Laser XE coming back

[Reaper1]

I find it really strange how the power levels are all over the place. In some instances he claims ~450hp and in others he's near 1000. I realize some are at the wheels and others are at the crank, but still. I'm not going to take anything away from Stephan as he has gone and done tings that most of us are still trying to figure out, but trying to say that "X" mod is needed at "X" power level is a bit...dangerous.

Larry B is pushing over 600, Shadow is at or over 600, Brian Slowe is surely over 600. There are probably others. Brian is the only one running a block with filler in it (if he;s even running that anymore, I know he had issues with it). I am not convinced that filling the block is a must and I also know of other tricks beyond long rods to take loading off of the thrust side of the cylinder walls.

[Vigo]

Various boost levels and fuels were mentioned as well as different parts setups being implied. I think it's all useful tidbits if taken in proper context.

[Reaper1]

Quote Originally Posted by SMPerformance View Post
I cracked a few common block's around the 450hp mark

since then i've been building them with billet 4 bolt main caps and arp studs never broke one again .running same engine for 3 years now

Keeping in mind that at the time this was posted not many people were running this amount of power, I kinda see this. However, there are many more people running this amount of power or more without 4-bolt mains now and very few are reporting back with broken blocks.

Quote Originally Posted by SMPerformance View Post
ill just give you guy's an idea 611cfptrq at only 5600 RPM

i use long shaft set-up by Axle Systems Inc (1.34 best 60ft)never broke one

It's unclear whether that is his peak torque number for that set-up, but if so, it's at a WAY higher rpm than I think anybody else is reporting right now that I can think of.

As far as him not breaking axles, here he isn't divulging one of the biggest things in keeping axles alive: geometry

Quote Originally Posted by SMPerformance View Post
my last 2.2 8 valve set-up did 588.9 Hp (engine dyno) and beleive me it's not an easy thing to do

there is alot of head work,custom intake,(i had )4 160lb/hr inj
custom rods,pistons
stand alone computer ,block prep and machining .......

Agreed that it's not easy. Yes, a lot of custom work has to be done. He was running 4 160lb/hr injectors because he was running alky IIRC. Custom rods, pistons, block prep/machining, and computer calibration...Agreed on all counts.

Quote Originally Posted by SMPerformance View Post
...and also Wallace of Lonewolf performance for they’re Camshafts.

What I like best about this season is showing everybody what a low budget
$4000.00 T-III engine can do. And how reliable these engines are. We have 9 events done so far same engine,
Almost all the other teams need 1 or 2 engines per race. Considering the fact
That we are making over 800hp at the crank with a stock head only the short block as been modified and a set of cams. If only I can get my race head done :bash:

Here's where it starts to get cloudy IMO. Making over 800chp with a *stock* head with only a set of cams and supporting lower end bits. Something doesn't jive here. To me a stock head means exactly that...you took it off of a factory car and plopped it on your block and stuck your cams in it. Even with custom manifolds and a huge turbo I don't see this happening. There are other things at play here. Most probable on that list is valve springs. He even says later that making more power is simply turning more rpm, but the stock TIII valve springs aren't up to the task of the revs he's claiming on top of the boost that would be needed to shove that much air/fuel down the engine's throat to make that power.

Hey, if I'm wrong, then that is amazing and I applaud his accomplishments that much more. Plus it makes me feel better about being able to get to my goals. However something in the back of my mind says there is a lot that was left out here.

Quote Originally Posted by SMPerformance View Post
the combination I found the best at the hp level i'm running
is copper o-rings and a cometic gasket cover with copper spray

yep I had the head machined for the o-rings the reason I did this is that it is easy to change the o-rings with the head on the work bench I change the o-rings about every 3 times I lift the head

I did 650hp on a cometic/arp studs without o-rings pass that point if you dont o-ring you better get ready to by gaskets by the box!
since I chaged to o-rings and cometic never blew a gasket

Yep had the same problem's you had that is why i now run a stock block no o-rings on the deck I had the head machined for to accept the .40 thousand of an inch copper o-rings,I let them hang out .12thousnand of an inch

