these micro-aggression against the 1.6L have to stop. The 1.6L can self-identify as a 1.8L if it wants to; displacement is fluid.
|
:rofl:
sigd |
should we have a trans-displacement section?
don't be a discriminating bigot |
The butthurt is real over there.
Out of respect for Greg's channel I don't want to troll too much. But it's hard not to. |
Originally Posted by aidandj
(Post 1332321)
The butthurt is real over there.
Out of respect for Greg's channel I don't want to troll too much. But it's hard not to. |
So to take away anything from all of this... Not 276?
|
Yes 276, it was a fucking Dynojet
|
Add a 3" exhaust and get another 300rpm of spool
|
Originally Posted by Girz0r
(Post 1332341)
So to take away anything from all of this... Not 276?
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1332343)
Yes to 76 it was a f****** Dyno jet
|
Originally Posted by 18psi
(Post 1332347)
Yah, with a 110 trap basically it's close enough for us to stop arguing about it.
|
Congratz then Greg :likecat:
|
It probably does range between 250 and 270. Cold air does magic for turbos.
|
1 Attachment(s)
|
1 Attachment(s)
|
He's too busy eating tacos :-)
|
Kaboom
|
timing breaks rods.\
he didn't need all that horsepower to beat a c6. |
Ouch!
Does this mean I don't need to try and live my life 12 seconds at a time? I will still try for a 12.99 tonight, hopefully I won't suffer a similar fate. |
He shoulda run -8* tapering to -10* to make 650whp on stock rods
|
Looks like its time for the 1.8 upgrade and a nice MKTurbo setup.
|
nonsense. Pretendingtofgt is about to disprove the whole 1.8>1.6 myth
you guyths need to embrace da future |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1342314)
timing breaks rods.\
he didn't need all that horsepower to beat a c6. |
VVT.
you're welcome. |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1342346)
VVT.
you're welcome. |
As an aside, overboost protection won't cause a total loss in oil pressure. The oil pump is still spinning at ~6000rpm regardless of whether the injectors are on or not. You will lose some pressure briefly, but that's just because the bearings aren't as heavily loaded as they were a split-second beforehand. IOW, hitting overboost didn't break the rod, but ~300whp on a stock bottom end did :party:
|
Originally Posted by Savington
(Post 1342355)
As an aside, overboost protection won't cause a total loss in oil pressure. The oil pump is still spinning at ~6000rpm regardless of whether the injectors are on or not. You will lose some pressure briefly, but that's just because the bearings aren't as heavily loaded as they were a split-second beforehand. IOW, hitting overboost didn't break the rod, but ~300whp on a stock bottom end did :party:
|
Originally Posted by 1993z32
(Post 1342354)
But is it realllllyyyy worth it over a standard BP4W??
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1342383)
A standard BP4W isn't going to give you 150rwhp as a base...
it will make same power there is nothing wrong with starting with a 4w |
nothing wrong except that's it's missing out on a bucket full of mid-range and no extra top end (especially once you bolt up a square top) -- out of the box.
If youre going to do a motor swap, do it right. |
It really does make a huge, huge difference between 3000 and 4000rpm. I've posted charts comparing them before, since I had the same 2871R setup on a BP4W and a BP6D head. Especially with larger turbos, the difference is dramatic.
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1342417)
nothing wrong except that's it's missing out on a bucket full of mid-range and no extra top end (especially once you bolt up a square top) -- out of the box.
If youre going to do a motor swap, do it right. topend same. get your NB knowledge straight, old timer :giggle: |
Originally Posted by Savington
(Post 1342421)
It really does make a huge, huge difference between 3000 and 4000rpm. I've posted charts comparing them before, since I had the same 2871R setup on a BP4W and a BP6D head. Especially with larger turbos, the difference is dramatic.
Dann |
more? probably not. but having 300tq when running good tires and 3.6 final drive is pretty cool
|
Originally Posted by 1993z32
(Post 1342361)
Yeah I'm not thinking the oil pressure had anything to do with the rod failure, I was thinking going from 235wtq into a full power cut and then back on boost was probably pretty stressful for the rods (rapid changes in torque?)
--Ian |
I think the boost cut was just coincidence. And it was doomed anyways.
|
Originally Posted by aidandj
(Post 1342448)
I think the boost cut was just coincidence. And it was doomed anyways.
|
Like most of the members on this site, they likely aren't straight ;)
|
Originally Posted by 18psi
(Post 1342596)
Like most of the members on this site, they likely aren't straight ;)
|
Originally Posted by 1993z32
(Post 1342593)
Just odd that it's been putting down roughly 240wtq for a year, and it was only making 230-235 all day, and after a very abrupt OBP limit it was game over. But it's anyone's guess really. I'm interested to see what the other 3 rods look like.
AIUI, most rods fail in tension (that's where they're weakest), usually at high-RPM with vacuum in the intake manifold (maximum tensile load), and it's not unusual for something that weakens a rod to result in it a seemingly random failure days or weeks later. FWIW, my stock motor had arrow-striaght rods when I took it apart, with 50K boosted miles on it, much of those at 250-260 rwtq. --Ian |
Originally Posted by codrus
(Post 1342598)
Where did you have the redline set? Did you rev it higher when upping the boost? Ever miss a shift and hit 2nd instead of 4th?
AIUI, most rods fail in tension (that's where they're weakest), usually at high-RPM with vacuum in the intake manifold (maximum tensile load), and it's not unusual for something that weakens a rod to result in it a seemingly random failure days or weeks later. FWIW, my stock motor had arrow-striaght rods when I took it apart, with 50K boosted miles on it, much of those at 250-260 rwtq. --Ian |
TLDR: are you still rocking the 2.5" exhaust?
|
Originally Posted by Forrest95M
(Post 1342732)
TLDR: are you still rocking the 2.5" exhaust?
|
that is definitely one of the reasons you couldn't make 300
|
Didnt you buy a gt2560 as well as the gt28? Why didn't you end up going for 300 with the 2560?
|
Alright WHO CHANGED MY THREAD TITLE :magna:
|
Originally Posted by 1993z32
(Post 1343196)
Alright WHO CHANGED MY THREAD TITLE :magna:
|
Originally Posted by shuiend
(Post 1343200)
You just now noticed? I did that like the day you blew the motor.
|
Originally Posted by 1993z32
(Post 1343205)
Speak of the devil. Hey thanks for the sticky cats in the mail, I did a little unboxing video on my other channel saying thanks and linking mkt and mt. We will spread the knowledge!
|
Wait, you couldn't hit 300whp? lol.
I'm glad I listened to these guys and bought the 2001 1.8VVT with flat top. |
Originally Posted by 1993z32
(Post 1343205)
Speak of the devil. Hey thanks for the sticky cats in the mail, I did a little unboxing video on my other channel saying thanks and linking mkt and mt. We will spread the knowledge!
|
Originally Posted by thumpetto007
(Post 1343209)
I'm glad I listened to these guys and bought the 2001 1.8VVT with flat top.
I'll add your vote to the "VVT is worth it" ballot. |
1 Attachment(s)
BP4W was an 83.5mm bottom end, stock BP4W head/cams, ABSURDflow manifold/DP, GT2871R 52-trim 0.86a/r, VICS manifold.
VVT was an 84mm bottom end, stock BP6D head/cams, same turbo setup, Blox B18 Honda IM. Three runs on 100 octane, one run on E85. VVT > * Attachment 232012 |
yeah but look at that bump at 4500. Not a bad place to start :jerkit:
|
TIL... I need VVT in my life.
|
Originally Posted by Savington
(Post 1343253)
BP4W was an 83.5mm bottom end, stock BP4W head/cams, ABSURDflow manifold/DP, GT2871R 52-trim 0.86a/r, VICS manifold.
VVT was an 84mm bottom end, stock BP6D head/cams, same turbo setup, Blox B18 Honda IM. Three runs on 100 octane, one run on E85. VVT > * I'm a VVT convert, have one in my '96. Just curious. |
Originally Posted by dasting
(Post 1344387)
Why no VVT enabled, stock IM, 14 psi run?
How much of the low end bump, if any, would you attribute to the Blox? (not familiar with it, though I'd guess its short runners are better for upper revs anyway) |
Originally Posted by 1993z32
(Post 1342354)
But is it realllllyyyy worth it over a standard BP4W??
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1342383)
A standard BP4W isn't going to give you 150rwhp as a base...
Originally Posted by Forrest95M
(Post 1342732)
TLDR: are you still rocking the 2.5" exhaust?
Originally Posted by 18psi
(Post 1342830)
that is definitely one of the reasons you couldn't make 300
Originally Posted by 1993z32
(Post 1343205)
Speak of the devil. Hey thanks for the sticky cats :likecat: in the mail, I did a little unboxing video on my other channel saying thanks and linking mkt and mt. We will spread the knowledge!
Originally Posted by aidandj
(Post 1343208)
Oh god. Keep them away...
Originally Posted by .one lane
(Post 1343316)
TIL... I need VVT in my life.
So hopefully MS3, 3" exhaust, VVT will be learnt.. Yes? :naughty: |
What's a guy got to do to get a forged 1.8 build thread started in this biatch?
|
Originally Posted by Girz0r
(Post 1345764)
So hopefully MS3, 3" exhaust, VVT will be learnt.. Yes? :naughty:
Thanks |
Ditch the VTCS its shit.
$100 is a decent price. Pretty average. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:49 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands