Post Hp and boost## please 12v 24v or cr and what chargers thanks

What's the split on your boost(how much total versus how much from the primary).
 
2782098650033715158nuPEQY_fs.jpg
 
180hp 12v, super b drop in dp cam,191's, ddp 4's, 64/71/12@50psi, 32*= 538 superflow
180hp 12v, dp2 cam, o22's, jl 5x.016's,super b special (64/71/14), 22*= 571 superflow
180hp 12v. dp4 cam, 191's, ddp4's, 64/71/12 over 480(65psi total 32 between) 26*=605 superflow before having the pump fletcherized and now going to a forced 91/96/1.32
 
RonA said:
What's the split on your boost(how much total versus how much from the primary).
Click to expand...

60 lb total but fighting the external gate keeps blowing open and around 25-30 on primary only made a hand full of wot runs and only watched the total boost on dyno have had fuel pressure prob so been watching fuel pressure gauge
 
And 60 lb was a spike on the boost the gauge fluttered around 40-50 until the very end of run then toped 60
 
UNBROKEN said:
CFM>PSI

Here's a friends car 4 years ago....twin 88's on a small block....pegged the 1800 hp dyno software with only 32 PSI
The stuff he has now is twin 108's on billet big blocks making close to 4000 hp at around 40 PSI

PSI means exactly jack sh!t....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeRnE6qpk0M
Click to expand...

Have to disagree here.
ideal gal law:
PV=NRT
N=PV/RT
We have three variables we can manipulate to get more moles of air, N, into our engines. R is a constant and cannot be manipulated.
1. Increase volume, which is V this means increasing VE of engine, expensive.
2. Decrease the temp of the gas, T, intercooling.
3. increase the pressure, P, boost, psi ....

Any engine will make more power with more boost then it would with less boost as long as the boost is made efficiently, all other variables being equal, intercooling, ve's and so on.

Obviously a large 600+ cubic inch engine with high rpm capability and an incredible VE will not need a lot of boost to get massive airflow,. Even a small block has more CI than our engines and with their high rpms and great VE they will also flow a lot of of air at a lower pressure when compared to our little diesel engines with low rpms and terrible VE. We need all the boost we can effeciently create, just make sure to keep your pressure ratios in the best part of the map as possible.
 
gs1000 said:
Have to disagree here.
ideal gal law:
PV=NRT
N=PV/RT
We have three variables we can manipulate to get more moles of air, N, into our engines. R is a constant and cannot be manipulated.
1. Increase volume, which is V this means increasing VE of engine, expensive.
2. Decrease the temp of the gas, T, intercooling.
3. increase the pressure, P, boost, psi ....

Any engine will make more power with more boost then it would with less boost as long as the boost is made efficiently, all other variables being equal, intercooling, ve's and so on.

Obviously a large 600+ cubic inch engine with high rpm capability and an incredible VE will not need a lot of boost to get massive airflow,. Even a small block has more CI than our engines and with their high rpms and great VE they will also flow a lot of of air at a lower pressure when compared to our little diesel engines with low rpms and terrible VE. We need all the boost we can effeciently create, just make sure to keep your pressure ratios in the best part of the map as possible.
Click to expand...

Well said. These engines benefit form the compression compounding with higher boost numbers. Low rpm, slow burning fuel, poor flowing heads.
 
^^^x2. All depends on what you're dealing with. When discussing a gas motor with 400cfm heads turning 8000-9500 rpm it is not exactly the same world as a sub 4000rpm street diesel with 150cfm heads. I've made some spreadsheets with the above formulas from Garretts website, I suggest many do the same it will open your eyes. Many variables to consider but those formulas are better than guesses.
 
So y'all would rather make 800hp at 100 PSI vs 800hp at 60 PSI after addressing the airflow to the motor?
Bullish!t...you're thinking in the dark ages.
 
You're not arguing my point....you're MAKING my point.
Yes it's expensive to do it right...but addressing airflow IS the right way to do it.
Does the old school way work? Obviously it does...but now ain't then and there are better, more efficient ways to do things these days.
Aftermarket heads, ported heads, side draft intakes, cams, etc all help with airflow...they'll all make more power with less boost.
CFM>PSI....you can't argue that point.

To address your 3 points.
1...if someone can't afford to do it right then thu need a new hobby.
2...doing it right will decrease IAT....fact
3...it works...but there's a better way.


gs1000 said:
Have to disagree here.
ideal gal law:
PV=NRT
N=PV/RT
We have three variables we can manipulate to get more moles of air, N, into our engines. R is a constant and cannot be manipulated.
1. Increase volume, which is V this means increasing VE of engine, expensive.
2. Decrease the temp of the gas, T, intercooling.
3. increase the pressure, P, boost, psi ....

Any engine will make more power with more boost then it would with less boost as long as the boost is made efficiently, all other variables being equal, intercooling, ve's and so on.

Obviously a large 600+ cubic inch engine with high rpm capability and an incredible VE will not need a lot of boost to get massive airflow,. Even a small block has more CI than our engines and with their high rpms and great VE they will also flow a lot of of air at a lower pressure when compared to our little diesel engines with low rpms and terrible VE. We need all the boost we can effeciently create, just make sure to keep your pressure ratios in the best part of the map as possible.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
eh, i wont make 800hp anytime soon! And whats the saying "boost doesn't kill head gaskets" LOL
 
UNBROKEN said:
So y'all would rather make 800hp at 100 PSI vs 800hp at 60 PSI after addressing the airflow to the motor?
Bullish!t...you're thinking in the dark ages.
Click to expand...

Of course increased VE is a desirable goal, but the fact remains that if you take an 800 hp engine at 100psi and do the airflow requirements to make the same power at 60 psi, and then turn the boost back up to 100 psi efficiently the 100 psi will make more power.
 
I've had alot of mid to upper 800's runs and 1 at 933. I generally see between 72 and 76psi total with 42-45 out of the primary. Common rails seem to do better , i don't know if it's the timing on the top end, the head flow, or what exactly. I'm going to run the same fueling(pump, and injectors) and turbo's on the new 6.7 engine. The head on it flows over 40% more than what i have now. Hopefully it will point me in the right direction in regards to boost versus hp and where to spend the time and money.
 
Last edited:
That we can agree on...but we're straying from the original topic.
Taking that 100psi motor and turning it into a 60 psi motor making the same power is gonna be a more efficient, longer lasting motor.
 
RonA said:
I've had alot of mid to upper 800's runs and 1 at 933. I generally see between 72 and 76psi total with 42-45 out of the primary. Common rails seem to do better , i don't know if it's the timing on the top end, the head flow, or what exactly. I'm going to run the same fueling(pump, and injectors) and turbo's on the new 6.7 engine. The head on it flows over 40% more than what i have now. Hopefully it will point me in the right direction in regards to boost versus hp and where to spend the time and money.
Click to expand...

I think it's been proven time and again that the better flowing 4V heads will make better power at lower boost levels than the 2V heads.
IMHO it's gonna show you right off the bat that airflow improvements are money well spent.

As much as the whole world knows my dislike for Greg Houge...the guy was right about that stuff. That much I'll give him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top