200hp on N/A engine?
So if a bone stock 99 1.8liter makes 140hp at the flywheel...is it possible to make 200 or a little over by redoing the head and putting in high comp pistons? I need to pull my engine cause I have a whole bunch of stuff that needs to be done, and I thought, "I wonder if I could sell all my turbo stuff off and build the motor up...and if I do, how much power could I make?"
I was thinking, I could use my MS of course, keep the 460's in there...use 11:1 pistons, get my head totally re-done, run 93 octane, put a header on it, etc. I assume a turbo setup on a stock motor is cheaper, I was just kicking around ideas. |
no
but you can make about 250 n/a :giggle: |
Do you have $10k?
if the answer is yes, my answer is yes. if no; no. |
Alright...simple question, and a simple answer...thanks guys.
|
No.
|
I imagine you could...if you also spend to get it to rev a little higher. I don't think the powerband would be desireable (think sportbike)...where a turbo'd car would be much better (think "area under the torque curve").
|
If you got an N/A BP motor to 200hp it would have a gay amount of torque compared to a turbo car at 200hp.
|
Originally Posted by paul
(Post 393148)
If you got an N/A BP motor to 200hp it would have a gay amount of torque compared to a turbo car at 200hp.
I just thought it would be a peaky little bitch like a Honda. In that case it might be worth it, and would probably make for a very nice package in a Miata. I can't imagine it being cheap at all though. |
With enough money anything is possiable :)
|
Seeing as some make 170whp, thats at least 200@crank, although terribly retarded unless you're limited in your class.
|
waaaaayyyyyy too expensive, but possible
|
2 Attachment(s)
these EVOs make around the same Horsepower as the S2000:
Attachment 206874 but take a look at the torque: Attachment 206875 wanna take a guess which one is the utmost monster out there? Please show me a peaky honda graph please. |
wow, thanks for the lesson
|
s2000
250Nm = 185ftlbs = GAY |
Yes you could make it pretty easily if you know what you are doing, probably on mostly stock components, everything but cams and pistons.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by raven21
(Post 393267)
Yes you could make it pretty easily if you know what you are doing, probably on mostly stock components, everything but cams and pistons.
|
Originally Posted by Stein
(Post 393269)
If that was the case, don't you think that a "few" of the hundreds of thousands of Miatas built would be sporting this? And to think, I spent all that money turbocharging my Miata when all I had to do is change pistons and cams for the same end result.
|
vs. what a turbo ~250rwhp BP motor makes(on a crappy tune)
http://www.miatamx5.com/dynoruns/11-...ie_258-249.jpg |
And how much money does that engine cost?
|
Originally Posted by raven21
(Post 393277)
Well the only problem with it would be detonation, so if you were going to make 200N/A just throw a set of 12:1 in there with a E85 tune then port the head and make sure to flowbench it, that is the key and have some cams made up, pretty sure that will make around 200 no problem. key is matching up cams to head flow. And most people dont do that b/c when doing this you loose all ability to go further than 200 with any components, forced induction gives you room to go up in hp. So if you are just wanting some peppy DD and nothing more na will be fine, but for all you race car drivers you want 300 or whatever you are making you go forced induction for room to upgrade.
I'm so doing this, like tomorrow. |
Doing this still requires rebuilding the entire engine and getting the head ported, just dont forget that. I say its not that hard b/c i have a full machine shop, engine and chassis dyno, and flow benches.
|
Originally Posted by raven21
(Post 393293)
And how much money does that engine cost?
That turbo kit which did 275rwhp/262ftlbs that day after tuning will run you $3000 with full 3" exhaust from the turbo back and 18x12x3 core FMIC Other costs like ECU, injectors, clutch you will will need anyway for your NA build. Wanna buy one? |
Not at all.
|
hehehe... my motor is in the shop and im building a '01 short block w/ '99 head. ill post back in few weeks when everything is together and car goes off to tuner.
|
I call dibs on urbansoots 99 head.
|
get in line, bitch! there are at least 5 people with dibs on most of my shit already :)
|
Originally Posted by UrbanSoot
(Post 393331)
get in line, bitch! there are at least 5 people with dibs on most of my shit already :)
|
Originally Posted by paul
(Post 393239)
s2000
250Nm = 185ftlbs = GAY Then again I've never driven an S2000. I got tired of having to wring the shit out of my Integra to get anywhere, but the S2000 is probably a different animal all together. |
how are the graphs skewed? They are proportionate. What it does illustrate is that two cars with the same peak HP can be two totally different machines. It also illustrates that small N/A motors sucks.
As an official mt.net act: I declare raven21 a n00b and suggest he stop posting. |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 393459)
how are the graphs skewed? They are proportionate. What it does illustrate is that two cars with the same peak HP can be two totally different machines. It also illustrates that small N/A motors sucks.
As an official mt.net act: I declare raven21 a n00b and suggest he stop posting. To me, that is what peaky is, not making any power until WAAAAY up there. I thought you were trying to argue that the Honda was a "steady beast." I think we are trying to say the same thing, but from different points of view and with different terminology. I too would much rather have a turbo 4 with torque all over the place than the stretched out powerband of the Honda. This is why I pointed out how important the area under the curve was, not for you, but for the less educated, like supernoob here. I second the act. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:59 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands