Log T1 Potential?

[ShelGame]

I'm trying to figure out what the full potential of an NHRA stock class spec log T1 is. I now have all the necessary parts to build one up. For reference, stock class does not allow any swapping from stock components.

- I can go up to 0.06" over; I doubt the stock block could take it, but I could also run a DC race block (if I could find one) which might be able to take 0.06" over. But, where would you get pistons?

- I'll have to check if there is a forged piston approved. I know there's an approved Ross piston for the 2.2 T2 and 2.5 T1, but I'm not sure about the Log T1. So, assume OEM oversize pistons.

- Stock LW rods are required, but can be blue printed, shot peened, and ARP'd (I have a set of ARP'd LW rods and 0.02" over pistons coming).

- Crank can be stroked to the limit of the FSM specs - so 0.01" over on the stroke. Not much, but every little bit helps.

- Head must be stock unported. I would probably use the 782 head as it came on the '86 log cars, right? So it would be legal. NHRA-spec 3-angle valve job is all that is allowed.

- Cam is actually kind of open. I can swap to roller cam with PT lifters, which I would for sure do. But, which cam? Must be stock lift is the only limitation. TBI roller?

- Intake must be stock log T1, unported. Throttle body must be stock and in stock location. I think this is the real killer. Being a suck-through is what I think will ultimately limit the power. EGR can be removed/blocked/etc.

- Turbo must be stock Garret T1. This I think is OK. A stock T1 Garret should be able to make 250hp easily.

- Fuel management is open. I can run 3-bar, +20's, and my own calibration.

- No IC is allowed.

- Race fuel only. Assume I'll run the same 110 octane VP fuel I run now in the 2.5 T1.



So, with all of those limitations, do you think a log T1 can make 250hp? At 250hp, it will be a class leader for sure. The engine is 'only' factored at 150hp (it's never been re-factored). Even at 220hp, it would be a potent combination in class racing.

What kind of boost would it need to make to reach 250hp? 18-20psi (this is what I run in the 2.5 T1 now with the Mitsu turbo)?

Has anyone pushed the log T1 in recent memory?

Please discuss...

[contraption22]

It would be a fun challenge for sure!

[vipernbox]

So by running a later 2.2 or 2.5 T1 you are gaining the intake manifold.. and stuck with the little turbo...

and going early gains you a bigger turbo.. but means you are stuck with a log..

and going T2 screws up the classification by bumping the HP numbers?

What about late style 2.2 T1? any favorable ratings to gain there?




With a race only motor, tuned right to the edge... I think 250hp should be within reach... but no idea.. You are going to be throwing lots of hot air into an intake manifold that is going to be trying to kill pistons by making tuning a cylinder by cylinder affair...

With open electronics though.. humm.... a SBEC would change the game..


Subscribed.. Sounds like a fun challenge.

[ShelGame]

Just did some math - what it means is I could race my Daytona as an '87; at my current 3000lbs with driver, it would put me solidly in C/FS. But, at the same weight and power as right now. Assuming I can make 220+hp, I could run mid-to-high 13's in a class where the index is 15.15. I could easily run 1.5+ seconds under the index (where I'm only just ~1 second under now with the 2.5 T1 in B/FS) - I could be #1 qualifier everywhere I go!

It would really piss off some $100k+ Mustang CJ and Challenger DP owners...

[vipernbox]

I could be #1 qualifier everywhere I go!
...

For one year... After which they will change the rules... or you will get tired of proving the car is legal all the time...





I say give em hell..

and besides... I seriously think a log with the Garrett probably could outrun a 2.2 with a one piece and mitisbishuiE... But maybe not..

[roachjuice]

I thought the log setup gets boost stack real easy? Like anything past about 13psi.

[ShelGame]

So by running a later 2.2 or 2.5 T1 you are gaining the intake manifold.. and stuck with the little turbo...

and going early gains you a bigger turbo.. but means you are stuck with a log..

Right...

and going T2 screws up the classification by bumping the HP numbers?

The T2 has been raced and is now factored at 185HP. So, to race a T2 in my Daytona means I have to race at least in class A/FS going up against PT GT's. I don't think even a maxxed out T2 with a stock turbo and IC can beat them. Technically, a T2 Daytona is an AA/FS car which means I would have to race Stage 3 SRT4's. There are a couple of them racing. I could never compete in AA/FS without some illegal weight reduction. NHRA Allows you to bump up or down 1 class from the 'natural' class. So, A/FS is the slowest class I could race a Daytona in.

Now, a T2 Omni in AA/FS would be fun. I think you could get an Omni (ie, GLHS clone) light enough to compete against the SRT4.

What about late style 2.2 T1? any favorable ratings to gain there?

Actually, yes. The '88 2.2 T1 is rated the same as the '87 log T1 at 160hp. So, you could run the '88 T1 in the same classes you can run the '87 Log T1. The question then is - which 2.2 makes more power? The Garret+log T1? Or the blow-thru Mitsu T1?

With a race only motor, tuned right to the edge... I think 250hp should be within reach... but no idea.. You are going to be throwing lots of hot air into an intake manifold that is going to be trying to kill pistons by making tuning a cylinder by cylinder affair...

