Apparently they've made over 1800hp and gone low 6s in the 1/4.
http://forums.freshalloy.com/showthread.php?t=159347

 

nah, its not the next 2jz. Apparently it takes a lot more mods to handle the same kinds of power that a stock 2jz could. Not to mention the fact that you need 2 $$$$$ big turbos instead of just 1 to do it.

besides, straight 6s are just sexier than V6s ever could be.

 

i dunno, the I6s are sexy but V6 is as well and is a stronger layout thanks to the shorter crankshaft. and i don't think the cost of an extra turbo matters on a car like that.

You're not going to be able to bolt on a single turbo and make stupid power like a 2jz, but as for ultimate power potential, it probably has it beat.

 

I wanna see the single turbo manifold when it comes out!

 

impressive, but I'm not so sure there's any factory parts left in that motor.

 

actually I6s are inherently stronger designed compared to a V6. Crankshaft length doesn't really have as much to do with that as much as main bearing support and balance that the I6 has.

 

ya know they could do it like the Buick GNs did, but that would take away from the "omgz twin siamese bling turdbozzz" thing

 

there's single turbo kits for the Mazda KL v6 - they seem to work well
btw- that video is badass

 

i thought there was less chance of crank deformation if it was shorter, better supported.

another advantage of the VQ is much more displacement, stock and modified.
3.0vs3.5 and 3.4vs4.2

and i'd fully expect it to make even more power with a single turbo. don't know exactly why they chose twins.

 

I think crank deformation would depend pretty much solely on the number of main bearings and the distance between them. Given that, there's no reason a long crank couldn't be as strong as a short crank.

Why do you say that a single turbo would be more powerful than twin turbos? Also, it's probably far easier to find and fit two smaller turbos capable of ~900hp each than one larger turbo capable of ~1800hp.

 

i remember talking to a guy that works at a speed shop,and he said I6 are better designed then v6s.he said the in the v6 it fights itself.

 

I don't know the exact reasons, but possibly because the hot side holds more heat and the cold side blows cooler, being all around more efficient? Maybe markp would know something.

What I do know is it that generally the fastest turbo drag cars, straight six or V8, are single'd.

as for i6 vs v6, i6 is naturally balanced, but that doesn't mean the v6 will 'fight itself'

 

Why is it that all dragstrip announcers don't know jack about anything non-domestic? He just called that 350Z a "straight-six turbo car"..

 

fixed it for ya. God, the announcing is the worst thing about No Problem Raceway over here.

 

I remember reading somewhere that the I6 has less chance of the crank walking. The longer cranks have some funny harmonics that are associated with them though. Probably the worst one is the V10 crank that is used for the viper. I heard that if something happens to the balancer on those motors, they are toast.

 

you're forgetting the heavy equipment market. I have a buddies who builds chassis and engines, they typically use turbos from the catepillar "earth mover" categories. If I were on my home computer, I'd share some pics.

 

because most foreign cars are garbage on a drag strip.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBBjguuVUJQ

that turbo came off a catepillar "earth mover," and the car was built by mike brink. Oh, and yes, I had shitty seats...hehe

 

fixed