how much power and your et's for unported 8v heads (t3/t4 especially)

[Stinkbox]

I want to know what other people et's and mph's are with a stock 8v head on there rides especially if you have a t3/t4 and what are all your mods? I need to figure out exactly what im doing wrong.

[GLHSKEN]

291 at the wheels. 111.91 mph 2600lb car

T3/4 50 trim .63 ar stage II exhaust 2.5" ported S/v
Dual stock cooler
+40's
22 psi boost
3bar computer
Ported Exhaust manifold
3 " side exit exhaust with a cutout before the cat.
89 tbi roller cam

Car was a dog til 4k then all hell broke loose. Gained 26-27mph in the last 1/8

[Frank]

Previous owner... stock engine

13.0@105 mph 3200lb car

T3/4 50 trim .63 ar stage II exhaust 2.5" ported S/v
Cummin's Intercooler
+40's
25 psi boost
3bar computer
Ported Exhaust manifold
3 " side exit exhaust with a cutout before the cat.
89 tbi roller cam

[GLHSKEN]

And it would build silly boost from a brake stand frank... My daughter ran a 13.8 @ 104 with that car on her third ever pass down the strip.

[Frank]

Here is a funny example of it also!
http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=1376&cat=504&ppuser=1

[Marcus86GLHS]

original bone stock engine, head, turbo, and intercooler: 12.92 and 106.

mods: 3" exhaust, TU cal, +20's.

[Jere86TZ]

Is it just me, or do these Dodges need more boost for the horsepower than other cars?

It seems some cars need more boost to produce power than others... even if it is at the same RPM. COuld the tune be the key to unleashing the power? Is it the fuel you use? Intercooling? It also seems that less HP is gained per pound increased as you go up the ladder... i.e. x HP gained going from 7-8psi, 1/2x HP gained going from 20-21psi...

[GLHSKEN]

It's the poor flowing heads. Of course, we get more torque per psi than the other cars though!!!

[ShelbyZD]

COuld the tune be the key to unleashing the power?

I can't say Im worried about anyone else. I don't see any 200hp cars on the road that can compete with my Daytona. You make it sound like that's a bad thing. I'm always wondering what their problem is. ;)

[turbovanman²]

Is it just me, or do these Dodges need more boost for the horsepower than other cars?

It seems some cars need more boost to produce power than others... even if it is at the same RPM. COuld the tune be the key to unleashing the power? Is it the fuel you use? Intercooling? It also seems that less HP is gained per pound increased as you go up the ladder... i.e. x HP gained going from 7-8psi, 1/2x HP gained going from 20-21psi...

As Ken said, its our crappy 8valve heads. Now bolt in a 16 valve head and its a whole different ball game. :nod:

[Ondonti]

Is it just me, or do these Dodges need more boost for the horsepower than other cars?

It seems some cars need more boost to produce power than others... even if it is at the same RPM. COuld the tune be the key to unleashing the power? Is it the fuel you use? Intercooling? It also seems that less HP is gained per pound increased as you go up the ladder... i.e. x HP gained going from 7-8psi, 1/2x HP gained going from 20-21psi...

actually I have a problem with this. most Honda guys I know dont build any boost till past 4000 rpms or higher. They make power from 6000-8500+ even when near stock. A TD is making power from 3500-5500rpms unless some major work is done and someone installs decent cams to go along with that work.


Not sure where the "same RPM, less power" argument is comming from since most other turbo 4 cars I know of use bigger turbos and are spooling much later in the RPM range. Be it SR20's, Hondas, DSM's......whatever. DSM with a stock small turbo might be the only exception........and they really dont make a lot of power.

compare the two @ 3000 rpms........Most turbo hondas make NO power there.

Sure they make a LOT more HP on the same boost leve, but that is a function of RPM, bigger turbo, and better flowing heads.

[Dave]

Brents got a point there. We do build boost surprisingly fast, but of course it runs out quick due to our shatty heads. 5,500 is all I got in my motor, then it dies.

On my stock head with a '88 Garrett turbo pushing 18.5psi I went a 13.91 at 97mph. T3/T4 will be here this week though. I'll let you know how fast it goes then.

[Jere86TZ]

I have a tendency to speak without letting my mind catch me in the act of saying something stupid...

Story: Before I went Mopar, I owned a Saturn and kept up with the trends of turbocharged saturns (through TSN). Most Saturns can make about 220WHP at 7psi* vs. 223 @ 13psi* with the TIII. Now, I know TD's make a lot more torque, so the power is able to be made earlier than other cars. I believe my Daytona can hit full boost around 2k (or so I think) rather than the 3k they must wait out for full boost.

The main question I have with this is because of the original question of the thread: what power for the ET? I'm more or less asking for a specific ET and what one would have to do to hit that goal... which is to break 100MPH in the 1/4 mile.

These goals are far down the road.

[Marcus86GLHS]

"......what power for the ET? I'm more or less asking for a specific ET and what one would have to do to hit that goal... "

JERE that question is more a function of race weight than anything else, so, any answer would have to be a function of power-to-race weight, here's a fun calculator that is great for ballparking what a car can do in the 1/4 mile:

http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm

[Directconnection]

Story: Before I went Mopar, I owned a Saturn and kept up with the trends of turbocharged saturns (through TSN). Most Saturns can make about 220WHP at 7psi* vs. 223 @ 13psi* with the TIII.


You are forgetting something.... the Saturns and even the Hondas you have seen examples of are converted N/A cars to turbo. This means that they are using the stock high compression pistons. That makes a difference. But if they wanted to make big power, very few will be able to do so with compression like this.

Boost is basically a measurment of your engines poor volumetric efficiency.

[Frank]

Boost is basically a measurment of your engines poor volumetric efficiency.


You are on the ball today Steve!

[Force Fed Mopar]

You are forgetting something.... the Saturns and even the Hondas you have seen examples of are converted N/A cars to turbo. This means that they are using the stock high compression pistons. That makes a difference. But if they wanted to make big power, very few will be able to do so with compression like this.

Exactly what I was about to say. My brother is into Hondas, and has turbo'd one, and several of his buddies have as well. My brother had a '94 Civic hatch w/ a stock 1.8 LS non-VTEC and a GSR 5-spd, and he slapped a T3/T4 turbo on it. It was done right, injectors, RRFPR etc. It didn't spool til 4K. On 8 psi it made enough power for him to outrun a Vette w/ it. But, at 8 psi, it also only lasted him like 3 months, maybe 4, before the motor took a dump on him. Head lifted under boost and blew the head gasket, then it started burning oil badly.

His new turbo Honda, a 91 Civic wagon, had a stock B20 VTEC w/ a turbo bolted on it. The guy he got it from built it, took it to the dyno, it made 350+ hp at the wheels. 3 days later it spun a main bearing. Now my brother is having it rebuilt, with an additional 600-700 bucks worth of bottom end parts and ARP studs to make it hold up.

Bottom line, there are very few cars out there that will hold up to our levels of boost as reliably (relatively speaking of course lol) as ours, for what little we put into them. The way I look at it, yeah they may be a making big power, but in 3 months mine will still be driving up and down the road, where as their Honda/Saturn/Mitsu/whatever will be back in the shop.

[Directconnection]

You are on the ball today Steve!


Got the house all to myself today and went to bed early last night:)

[turbovanman²]

"......what power for the ET? I'm more or less asking for a specific ET and what one would have to do to hit that goal... "

JERE that question is more a function of race weight than anything else, so, any answer would have to be a function of power-to-race weight, here's a fun calculator that is great for ballparking what a car can do in the 1/4 mile:

http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm


Not bad but I don't believe its that accurate. I use the first chart, I am only making 266 whp, 2nd chart, 284 whp. :( :p

[Stinkbox]

so basically if you wanna move your gonna have to run high boost, like 20-25 psi if you have the fuel?

[Frank]

20-25 is high 12 to low 13's depending on the car.


Frank

[Ondonti]

I understand the idea of higher compression, blah blah, but the reason reason the saturn is making more hp on the same boost is because when you build that setup you basically install an "upgraded" turbo system as your original system.

No one installs a microscopic turbo, 1 7/8" exhaust, etc on their custom turbo saturn.
Then on top of that, the saturn is cam'd to make power in the higher RPM's
I stick with the idea that you can make NEAR the same power on lower compression with increased timing on the same boost level.
a 1.0 increase in compression number is NOTHING when it comes to making more power. 4% overall power maybe.....but in the end that just means you can never make as much power when you try to max out your setup.

[8valves]

I understand the idea of higher compression, blah blah, but the reason reason the saturn is making more hp on the same boost is because when you build that setup you basically install an "upgraded" turbo system as your original system.

No one installs a microscopic turbo, 1 7/8" exhaust, etc on their custom turbo saturn.
Then on top of that, the saturn is cam'd to make power in the higher RPM's
I stick with the idea that you can make NEAR the same power on lower compression with increased timing on the same boost level.
a 1.0 increase in compression number is NOTHING when it comes to making more power. 4% overall power maybe.....but in the end that just means you can never make as much power when you try to max out your setup.

Agreed. Compression will NEVER, EVER make up for power in comparison to additional boost, espescially when you get into big compressor's, like 70+mm inducers.

We run 7.5:1 static compression in our Talon to allow a (hopefully) peak boost of around 50. :eyebrows: The standard DSM fare of 8.5:1 would be topped out at 40-45ish probably. And on these well built motors, you're talking 30+ whp per lb of boost.

AM

[Stinkbox]

1st gens are 7.8:1. i mess around with alot of other cars and most of my friends have fast imports, ive had 2 dsm's and im about to build a honda myself. im not saying this to anbody specific but i hate when people are closed minded about other types of performance cars aka honda's dsm's and the likes cause to each his own and there are pros and cons for everything. so far ive learned the differnece between turbo dodges and some other 16v and similair cars is this.

honda's powerplants are tremendously potent. there is so much potential. sure they don't make much torque and have to rev to the moon but lets look at some other pro's con's

pro's

interchangable motors/ parts galore
vtec heads flow rediculously awesome compared to just about any other production 4 cylinder.
relatively cheap parts
old enough to be cheap
loads of knowledge do to much experimentation and tests
capable of almost 1000hp fully built correctly
relativly light cars
reliable midly modified
super easy and cheap to make 12-13 sec cars

cons
way too many idiots own these giving them a bad name
so many parts its hard to find well manufactured ones do to the ssautochrome and such dealers
high comp ratio = bad for boost
300whp limit for reliabilty, after this sleeves and forged pistons ect
lots of parts not engineered for high horsepower abuse stock

now dsm's
pros
awd or fwd making for personal preference
turbo and intercooled stock with dohc 16v heads
awd = traction
old and relatively cheap
lots of research and parts proven
lots of tuning options

cons
awd = hard on trannies and 1st gen 3 bolt rear ends
3000 lbs
somewhat unreliable
parts can get expensive

ok i have no idea why i just wrote all that haha ok lets move in another direction

basically our cars have crappy 8v sohc heads on most so what this leads to is 16v swaps which are expensive and unreliable if done wrong or if keeping the 8v try to get it ported to help it out with flow and your going to have to run alittle more boost than other 16v better flowing engines do to the crappy head no being able to flow trying to force more air in to bring us up to 16v flow. oh man i think im done with this post.

just disregard this post haha im ranting

so baiscally you need to run 20 psi or more to get some serious power from these dumb heads.

[8valves]

1st gens are 7.8:1. i mess around with alot of other cars and most of my friends have fast imports, ive had 2 dsm's and im about to build a honda myself. im not saying this to anbody specific but i hate when people are closed minded about other types of performance cars aka honda's dsm's and the likes cause to each his own and there are pros and cons for everything. so far ive learned the differnece between turbo dodges and some other 16v and similair cars is this.

honda's powerplants are tremendously potent. there is so much potential. sure they don't make much torque and have to rev to the moon but lets look at some other pro's con's

pro's

interchangable motors/ parts galore
vtec heads flow rediculously awesome compared to just about any other production 4 cylinder.
relatively cheap parts
old enough to be cheap
loads of knowledge do to much experimentation and tests
capable of almost 1000hp fully built correctly
relativly light cars
reliable midly modified
super easy and cheap to make 12-13 sec cars

cons
way too many idiots own these giving them a bad name
so many parts its hard to find well manufactured ones do to the ssautochrome and such dealers
high comp ratio = bad for boost
300whp limit for reliabilty, after this sleeves and forged pistons ect
lots of parts not engineered for high horsepower abuse stock

now dsm's
pros
awd or fwd making for personal preference
turbo and intercooled stock with dohc 16v heads
awd = traction
old and relatively cheap
lots of research and parts proven
lots of tuning options

cons
awd = hard on trannies and 1st gen 3 bolt rear ends
3000 lbs
somewhat unreliable
parts can get expensive

ok i have no idea why i just wrote all that haha ok lets move in another direction

basically our cars have crappy 8v sohc heads on most so what this leads to is 16v swaps which are expensive and unreliable if done wrong or if keeping the 8v try to get it ported to help it out with flow and your going to have to run alittle more boost than other 16v better flowing engines do to the crappy head no being able to flow trying to force more air in to bring us up to 16v flow. oh man i think im done with this post.

just disregard this post haha im ranting

so baiscally you need to run 20 psi or more to get some serious power from these dumb heads.

Our car is a 98 Talon w/ 7.5:1 Ross pistons off of Manley rods and an FFWD butcher 2.4L crank. Not the standard stuff :eyebrows:

Even with an AWESOME 8V head, you're still talking 20psi plus (usually) to have a solid car. IMO, solid being 12's or better. That's not neccisarily a bad thing, but it makes it difficult to find a happy medium for those that still like a quick spooling car, yet have a hard top end hit as well.

And yes, you're correct about the other vehicles. Every type fo car has it's pros and cons. For another reference, my buddy Chad's stock H22A head flows 279 cfm on the intake. Our talon's head does 327 cfm at only .400"! That tends to help power production.

AM

[Directconnection]

Compression increase alone = small gains as you stated. But compression is needed for big cams and other hardware when talking NA. It must go hand in hand and then it amounts to alot. But in a turbo application, camming is much different, so you may be right.... to some point :eyebrows:

[Stinkbox]

as for the 279 cfm at what lift and in/hg and at what in/hg for the dsm, that is some sweet numbers on that head. alot of people i talk to are unsure of 1mm oversized valves do to them using stock valve seats in which it just adds another mm of obstruction for the air to move around.

check out these stock numbers i dug up.

TYPICAL FLOW NUMBERS FOR FULLY PORTED HEADS
Flow numbers will vary slightly from one casting to another of the same model.
NOTE: All flow testing is done @ 25in hg pressure. All valve lift is measured in Inches.
ACURA 1.8L TYPE R Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 248cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 283cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 196CFM @ .450" valve lift EXH. 229cfm @ .450" valve lift
ACURA 1.8L GSR Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 236cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 274cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 179cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 221cfm @ .450" valve lift
AUDI 1.8T 20V SMALL PORT Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 167cfm @ .380" valve lift INT. 225cfm @ .380" valve lift
EXH. 162cfm @ .380" valve lift EXH. 191cfm @ .380" valve lift
AUDI 1.8T 20V LARGE PORT Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 200cfm @ .380" valve lift INT. 243cfm @ .380" valve lift
EXH. 184cfm @ .380" valve lift EXH. 212cfm @ .380" valve lift
HONDA D16 OPEN CHAMBER Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 216cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 245cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 161cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 198cfm @ .450" valve lift
HONDA D16 CLOSED CHAMBER Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 209cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 241cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 153cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 199cfm @ .450" valve lift
HONDA B16 2nd gen stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 216cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 258cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 173cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 215cfm @ .450" valve lift
NEON 2.0L 1st gen stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 202cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 237cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 125cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 156cfm@ .450" valve lift
TOYOTA 7MGTE 24V Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 197cfm @ .400" valve lift INT. 217cfm @ .400" valve lift
EXH. 141cfm @ .400" valve lift EXH. 173cfm @ .400" valve lift
VW 8V EARLY CASTING Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 126cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 152cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 95cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 124cfm @ .450" valve lift
VW 8V CROSS FLOW Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 131cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 156cfm @.450" valve lift
EXH. 101cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 130cfm @ .450" valve lift
VW 16V 2.0L Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 184cfm @ .400" valve lift INT. 218cfm @ .400" valve lift
EXH. 142cfm @ .400" valve lift EXH. 168cfm @ .400" valve lift
VW VR6 12V Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 148cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 176cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 137cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 159cfm @ .450" valve lift

[Stinkbox]

has anyone ever tried making a high performance 2.2 or 2.5 n/a engine 8v or 16v and what where the numbers and parts?

[Mario]

There was a guy on Turbododge.com that was making 300-325 HP in an N/A 8V. I think he said he had something around $10K into the engine. I forget the guy's name.

[Directconnection]

He "claims" 350 hp along with alot of other things.

[Mario]

He "claims" 350 hp along with alot of other things.

Ah. I see.

What about the Hooters Omni? Didn't that have an N/A engine in it a while back making some decent power?

[Dave]

I think the real power is found in the head and exhaust. Sure the size of the compressor housing, wheel, intercooler, plumbing, and computer all play to fine tune an enhance it, but you ever notice why those other cars are making more numbers per psi?

I know you can make 300+ WHP on a stock head :blah: but such a gain is found once ported, oversized, and matched to everything. Like I've said before, a stock 2.4 head will flow more air and more efficiently than a bada$$ Menagon head ever will.

I really should put my foot in my mouth b/c I couldn't even run a 13.7 at 21psi with my T2 turbo on the stock head. :mad: POS!

[Directconnection]

Like I've said before, a stock 2.4 head will flow more air and more efficiently than a bada$$ Menagon head ever will.

I really should put my foot in my mouth b/c I couldn't even run a 13.7 at 21psi with my T2 turbo on the stock head. :mad: POS!

Prepare to stick your foot in your mouth then. The Menegon Stage IXIVMCII head is being preppared to enter world domination mode.

[Jere86TZ]

Since I'd rather speak my mind around those who actually know their material than a bunch of people who will agree with me to the end of my motor, I'll just speak what I figure would be at least decent hypothetical thoughts:

What if someone built a car around the prospect of running one set-up for street and another for the track? I could trudge through some people's posts on their luck with running a car in the high 12's/low 13's on the street, if not lower, but I figured I'd just ask about this first. Right now, the best I could afford is possibly mid/low 14's. Eventually, though, I plan on either just making the car run into the 12's and still be streetable or run 12's on the track with a different set-up.

[Tony Hanna]

I think the key there is to detune for the street so parts aren't seeing the strain from the higher power output in daily driving. I think an electronic switchable boost control is probably one of the most effective ways to do this. I had the old Datona set up so that at the track boost was approaching 30 psi. With an old vacuum solenoid, toggle switch, and some wire, a simple flip of the switch would bring boost down into the 18 psi range for the street.
This was probably still a bit too high as the auto trans failed shortly, but 18 was the least I could run with the wastgate can preloaded to hold the high boost setting.
This time around, I'm going to use a different wastgate can, 2 solenoids, and a 3 position switch. If it works out, I'll have a switchable boost control good for 10,20,and 30+ psi. I'm going to attempt to run the 20 and 30 psi settings off a ful throttle switch so that boost is held at 10 below full throttle.
Also, if I can figure out the wiring, I'm going to run the whole mess through a pressure switch on the alcohol injection line so that boost will not go above 10 psi unless the alcohol injection is working properly.
Hopefully all this will help contribute to reliability on the street while maintaining an easy transition to race trim. Just flip a switch and bolt on a set of slicks. Doesn't get much easier than that.

[CSX321]

What if someone built a car around the prospect of running one set-up for street and another for the track? I could trudge through some people's posts on their luck with running a car in the high 12's/low 13's on the street

I think the key there is to detune for the street so parts aren't seeing the strain from the higher power output in daily driving. I think an electronic switchable boost control is probably one of the most effective ways to do this.
It sounds like you're describing an SRT4 with Stage 2 or 3 w/turbo toys. :) I have Stage 2 w/toys and run low 13s on street tires. I can use the toy's dial-a-boost to run less boost on rainy days, etc. and can hit the high-octane mode button for an extra 20 hp with race gas in the tank.

I got frustrated with trying to race my '87 CSX. I could not break the 100 mph barrier, either. With +40s, a TU S60 turbo, mildly ported exhaust manifold, and full 2.5" exhaust, running from 18 to 24 psi my trap speed was still 99.xx mph. I now feel it is the head flow that is the barrier on that car.

[turbovanman²]

Since I'd rather speak my mind around those who actually know their material than a bunch of people who will agree with me to the end of my motor, I'll just speak what I figure would be at least decent hypothetical thoughts:

What if someone built a car around the prospect of running one set-up for street and another for the track? I could trudge through some people's posts on their luck with running a car in the high 12's/low 13's on the street, if not lower, but I figured I'd just ask about this first. Right now, the best I could afford is possibly mid/low 14's. Eventually, though, I plan on either just making the car run into the 12's and still be streetable or run 12's on the track with a different set-up.


You can have both both, you just have to be realistic. My van has run 13.6 at 25psi of boost. Now this is at the track, so after racing is done, I turn it back down to 15 ish psi, thats more than enough to play on the street, dust of some imports and keep engine wear and parts breakage to a minimum, :thumb:

[Bardo]

i ran 20 all day long on all stock parts

[8valves]

I think it's also dependent upon the build level of the car. If you have a good soild rebuilt motor with a nice head, etc etc... GOOD parts, there should be no reason to turn the power down to drive it... that's pointless if you ask me.

I daily drive my car at 26 psi on pump gas, last year making 370 whp. This year even more so, although not verified yet. If the car is assembled correctly with care and precision, coupled with good quality parts then I don't think there is a single good reason to back off boost to drive the car. Hell, to get into boost you have to dig your foot into it anyways, if you're that concerned just lay off the pedal.

AM

[turbovanman²]

I think it's also dependent upon the build level of the car. If you have a good soild rebuilt motor with a nice head, etc etc... GOOD parts, there should be no reason to turn the power down to drive it... that's pointless if you ask me.

I daily drive my car at 26 psi on pump gas, last year making 370 whp. This year even more so, although not verified yet. If the car is assembled correctly with care and precision, coupled with good quality parts then I don't think there is a single good reason to back off boost to drive the car. Hell, to get into boost you have to dig your foot into it anyways, if you're that concerned just lay off the pedal.

AM


I agree to disagree, mine is built but I wouldn't keep the boost at 25 psi all the time. Just alot more wear and tear on the engine. Maybe if I had a lighter vehicle, :eyebrows: :lol:

[Jere86TZ]

Realistically, I doubt I can go too much above... uhm...185ish at most right now. That'll be with stock everything except intercooler and new computer added... and all necessary components to even make it happen... but there's always time :)

[Ondonti]

Since there was a 6 cylinder included in that list, I can laugh and remind you that stock dohc 6g72 heads flow more then any head on that list @ only .350" lift. More exhaust flow then almost every head on that list pulls on intake. :lol:

as for the 279 cfm at what lift and in/hg and at what in/hg for the dsm, that is some sweet numbers on that head. alot of people i talk to are unsure of 1mm oversized valves do to them using stock valve seats in which it just adds another mm of obstruction for the air to move around.

check out these stock numbers i dug up.

TYPICAL FLOW NUMBERS FOR FULLY PORTED HEADS
Flow numbers will vary slightly from one casting to another of the same model.
NOTE: All flow testing is done @ 25in hg pressure. All valve lift is measured in Inches.
ACURA 1.8L TYPE R Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 248cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 283cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 196CFM @ .450" valve lift EXH. 229cfm @ .450" valve lift
ACURA 1.8L GSR Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 236cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 274cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 179cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 221cfm @ .450" valve lift
AUDI 1.8T 20V SMALL PORT Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 167cfm @ .380" valve lift INT. 225cfm @ .380" valve lift
EXH. 162cfm @ .380" valve lift EXH. 191cfm @ .380" valve lift
AUDI 1.8T 20V LARGE PORT Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 200cfm @ .380" valve lift INT. 243cfm @ .380" valve lift
EXH. 184cfm @ .380" valve lift EXH. 212cfm @ .380" valve lift
HONDA D16 OPEN CHAMBER Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 216cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 245cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 161cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 198cfm @ .450" valve lift
HONDA D16 CLOSED CHAMBER Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 209cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 241cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 153cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 199cfm @ .450" valve lift
HONDA B16 2nd gen stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 216cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 258cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 173cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 215cfm @ .450" valve lift
NEON 2.0L 1st gen stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 202cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 237cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 125cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 156cfm@ .450" valve lift
TOYOTA 7MGTE 24V Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 197cfm @ .400" valve lift INT. 217cfm @ .400" valve lift
EXH. 141cfm @ .400" valve lift EXH. 173cfm @ .400" valve lift
VW 8V EARLY CASTING Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 126cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 152cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 95cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 124cfm @ .450" valve lift
VW 8V CROSS FLOW Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 131cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 156cfm @.450" valve lift
EXH. 101cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 130cfm @ .450" valve lift
VW 16V 2.0L Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 184cfm @ .400" valve lift INT. 218cfm @ .400" valve lift
EXH. 142cfm @ .400" valve lift EXH. 168cfm @ .400" valve lift
VW VR6 12V Stock valve size
Stock: Ported:
INT. 148cfm @ .450" valve lift INT. 176cfm @ .450" valve lift
EXH. 137cfm @ .450" valve lift EXH. 159cfm @ .450" valve lift

[Stinkbox]

these numbers are low on this list cause they were all tested at only 25in/hg when most do it at 28in/hg.

[Pat]

Ah. I see.

What about the Hooters Omni? Didn't that have an N/A engine in it a while back making some decent power?

The Hooters Omni was the S60 development car and still runs a S60 set up. Barry Miles (a local) has owned it for a number of years...very cool car.

[Pat]

On the hybrid with a stock head discussion, I think there are gains to be had with a hybrid over a stock turbo, the the head is such a limiting factor, I'd argue that you'll go almost as fast, if not, just as fast with a stock Garrett with a stock head. You'll make a bit less peak horse power with the Garrett, but you'll have a much broader powerband (more area under the curve). If you don't spool till 4200 rpm due to turbo size and you run out of breath by 5500 rpm due to the crappy stock head, that doesn't leave you much rpm to play with.

My GLHS went 12.59 @ 110 with the bone stock, 90k+ mile original untouched top end.

[Stinkbox]

my hybrid with a 2.5 and stock head can't get to rev limit fast enough, it pulls right to it, doesn't die at 5500. i believe these cars died at that rpm do to the stock turbine side limiting flow, i know my stage 3 in a 63a/r sure doesn't limit it.

[Pat]

my hybrid with a 2.5 and stock head can't get to rev limit fast enough, it pulls right to it, doesn't die at 5500. i believe these cars died at that rpm do to the stock turbine side limiting flow, i know my stage 3 in a 63a/r sure doesn't limit it.

Is it still the stock 6200 rpm 2.5 rev limit? Most have found that even with a large turbo, the 2.5 is not making as much power past 5500 rpm or so as they think.

My point is simply that I think peak power is nice to talk about but the more area under the curve, the quicker the car is going to be. My GLHS was a great example of this. Based on race weight and trap speeds, it was probably making around 260, maybe 270 whp but it was consistently ET'd better than quite a few hybrid turbo cars with stock heads.

[turbovanman²]

^^^^^^Agreed, mine stops making power around 5700 rpm, even with a heavilly ported head, intake and log header, and of course, big as* turbo. :(

[daytonaturbo87]

Yeah I also agree, having more power under the curve is much much better than peak HP. Go race a new civic si with the 200hp vtec. Absoloutely zero power under the curve. A guy I worked with had one of those and took me for a ride in it, his was a couple years old, around 160hp I think. Anyway, it went decent and he was good at shifting it. He let me take it for a quick blast and I was shifting it too soon(not used to a car that tops out at 7k rpm) and it felt about twice as slow cause I was dropping it out of it's power band. Okay, not turbo, but it's still a good example of why you need that torq.

And as pertaining to the question of power versus et's, for a given turbo mopar, what kind of a 1/4 mile difference would one see with the auto trans versus a 5sp?

[iTurbo]

Here are my results with two cars, both having stock head and stock TurboII (Garrett T03) turbochargers and 14 psi boost:

Omni GLH: 198 WHP/270 WTQ
2.5L Turbo I
3" ehxuast and swingvalve
Big NPR intercooler

Shelby Lancer 196 WHP/242 WTQ
2.2L TurboII
3" exhaust and swingvalve
stock intercooler

The HP didn't drop off too bad at higher RPM with the 2.5L in my Omni, BUT, the torque dropped off at a linear rate after the 3200 RPM torque peak. It was dynoed all the way to the rev limiter and at 6200 RPM it was making 175 WHP/150 WTQ. A good intercooler will make a big difference here. I wouldn't bother upgrading the turbocharger on a car with the stock TII intercooler. That thing was HOT after a couple back-to-back pulls. The NPR was cool as ever.