Every now and then there comes a dyno graph... - Page 2 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


General Miata Chat A place to talk about anything Miata

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-06-2009, 11:08 PM   #21
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,889
Total Cats: 28
Default

There is tons of info on engine swaps and costs on miata.net. It is not cheap if you do it right. After all one is basically replacing the entire powertrain.

But, for all the money I have spent so far on my turbo mods, and an engine build to replace a blown motor...
ZX-Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2009, 11:13 PM   #22
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 2,084
Total Cats: 0
Default

and it took how many liters to make this pittance of power? I just don't think it is comparable to a built turbo 2.0L money wise
mazda/nissan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2009, 11:48 PM   #23
Unbannable
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Trent Hills, ON
Posts: 156
Total Cats: 1
Default

Photos of the build are here:

Flyin' Miata : Projects: The V8 Miata Project
jmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 12:06 AM   #24
Junior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: south FL
Posts: 215
Total Cats: 0
Default

to each their own.
wayy too much work for a swap.

a turbo 2.0L will make more power and be much easier to accomplish
robino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 01:47 AM   #25
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: GJ, CO
Posts: 224
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robino View Post
to each their own.
wayy too much work for a swap.

a turbo 2.0L will make more power and be much easier to accomplish
Me thinks you are missing the point.
GT3man2001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 01:48 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 510
Total Cats: 104
Default

I can attest that a 2.0 liter will make more power (at least more than FM's Elvis). I suspect that, all else being equal, the LSx Miata will destroy me in an autocross or on a tight track. There are a couple of sub-500 hp LS3s being installed at FM currently currently

Doesn't matter to me though. A high-boost, high-revving 4-banger suits the Miata's personality, which is why I took this route.
DeerHunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 01:54 AM   #27
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 36,175
Total Cats: 2,576
Default

ls1 miata is badass...I dont give a **** what kind of power you can make with a built stock engine, the v8 will always be more badass. something about power/torque being EVERYWHERE and the car being so damn smooth that makes me drool when I see one.
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 02:24 AM   #28
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Savington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 14,362
Total Cats: 1,323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robino View Post
to each their own.
wayy too much work for a swap.

a turbo 2.0L will make more power and be much easier to accomplish
Find me a two-liter turbo motor making 400ft.lbs at 2500rpm and 515whp and I will make you a rich man.

Name:  evilgto.jpg
Views: 34
Size:  51.5 KB

416ci stroker LS3, intake manifold, headers, aggressive cam, intake, tune. 91 octane, through cats.
Savington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 03:07 AM   #29
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 1,378
Total Cats: 0
Default

Theres no replacement..
naarleven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 04:17 AM   #30
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 2,084
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savington View Post
Find me a two-liter turbo motor making 400ft.lbs at 2500rpm and 515whp and I will make you a rich man.



416ci stroker LS3, intake manifold, headers, aggressive cam, intake, tune. 91 octane, through cats.
I am not hating on V8's, just GM. I love the VH45, and the M62B44, but the LTX/LSX motors are just behind the curve.
mazda/nissan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 05:52 AM   #31
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Mobius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 3,178
Total Cats: 262
Default

[QUOTE=robino;364663]the torque is nice
the hp figures are peaky though, you only have 1000 rpms of 350 hp, rest of the time you're way below that.
/QUOTE]


Big fat area under the torque curve for the win. Small tiny area under the 280 HP line in an RSX for the lose.
Mobius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 06:15 AM   #32
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mazda/nissan View Post
I am not hating on V8's, just GM. I love the VH45, and the M62B44, but the LTX/LSX motors are just behind the curve.
The LS engines are behind the curve??? How do you figure this?
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 06:32 AM   #33
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savington View Post
Find me a two-liter turbo motor making 400ft.lbs at 2500rpm and 515whp and I will make you a rich man.



416ci stroker LS3, intake manifold, headers, aggressive cam, intake, tune. 91 octane, through cats.
Can you imagine that ****. I bet that is a one of a kind experience. That kind of torque in that light of a car.
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 01:58 PM   #34
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Concord, North Carolina
Posts: 4,172
Total Cats: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deliverator View Post
In a car that weighs 30% less than a corvette, I bet it'd get better than 26mpg highway.

Might not be as good as the 1.8's mileage, but I bet it'll be within 20%.
My guess is you are right on the money.

Buddy of mine had a 500rwhp SC SS and got right at 22 on the highway, and around 17-18 just playing around.

LS1 motors are ridiculous. Simple, yes. But that doesn't make them any less badass.
miatamania is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 03:07 PM   #35
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 2,084
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NA6C-Guy View Post
The LS engines are behind the curve??? How do you figure this?
they could be making more power than they are, but GM doesn't think like most people. The design of the LS1 isn't horrible, but it doesn't match horsepower/liter with motors such as the BMW M60B40. The one advantage it has is its compact size due to it not having overhead cams.
mazda/nissan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 03:11 PM   #36
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robino View Post
the torque is nice
the hp figures are peaky though, you only have 1000 rpms of 350 hp, rest of the time you're way below that.
LOL you have it backwards.

