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

SCHOOL BUS said:
no offense to bigblue24, its cool hes doing what hes doing for not much money. but come on 12's? thats so 8 years ago. id much rather spend 20k to run 10's!!!

:rockwoot:
Click to expand...

Be careful, the 95' Junker is going to surprise a few people it's next debut without the use of $4 per pound go-juice.

And no offense to you, if I had 20K to blow on a hobby, I wouldn't have wasted countless hours building a Junker Drag Truck, I would have built a nice pro-street truck.
 
And I'm not sure "blow money" is what you call it when it's being put towards a hobby you love. It's an investment towards my happiness lol.
 
SCHOOL BUS said:
no offense to bigblue24, its cool hes doing what hes doing for not much money. but come on 12's? thats so 8 years ago. id much rather spend 20k to run 10's!!!

:rockwoot:
Click to expand...

He will be in the 10's well before he gets close to the 20k mark. I will put money on that
 
It's not just performance mods that add to grand total.

Supporting mods and safety equipment aren't free. 12's and 10's are two totally different animals. I'm not saying he can't do it. But just because 12's were cheap doesn't mean 11's-10's will be
 
UNBROKEN said:
Huh? Am I reading that right?
Click to expand...

I think you're reading it right, to bad it's incredibly wrong, it's not about PSI it's about PSI at a said CFM, the more CFM at a lower PSI the better, at least that's what I've come to learn everyone can make huge PSI, I used to hit 48 on the stock turbo, sure my turbo now is capable of more, but it runs way better at lower PSI and achieves way more power at the lower PSI than the stock turbo did or even when I had the 62/65/12
 
straight 6 roar said:
It is impossible to put more CFM through the intake without A) psi increase, or B) temperature drop.
Click to expand...

while I agree with the psi and temp bit I think that cfm is the wrong term. It should say it is impossible to put more lbs of air through....
 
CFM is determined and can only be increased by doing what unbroken is advocating for. Increases to airflow in the actual engine through head work, cams intakes ect.. Once that is done your cfm is determined by rpm. And that cfm is quite low. for instance a 359 CI engine at 4500 rpm with 100% VE (good luck getting 100%) will flow 467.45 CFM. If you want more you need a bigger engine.

So at 467.45 cfm and with air weighing about .076lbs per cubic foot as sea level this engine will flow around 35 lbs of air per minute. Depending on your tuning that should be good for around 250-350 crank hp.

This is the perfect engine according to what I have been reading. IF less psi is better then when is it to little? What is the perfect number? I always read that "boost is just a measurment of restriction" I have yet to see anybody use any math or science to prove there guesses. go spend 30,000 bucks to get your 100% VE engine and keep the boost at 0 and enjoy your 250-350 crank HP.


What turbocharging and intercooling does is allow the air mass (lbs. of air) of 2000 CFM, at ambient pressure and temperature, to fit into the space of 467.45 CFM.

Don't misunderstand that I am against increases to VE. I agree with unbroken that it is an incredibly effective way to make big power. lets use our perfect motor vs a stock 12V for an example
I don't know the true VE for a 12V other than it is bad. Lets say 65% so the diffence is obviouse.

Perfect engine.
467.45 CFM = 35 lbs at 1.0 pressure ratio and 0 psig.
467.45 CFM = 71 lbs at 3.0 pressure ratio and 29.48 psig with turbo efficiency at 75%
467.45 CFM = 101 lbs at 3.0 pressure ratio .... with air to water with ice water and 80% efficient intecooling ability.

Stock engine
303.84 cfm = 23 lbs, 1.0 PR and 0 psig
303.84 cfm =46lbs, 3.0 PR 29.48 psig turbo at 75% effiecient.
303.84 cfm = 66 lbs , 3.0....... water to air with ice water.....

So yeah who doesn't want a more effecient engine, move more air hands down and is a very desirable goal.
BUT
Did you notice how by spending crazy money on you motor you got to 71 lbs with the turbo and with a stock terrible 65% VE you got to 66 lbs with an air water intercooler at the same boost...
If funds are limited you might keep the ve upgrades till later, but when you do get the money hold on 100 lbs at 30 psig will be fun, I think that a comprehensive approach is called for in increasing airflow.
 
bobcat67 said:
I think you're reading it right, to bad it's incredibly wrong, it's not about PSI it's about PSI at a said CFM, the more CFM at a lower PSI the better, at least that's what I've come to learn everyone can make huge PSI, I used to hit 48 on the stock turbo, sure my turbo now is capable of more, but it runs way better at lower PSI and achieves way more power at the lower PSI than the stock turbo did or even when I had the 62/65/12
Click to expand...

I am sorry to keep bringing up the ideal gas law but this post is hilarious to me. He says how the guy is incredibly wrong and then goes on to prove him right, and he didn't even know it.

ok
pv=nrt
n=pv/rt

once the engine is made and put together V will not change. R is a constant and will not change. so pounds of air (airflow) will only be affected by pressure and temperature and this guy found out the same to be true.

How hot is a stock turbo at 48 psig at the elevations in MT? I am guessing crazy hot.
conditions:
4valve engine guess 85% VE
3200 rpm peak power
4000" elevation
intercooler efficiency 65%
air temp 65*
pressure ratio at said conditions 4.8

Now your engine at these conditions with a turbo in its map at 70% efficiency will accept 1060 cfm of ambient air. It will have been compressed to fit into the 282 cfm you have available but that is what you are asking you turbo to flow.
Who here thinks a stock turbo can flow any where near 1060 cfm? that is equivilant to 80lbs per minute at sea level, so you need a turbo that has a map that can move 80 lbs a min at a 4.8 PR, the stock one will not do.

The only option your little turbo had was to super heat the air as to expand it to meet the cfm requirements. obviously when you got a turbo capable of meeting the demands of the engine the temps went way down, but so did your boost( your choice in lower boost), here is where the equation comes back into play.

n=pv/rt
since T is under the fraction sign it is inversly related to lbs of air moved. as T goes down N goes up, inverse. As long a T falls faster than P you will have more air in and more power.
SO his boost goes down a little maybe 10 psig and his turbo discharge temp falls a few hundred degrees and whalla he makes more power with less boost, however the incredibly wrong guy turned out to be right because he said more boost OR less temp.

If your current turbo is capable of 80 lbs per minute at a PR of 4.8 you may as well turn up your boost and enjoy the increase you will see in power( so long as your drive pressure is in check), look at your map and decide.
 
sorry for the long thread derail
compd hp calc has me a 702 rwhp gtx4202r at 48lbs. fuel only
my n20 runs are a bit higher.
 
but thank you for the very detailed description of how it works, I appreciate that, I was just repeating what I was under the impression was true, had I known I was wrong I wouldn't have said anything
 
gs1000 said:
IF your retarded you probably shouldn't call someone elses correct post incredibly wrong.
Click to expand...

retarded people don't know when not to talk, like right now for example, and I don't believe that I am the only person that thinks this way, or thought
 
P pump 24v with 7x0.14 injectors, 191 dv's, 4k springs, 66/74/14 and 26 degree's timing
I put down 448hp and 1196ft lbs but the clutch slipped bad at 2100 rpm's. it should have pulled hard all the way to 3500 rpms
 
98 12V Hx35/14 over HT60/26, 5x16's, full cuts,4ks, 100 plate, 601/11??
 
bobcat67 said:
retarded people don't know when not to talk, like right now for example, and I don't believe that I am the only person that thinks this way, or thought
Click to expand...

Alright, now I feel like the jerk. Your post of appreciation was typed at the same time I typed that. Had i seen that first I wouldn't have been so crass. sorry.

And your post was used as an example for all. You are not retarded, you have experiance and posted what you found. I wasn't crazy about a good comment being called incredibly wrong, but hey this is compd, no need to mince words here. I am glad to have helped your understanding of things. If someone out there can show how what i have said is wrong i would greatly appreciate the knowledge.
 
SCHOOL BUS said:
It's not just performance mods that add to grand total.

Supporting mods and safety equipment aren't free. 12's and 10's are two totally different animals. I'm not saying he can't do it. But just because 12's were cheap doesn't mean 11's-10's will be
Click to expand...

I just knew you'd go out on a limb and write about 11's. I anticipate cheap 11's very shortly, maybe even my next time out!


10's will cost quite a bit, safety equipment alone could blow $1,000. And who knows if my motor, stock head bolts, stock input shaft, etc will hold together so that could easily be another $1,500+.

My goal is to run 10.99 someday, so until then I don't plan to give up unless it becomes so expensive I have to stop chasing the Junker pipe dream.
 
gs1000 said:
Alright, now I feel like the jerk. Your post of appreciation was typed at the same time I typed that. Had i seen that first I wouldn't have been so crass. sorry.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry too, I didn't read your whole post before I decided to write that I'm a retard, and yes here in MT at the 5k+ elevation spooling turbos is not the most fun thing to do, I'm going to add another cp3 and some larger sticks and a 62/71/13 over an S480 to see if it helps out at all, on my old setup 62/65/12 I made 478/937 and hit 42psi and that was with 50hp sticks stock cp3 and smarty on level 7 with all default adjustments mostly cause I had no idea you needed to set those then program the truck, like I said I'm pretty new to this whole deal, but trying to learn, and I still can't seem to keep EGT's down with the current 64/74/14 and 90's with a water meth injection system, kinda the only reason I got the water meth, I'd still easily hit 1500-1600 mostly the reason why I'm going to compounds
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top