i have a few questons and it would be great if someone can help, i am looking at getting my stock s2000 engine upgradedwith a 2.4L stoker kit, with all the right parts and installations, how much hp and tq would i be looking at? price not a variable..

Would it be better to purchase an already tuned engine?

is a 2.2 stroker kit mor beneficial?

i am really aiming towards a powerful engine over forced induction looking to bring it to the track i look forward to hearing back thank you.

 

wut do u have a AP1 2.0L or AP2 2.2L ???
theres a stroker kit for the F20C that brings it up to a 2.2L displacement look up Amuse
S2200, it made over 285HP

 

didnt u read turbo, price isnt a variable... i would buy the J's racing engine... 300 hp bam done...

 

I agree! not as much toque as a turbo motor but its more "responsive"

 

^ too bad they blow up

 

haha and catch on fire... and then japanese people laugh because they get them for free...

 

that Is one sweet a$$ motor.

 

If you not talking from actual experience then there is no need to post in this thread.

 

i have an AP1, and will do

 

I never understood that sort of reasoning. There's really not much more responsive, in my mind, than a car that has actual midrange power and hand of god top end acceleration.

I'm not a big fan of how twitchy S2000 are at the limit of traction in the twisties, but a mild turbocharged one behaves like a mini GT car... does very well, to the point it makes a JZA80 Supra look like the heavy, overpriced, and poorly designed chassis it is. Further, there's nothing that makes my lip curl with contempt more than a weak drivetrain, but the total package of a turbo S2000 offsets the rear end issues, and in my mind makes a rear end upgrade worth fooling with.

 

i agree, I think the 100 extra horse would make up for the lack of response. even tho before the turbo is spooled its still making more power then it would be if it was N/A

 

lol a stock s2000 will be more responsive because drawing air is much faster. with the intercooler in play imagine how much time it takes for air to get forced through the turbo and into the throttle body, then more time for it to pressurize inside the charge piping. if you guys don't understand it, you've never raced from a dig before haha.

 

Your understanding of turbochargers is very poor, sir. Any given engine will make more power with a turbo being pedalled to "stay out of boost" than it will NA with a race header/intake/etc bolted to it. Further, turbochargers are load based devices, and there simply isn't enough load in first gear to spool as soon in a lower gear as it does in a higher gear (load). Even with a small turbo.

And, uh, drag racing is always from a dig.

 

hi, i can has a turbo s2000?

when did i ever make the argument of "power" ? the crispness of N/A throttle response is what I was referring to. if you're arguing that turbo cars give better throttle response and easier to control launching why i'd call bullshit.

"my understanding of turbochargers" may be poor, your understanding of the English language straight fails.

my N/A s2k:
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...e/100_0812.jpg

 

my stock engine turbo f22 make over 300whp at the changeover. full boost comes on at pretty much any rpm. on the dyno it was making full boost when we were starting the pulls at 3000rpm. it made about 130 at vtec before the turbo. the response is in fact better with the turbo than without it. it all has to do with the turbo sizing and tuning.

 

so you're saying from idle til redline that every point on the graph that its higher hp/tq than a n/a s2000? show a graph, i'd like to see it.

and if you're hitting peak boost at 3000rpm, wheres the power drop off at? i'm curious, mine takes until 4-4.5k before its fully spooled and from what i've looked up it drops off right around redline. dual bb too

 

Oh, dear, an internet argument with someone who owns a turbo S2000.

You ever pay attention to the SFWD cars that pull 1.4 60' times without wheelie bars? So difficult to do so consistently, yet they do. A properly set up RWD car, which most IRS vehicles very much are not, is even easier. Do you know what gearing is?

 

 

yes that it what im saying, ill scan the graph tonight and post it up, why is it so hard to believe?

before: 227whp@9k




after: 340whp@7500-9000



when the car was na it was pretty weak until after vtec, now the car blows the tires off well before vtec and peak power is made around 7500 as aposed to 8000plus before. the power now is pretty flat from 6500-9000 (300 to 340whp)due to the turbo being maxed out (what i was shooting for) this creates amazing response as the turbo is practically always spooled.

 

i could honestly care less what you are arguing about because i did not once in that post you quoted mention power. i am well aware of how a turbocharged car works. the aim of an N/A car is completely different wouldn't you agree? the aim of the motor is to make it lighter, more efficient, and burn more air per part of fuel. (higher compression)

whereas for a turbocharged car you're looking to build a stronger motor, not necessarily more efficient, some times lighter but once again not necessarily. the aim is to be able to hold combustion given that its being force fed.

so to compare either one motor setup to motor setup is pointless, there is an obvious x-factor that you seem to be blind to. If throttle response is better AND power is better for a turbocharged s2000 why does it run similar times on a road course than an N/A built S2000?

 

because power is not the number 1 factor in road racing, it is usually weight, grip, and brakes, then power

 

im trying to get at consistency/control, can't say so for every other s2k out there but my other s2000 was far easier to control at any throttle position.

 

whatever im done beating this horse, you guys are free to your opinion as I am to mine.

 

maybe the turbo you were using was too big for the response you were looking for, yes a large turbo on a small engine can be very peaky and unpredictable, but a small turbo on a small engine can be very linear and predictable ie: wrx, sti, evo, supra, rx7 etc. i originally was going to use a nissan gti-r turbo on my s2k engine until i found a great deal on the garret gt28. i think alot of people think of turbo lag waay too much because of the majority of turbo setups being built for peak power and not overall power.

 

I've tuned a handful of turbo cars that netted 0.37-0.39 bsfc. Your hypothetical super efficient naturally aspirated S2000 does not do any better.



Sorry, friend, I am not blind to anything. Most particularly I am not blind to the fact you keep changing the subject we are debating with your every post.