The turbo car makes 80% of peak power from 5200-7000 RPM. That's a ratio of 1.35:1.

The V8 makes 80% of peak power from 3900 to 6050 RPM. That's a ratio of 1.55:1.

The ratio of the RPMs is what matters, not the difference.

Not to mention, the V8 makes more power than the turbo's peak from 3750 RPM to redline.
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 03:25 PM   #37
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 510
Total Cats: 104
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mazda/nissan View Post
they could be making more power than they are, but GM doesn't think like most people. The design of the LS1 isn't horrible, but it doesn't match horsepower/liter with motors such as the BMW M60B40. The one advantage it has is its compact size due to it not having overhead cams.
There was an article in one of the car mags (Road & Track?) a while back where they compared engine technology, output and cost. They looked at the 7.0l Z06 motor (505 hp) vs. the 6.3l AMG V8 (514 hp or so, depending upon application). The AMG motor has all the modern bells and whistles (DOHC, VVT, etc, etc), weighs more, takes up significantly more space and barely makes more power per liter than the Corvette mill. The kicker is that you can walk into any Chevy dealer and buy an LS7 engine for about 18 grand, while AMG will charge you north of 60

Yes, if money was no object, I'd prefer the AMG engine. The point is that Chevy did very well that motor and in many ways it is world class.
DeerHunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 04:12 PM   #38
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 2,084
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeerHunter View Post
There was an article in one of the car mags (Road & Track?) a while back where they compared engine technology, output and cost. They looked at the 7.0l Z06 motor (505 hp) vs. the 6.3l AMG V8 (514 hp or so, depending upon application). The AMG motor has all the modern bells and whistles (DOHC, VVT, etc, etc), weighs more, takes up significantly more space and barely makes more power per liter than the Corvette mill. The kicker is that you can walk into any Chevy dealer and buy an LS7 engine for about 18 grand, while AMG will charge you north of 60

Yes, if money was no object, I'd prefer the AMG engine. The point is that Chevy did very well that motor and in many ways it is world class.
let me do ya some math here

Z06 LS7: 505HP/7L=72.14HP/L
E39 M5 S62: 395HP/4.9L=79HP/L

If GM modernized their motors they could see substantial gains with that much displacement.
I wouldn't bUy an AMG engine, not much of a Mercedes guy myself. It is surprising to see how much better the LS7 does HP/L than the LS1 though.
mazda/nissan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 04:58 PM   #39
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 510
Total Cats: 104
Default

I can't believe I'm even getting caught up in this discussion. I didn't want to do a V8 in my Miata (doesn't suit the character of the car, IMO), I don't particularly like Chevy (I'm an import guy) and the previous generation of M5 has always been one of my dream cars.

However, I think people are losing some perspective here. A DOHC engine will always breath better than an OHV one. Twice the number of valves = better flow. Overhead Cams = less friction and more precise valve actuation. It would be crying shame if BMW engineers were not able to extract 11% more power per liter than Chevy. Personally, I would have expected better.

Chevrolet engineers purposely stayed with the OHV design, not because of lack of know-how, limited development budget or adherence to tradition. The simple reason is that this engine is much less tall and will package better. Look at the technology they did incorporate into this engine:
* All-aluminum block with forged crank and main bearing caps
* Dry sump oiling
* Titanium rods and intake valves (good for 7,000 rpm)

This is not a retro motor with archaic technology, by any standard.
DeerHunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2009, 06:00 PM   #40
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 2,084
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeerHunter View Post
I can't believe I'm even getting caught up in this discussion. I didn't want to do a V8 in my Miata (doesn't suit the character of the car, IMO), I don't particularly like Chevy (I'm an import guy) and the previous generation of M5 has always been one of my dream cars.

However, I think people are losing some perspective here. A DOHC engine will always breath better than an OHV one. Twice the number of valves = better flow. Overhead Cams = less friction and more precise valve actuation. It would be crying shame if BMW engineers were not able to extract 11% more power per liter than Chevy. Personally, I would have expected better.

Chevrolet engineers purposely stayed with the OHV design, not because of lack of know-how, limited development budget or adherence to tradition. The simple reason is that this engine is much less tall and will package better. Look at the technology they did incorporate into this engine:
* All-aluminum block with forged crank and main bearing caps
* Dry sump oiling
* Titanium rods and intake valves (good for 7,000 rpm)

This is not a retro motor with archaic technology, by any standard.
well this V8 is better than this V8 which is better than this turbo 4 is all fun, but still child play, since the real baddies are the v12's
mazda/nissan is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why dynos should plot Torque divided by MAP JasonC SBB ECUs and Tuning 11 10-27-2015 05:56 PM
Time to start learning and play with tuning The Gleas MEGAsquirt 3 10-01-2015 10:30 AM
1.8, C30-74 Rotrex, 9psi, 235WHP/190WTQ (E85) Lincoln Logs Dynos and timesheets 4 09-23-2015 01:26 PM
New personal best 1/8th mile tehzack Dynos and timesheets 10 09-21-2015 07:30 PM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:36 AM.