Under the same setup (management, turbo, boost, dp, exhaust, etc)... Would a built motor act significant better than a stock? I know a built motor can handle more, but would there be major gains under the exact same setup. Factors like differences in lighter components, inertia, frictions... etc. can contribute to some.. about alot?

 

good question

 

possibly loss of horsepower. If you go lower compression. Built motors are nice because you can do everything all at once and get a lot of gains in other areas, like the head.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 93turbo16 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">possibly loss of horsepower. If you go lower compression. Built motors are nice because you can do everything all at once and get a lot of gains in other areas, like the head.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I would bet money a 9:1 built 81.5MM GSR motor would make more horsepower than a 10:1 stock GSR motor in a turbo application. Lighter parts and a fresh motor make up a bigger difference than the 3-4% power loss you'll see from a full drop in compression.

 

a built "engine" will always be better than a stock engine. You can lower compression and run more boost, or you could just go to forged pistons, rods, and balancing with same compression and get more power under the same boost.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by b16coupe &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I would bet money a 9:1 built 81.5MM GSR motor would make more horsepower than a 10:1 stock GSR motor in a turbo application. Lighter parts and a fresh motor make up a bigger difference than the 3-4% power loss you'll see from a full drop in compression.</TD></TR></TABLE>

But how much are you truly netting? 3-4% loss due to compression.. but better flow, lighter components and a tighter motor give you back the 3-4%, how much over that are you getting? And if it's only a percent or two... you couple potentially make that up with an ice pack... every 11 deg cooler is 1% more hp... just as an alternative.

I'm not an advocate for or against... I was wonder if there is an overwhelming benefit to building motors for boost.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by scartail &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

But how much are you truly netting? 3-4% loss due to compression.. but better flow, lighter components and a tighter motor give you back the 3-4%, how much over that are you getting? And if it's only a percent or two... you couple potentially make that up with an ice pack... every 11 deg cooler is 1% more hp... just as an alternative.

I'm not an advocate for or against... I was wonder if there is an overwhelming benefit to building motors for boost.</TD></TR></TABLE>

.....reliability without an ice pack.......?¿?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by snoochtodanooch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">a built "engine" will always be better than a stock engine. You can lower compression and run more boost, or you could just go to forged pistons, rods, and balancing with same compression and get more power under the same boost. </TD></TR></TABLE>

i run compression higher then stock lol from 9.8:1 to 10.2:1

 

there you go.

 

I guess it would all depend on how bad of shape the motor was in original form...

 

with the same compression I'd say the stock motor would be better, the built stuff is most likely heavier. Atleast H-beams are.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DaZman69 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">with the same compression I'd say the stock motor would be better, the built stuff is most likely heavier. Atleast H-beams are.</TD></TR></TABLE>

no way dude. i doubt they are any heavier, and they are much stronger in the strength to weight ratio. built will always be better than stock.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by snoochtodanooch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

no way dude. i doubt they are any heavier, </TD></TR></TABLE>


get out your gram scale !!!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Dturbocivic &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">


get out your gram scale !!! </TD></TR></TABLE>


can't, i ain't into that stuff but that my friend is another topic

 

\/___\/
___:___


sniff sniff

 

so what's the conclusion we can draw from all this??

 

negligible.

 

built engine&gt;stock engine period.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by snoochtodanooch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">built engine&gt;stock engine period. </TD></TR></TABLE>

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by scartail &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Under the same setup (management, turbo, boost, dp, exhaust, etc)... Would a built motor act significant better than a stock? I know a built motor can handle more, but would there be major gains under the exact same setup. Factors like differences in lighter components, inertia, frictions... etc. can contribute to some.. about alot?</TD></TR></TABLE>

what do you mean 'act' better than stock? make more power? be more reliable?
majority of the people who have 'built' motors lower there compression to around 9.1
that being said, if two motors have the same setup like you mentioned, then yes the built motor would be more reliable, but given the same setup and boost levels, the stock motor (say a gsr with CR 10.1) will put out more power and be more streetable. (this doesnt go to say the 9.1 motor isnt streetable b/c it is as well)

 

you could build an "ENGINE" for boost with the same compression as the stock engine and it will have much more power, and be more reliable with all other conditions being the same.

steak&gt;burger
2&gt;1
built&gt;stock

 

hey dave you just say something about an "ENGINE?"

oh yeah.. that's what people call "MOTORS."

stock &lt; built (hint dave.... BIG HINT)

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by b16coupe &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I would bet money a 9:1 built 81.5MM GSR motor would make more horsepower than a 10:1 stock GSR motor in a turbo application. Lighter parts and a fresh motor make up a bigger difference than the 3-4% power loss you'll see from a full drop in compression.</TD></TR></TABLE>

and

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by snoochtodanooch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">built engine&gt;stock engine period. </TD></TR></TABLE>

end of thread.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by djsbon &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">hey dave you just say something about an "ENGINE?"

oh yeah.. that's what people call "MOTORS."

stock &lt; built (hint dave.... BIG HINT)</TD></TR></TABLE>

hey my engine ain't stock..... its JDM.....