To me this is where the "danger zone" is being approached. Basically it's being said that at 650hp (unclear as to whether that is crank or wheel) it is *needed* to run o-rings, most specifically in the head. Now, what did he find that this was *needed*? I can't swear to it, but I don't think Brian is running them. I know Shadow isn't. I don't think Larry is either.

torque that to
77 pound I retorque them 3 times (3 heat cycles )

Now here is where maybe technology has gotten better. ARP don't recommend retorquing if you use their assembly lube. I understand reduced clamping force due to "creep", but on a head? The factory doesn't retorque headbolts.

Quote Originally Posted by SMPerformance View Post
28psi T-68 DBB

Unless he was running the thing WAY off the map, this was around 500-550chp.

Quote Originally Posted by SMPerformance View Post
we are using only 3 and we are near the 1000hp mark the end caps are fine
in the testing we did we ran all the 05 season with the same bearings with only 3 main caps the same wallace is selling.

the center of the block is where the flexing occurs not at the ends

I agree that the block twist happens in the middle of the block, and primarily #3, however I do think that supporting the ends like what Warren is doing is a good idea. It'll help the block from reacting to the resistance from the applied torque. This has more to do with keeping everything where it's supposed to be and it might keep the headgasket surface from warping under power.

Quote Originally Posted by SMPerformance View Post
No need to de-stroke good to 11K with the 2.2 crank you will however hit the wall with the stock valve train at 9000rpm you also need custom cams the stage 1 from Lonewolf Performance will get you up at aroung 8100rpm stage 2 will get you over 9200 rpm and stage 3 still did not fing the limit

stock crank needs to be lightened and knife edged all the rotating assembly
needs to be balanced I recommend Long connecting rods so it will lessen crank angle, stock rods will bend a bit over 450whp

See...now here's why I question the *stock* head thing. He's saying here that the stock valvetrain needs upgraded to go over 9000rpm.

I agree that lightening the stock crank and having a lighter rotating assembly will help with engine response, but as long as it's balanced I don't think it's *needed* to spin the engine that much. Knife edging will help with weight and oil control. Using a crank scraper and a baffled oil pan will work very well and if you use that in conjunction with good crankcase pressure evacuation you get the bonus of better ring sealing too.

Long connecting rods will help with lessening the thrust side crank angle, but I think we can pretty easily say that the stock rods are good for 450hp as Shadow and a few others have proven if I'm not mistaken.

Anyway, the thing is that technology and experience have come a long way since this stuff has happened. On top of that there was quite a bit left out because Stephan was also in competition and couldn't afford to tell all of his secrets. I don't think any blame can be pointed out there. The experience that was gained certainly is worth noting and keeping in mind, but holding it to a "T" I think might be the wrong thing to do.

[Ondonti]

Methanol + any turbo will make 20% more HP out the box. Easy HP achievement with a t68.

Are you actually thinking the TIII heads won't make power at high rpms? With methanol he really only needs to make 650chp on gasoline to instantly jump near 800chp. Not weird at all for the heads. When you are running a 72mm turbo it really helps all this. IMO if he had a highly modified head he would make the same power at less boost assuming there were no other bottlenecks. I am also a fan of overcamming a race only motor to make up for headflow problems. It works all the time on v8's, it just kills the lowend.

[Shadow]

Guys, no offense, but this is all really Old info and I'm sure that Warren is aware of all of it. Might be a better idea to move it to another section for further debate/ conversation rather than jack up his thread?

[Vigo]

That was my main reason for not responding to that one.. I have some stuff to say, but im pretty sure Warren is fully capable of putting things in the 'proper context' i mentioned, so my long-winded response to Reaper's post would just be shitting up a good thread.

[Reaper1]

Yeah, I'm sorry. Could a mod please move our little side discussion? I'm interested in what Vigo has to say, but I don't want to jack up Warren's thread anymore.

I apologize. I should have known better. DOH!

[Ondonti]

I have always wondered about using a fancier Darton sleeve but looking for Iron block stuff they had one that basically said "forget it, this is not production, will never be."

So we are stuck filling.

[Reaper1]

There are other companies that do sleeves. Besides, diesel engines are iron blocks and have sleeves. It's not like it's an uncommon thing. Plus, if it's going to be custom...who cares if a "namebrand" company won't help?

[zin]

There are other companies that do sleeves. Besides, diesel engines are iron blocks and have sleeves. It's not like it's an uncommon thing. Plus, if it's going to be custom...who cares if a "namebrand" company won't help?

My thoughts exactly... Give the specs or a print to a machine shop and let them make them for you, I can't imagine that it requires any exotic equipment to produce them... Really just a lathe of sufficient size.

Really might be an effective way to upgrade the CB, as one can control the material the cylinders are made of. I do think I'd still partially fill the block though, as the bottom of the cylinders would need a bit more help to keep them "centered".

Mike

[Reaper1]

My thoughts exactly... Give the specs or a print to a machine shop and let them make them for you, I can't imagine that it requires any exotic equipment to produce them... Really just a lathe of sufficient size.

Really might be an effective way to upgrade the CB, as one can control the material the cylinders are made of. I do think I'd still partially fill the block though, as the bottom of the cylinders would need a bit more help to keep them "centered".

Mike

Simple: pin them.

[zin]

Yeah, but I prefer to support the full circumference of the cylinder, pinning would help locate them, but would localize the stress.

Besides, I can't come up with a good reason to not partially fill the block, once we're at this level of power anyway...

Mike

[Reaper1]

There are a few reasons I don't want to fill the block:

I've heard of and seen block fill crack and basically ruin engines.

My goals are going to require maximum cooling...WOT for very long periods, we're talking minutes at a time at high boost and high rpm.

A lot of the original jug will be in tact. The material that the sleeve is made of is not only stronger, but also stiffer than the block, so basically the original jug is doing the locating and some support. The bottom of the sleeve is usually pressed into a slightly smaller bore to locate it and to lock it into place if I'm not mistaken.

Because the sleeve is made of stiffer material it should not deflect as much, so less stress is carried by the block due to less deflection (notice I did not say less force, because that is determined by rod ratio and combustion pressure).

Pinning has been used very successfully in other applications. It just has to be done correctly and before the cylinder machine work is done. I wouldn't pin a sleeved block unless it was proven that it was absolutely needed. At that point I'm looking at ways to reduce the thrust load significantly anyway.

This isn't something I'm doing with my engine at the moment. However, it is something I've thought about extensively and when I build my next engine, will probably be incorporated among other "over the top" type modifications.

[Warren Stramer]

Hello everybody, Hope you are all well. I last posted here last Sept. so I thought I should finish my new engine build-up thread.
I actually finished putting this thing together last fall, but still have not taken the time to install it in the car. I will get to that soon. So, the following photos are random shots of the engine build-up as it went together.
I have alot of photos so if I hog too much band width, or they get boring, just say so......

[Warren Stramer]

These shots show the new turbo install (GTX3582R) with .82 AR hot side.( No more Mr. nice guy)
Also my old ITB setup needed updating. When I built the ITB's I thought I would never need or want more than 400HP, so I made the throttle plates a rather small 1.740 diameter, good enough for what I intended then, but when I built the big valve-big cam head they became a major restriction, So I rebored the throttles to 2 inches, profile milled the throttle shaft, and made new aluminum V stacks slightly shorter.
So, After getting rid of the "restrictor plate" throttles, and the "pea shooter" 50 trim turbo, I'm looking for 700+ HP.
Next project is to increase the intake piping diam. from 2.5" to 3"

[85boostbox]

Absolute artwork. I tip my hat to you good sir.



Paul

[banger68]

Never get boring ... eye candy!

[Pat]

Looks great, Warren!

[Reeves]

Very nice Warren!

[DetroitTurbo]

WOW!!!! That is beautiful! Did you make that header or did you buy it? Either way its a work of art!