just overall wheel/shaft sizes that determine what you think you want

3) continuing to believe that PSI is the determining factor as to what power level or torque band is going to be best to have the best of all worlds, and still not break the bank or the bottom end.

What you're asking for is rather simplistic, and complicated at the same time, because although your power goals are reasonably specific, your powerband goals are in the air, especially since you're going for specific E.T., and other measurable factors of power-to-weight and torque-to-weight require in order to achieve the 9.99 seconds you're looking for. (This is why I can't stand people who want "10s" or "9s", and don't even get specific with that area... what the hell do you mean? 9.50? 9.99? 9.00? these are major differences in selection and use here)

What I've noticed over the years that I have found to really calculate the best way to look at the street/strip or street/circuit purpose use is to look at the overall powerband to the wheels that you're looking for, and not just peak power or psi. Yes, these are important factors to weigh in on the subject, but they're actually rather small factors in the grand scheme of things, especially when unknown fuel is involved, which can make the difference of the turbocharger being at an efficient pressure ratio and rotational speed in order to perform that specific feat.

*beware, slight soap box, again*

Too many street/strip enthusiasts who have been on this forum and several others have been using too large of a turbocharger for a high peak power number simply because they believe that A) "low boost" pressure is safer than "High boost" pressure no matter what size the turbocharger that's being used is, (which is a horrible way to think about it, unless your situation is in the extreme outlying case) and B) they want all the peak power, but since they can't (or won't) look into higher-knock resistant fuel use for their application, (notice I didn't get specific as to which high-knock resistant fuel to use) they won't get the proper powerband that's needed in their specific rpm range in order to get the acceleration rates they need (torque-to-rate ratio) to get to the power level they need.

These same individuals and groups only look to what some sponsored guy did to save money by buying one HUGE turbocharger so they could "grow more later" (C'mon guys, how often do they really "grow" since they skimped out in the 1st place), think they can get the powerband they need by using "low boost" and because they have a peak HP goal that will "shock the world", on 93 octane, they'll have the same powerband and torqueband that the smaller turbocharger will have.

I'm not saying it hasn't been done, as D-Rob has shown that with careful and specific tuning, he can make peak power out of a larger 62mm sized turbocharger using 93 octane, and have relatively decent drivability; but even then, I challenge that setup to a slightly smaller turbocharger with better characteristics that match the behaviour of that same engine, and you have a much better overall package whether it be in 93 octane or high-knock resistant fuel.

*end soap box*.

So, what I'm saying to 96ekb20, is that anyone can put a 62mm or 67mm sized turbocharger on either engine, run a high boost pressure ratio with the right fuel, and make 500whp PEAK POWER, no problem. The bigger the better. You won't hit "9s" in any way, due to the requirements of the correct power-to-weight ratio needed on almost any Honda that you're considering putting these engine in with 93 octane and 500whp, but, it'll be big, loud, great to show off with, and I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

Just don't be shocked when soccer mom in a 2010 9.3 2.0l Saab will out accelerate you to get over onto the next lane by the time you shift gears, use BBG, a launch control and whatever else you have under the hood to get you going. .

*Cliffs*
What I'm getting at is that both of these engines you're proposing will more than likely use two different turbochargers to reach the same goal. The characteristics of the two are just vastly different, especially on the cylinder heads (different timing events, low cam/high cam adjustments, CFM of head flow, etc) that requires two different modes of thought.


You have to decide on the engine first, then start looking at the turbocharger relative size. Now, yes, you can at least narrow it down by

1) understanding that you need a turbocharger that has enough capable airflow and turbine gas flow to even achieve 500whp, as the turbocharger won't care which engine it's on. So that can easily mean about 52lbs/min or more. Then

2) look at whether or not that can be done on 93 octane...hmm, no... so you have to go to at least 65lbs/min....(Let's just say even a GT35R can't do 500whp on 93 Octane on an LSVTEC, dyno number calculation aside)

Whelp, now your engine behaviour just changed with 65lbs/min, and the mom-Saab already has you on the ropes. So, now you go back down in size, and reign in the power goals and use a bit more (No "9s", and no "500whp" bragging rights.), or you change your fuel options and keep your power level goals, (Forget the "9s", it's not going to happen) and still go down in size.

Or, stay big in turbocharger size (over 70-80lbs/min), get 500whp with 93 octane, go "9s", and dedicate it to drag racing only. And this is with either engine.



I hope I didn't go too crazy like Wantboost usually does, but I thought I'd get to the meat of this explanation without going over more Turbo x vs. Turbo Y with Engine Z vs. Engine Q with or without VTEC kind of thing.

Geis

A few things:
'impartial/partial' - nice synonyms for biased :D (jk)

an example of 9sec integra from Team-integra is Luck4mkrc's (i think I got that right)
he was running mid or low 9s...back when he had a cool 750whp (now 850)
Even by honda standards, a gutted crx will probably need considerably more than 500 to get the same times

Random q in the middle of this; how do you know what the limits of your turbo are based on fuel? Also, I figured running larger turbos in more efficient islands is 'safer' on say, a stock sleeve b20 because of the colder air charge and less susceptibility to knock

52lbs/min for 500whp? I would think that drivetrain losses warrant at least around 60lbs/min no matter what fuel, just curious

And finally..where the hell is wantboost? lol

LightningTeg

I think the limits are based on the engine more so then the turbo. The turbo doesn't care what fuel you are using. Its just compressing air. The less efficient, the hotter the air, the more prone to detonation like you said. But I'm not sure how that would be determined without any kind of real world testing. we kind of know 450-550 is about the safe limit no matter what turbo you have running 93 (obviously depending on the engine displacement, and internal upgrades) with our motors.

I used to run my GT28R (33 lb/min) well past its efficiency on 93oct in an attempt to squeeze the most out of it and never had signs of detonation.


Im gonna guess it has something to do with a female...lol