Yep, and you'd just have to throw some fuel at it to keep it cool which is what I do now.

With open electronics though.. humm.... a SBEC would change the game..

I thin SBEC would be the way to go with it. Though, tuning would be a little bit more work that way just because it's a new combination. Some code modification would be necessary to get the cyl1-2 enrichment working without the adaptives screwing it up.

I probably need to build a new engine this coming fall anyway (the engine in the car now has been in there for 6 years and hundreds of passes). I just need to decide what to actually build so I can get the block, crank and other parts prepped for the machine shop.

[RoadWarrior222]

I've got an intercooler that isn't an intercooler idea ...

[ShelGame]

I've got an intercooler that isn't an intercooler idea ...

Oh? do tell...

[Warren Stramer]

The first thing I would want to know is what fuels are legal. This will be a BIG deal not being able to run a IC, and will ultimately be the limiting factor.
I would then build the biggest engine the rules allow, just as you alluded to. Also, I would use the lowest tension piston rings I could get away with that would still keep some semblance of oil control. (Talk to Keith at Total Seal, but not about gappless rings. I would use conventional style, low tension)
I would set the brg clearances such that I could run 0w10 synthetic oil, and if legal the deepest oil pan that would fit and not have ground clearance problems. With a maximum of 4.5 qts oil in pan.
I would spend alot of time porting the oil pump and oil galleys to reduce pumping drag, and run no more oil pressure than is needed.
And finally, the cam will be a huge factor. finding the perfect cam and torque convertor (if auto) will be the hardest challenge. The fastest cam will very likely not be a factory cam. Dont buy into the fairy tale that you cant find power with a "large" duration cam, and unported head nonesense. In fact, with the stock TB,Intake and head, the cam will be even MORE importand to get right.
I would definatley run a fuel cooler. It will help with the charge temps. I would insulate the entire fuel system from the fuel cooler to the fuel rail.
There are alot more tricks you can use to lessen the parasitic HP losses, but that will take another few posts.
I think 250HP is achievable if you can use a fuel with the right burn characteristics, and enough boost.

[ShelGame]

The first thing I would want to know is what fuels are legal. This will be a BIG deal not being able to run a IC, and will ultimately be the limiting factor.
I would then build the biggest engine the rules allow, just as you alluded to. Also, I would use the lowest tension piston rings I could get away with that would still keep some semblance of oil control. (Talk to Keith at Total Seal, but not about gappless rings. I would use conventional style, low tension)
I would set the brg clearances such that I could run 0w10 synthetic oil, and if legal the deepest oil pan that would fit and not have ground clearance problems. With a maximum of 4.5 qts oil in pan.
I would spend alot of time porting the oil pump and oil galleys to reduce pumping drag, and run no more oil pressure than is needed.
And finally, the cam will be a huge factor. finding the perfect cam and torque convertor (if auto) will be the hardest challenge. The fastest cam will very likely not be a factory cam. Dont buy into the fairy tale that you cant find power with a "large" duration cam, and unported head nonesense. In fact, with the stock TB,Intake and head, the cam will be even MORE importand to get right.
I would definatley run a fuel cooler. It will help with the charge temps. I would insulate the entire fuel system from the fuel cooler to the fuel rail.
There are alot more tricks you can use to lessen the parasitic HP losses, but that will take another few posts.
I think 250HP is achievable if you can use a fuel with the right burn characteristics, and enough boost.

Yes, I would really like it if I could get a hold of an NOS DC block to run. Bore it to 3.5" and stroke the crank would give an easy 2.3l.

I definitely think there is more in the cam even with my 2.5 combo now. I just don't really know how to go about figuring out the right duration(s).

Most of the VP race fuels are legal. Right now I run C11 and it seems to work OK in the 2.5 T1. But, I mostly run it because my father-in-law and brother-in-law run it in thier V8's and it's usually better if we run the same fuel so we aren't buying 2 different kinds at every race. But, my father-in-law is switch to SS/CS this summer and will likely run C16. So, maybe it's not such a big deal anymore. Any suggestions for a better fuel than C11 for a turbo car?

EDIT: There is an approved Ross forged piston for the 2.2 T1. So, it would just be a matter of finding the $$ for them and waiting. I hear Ross takes a while with NHRA-spec orders like these where they don't stock the parts.

[zin]

Alky or water injection legal, or at least something you could slide in stealthily? Either would give you the needed charge cooling, and you will need it running that restictor plate of an intake!

Mike

[ShelGame]

Alky or water injection legal, or at least something you could slide in stealthily? Either would give you the needed charge cooling, and you will need it running that restictor plate of an intake!

Mike

Not legal and not easy to hide. Though, as Warren stated, a fuel cooler is legal and probably a good idea. I should actually be running one now.

[Keito]

http://www.turbododge.com/forums/f1/...rd-t1-log.html

[OmniLuvr]

how bout running e-85 as a fuel? i ran e-85 in my log manifold shelby charger, stock computer (map clamp), stock swirl head, flex fuel inj, 16 psi with no intercooler and g-head pistons. i think i could have turned the boost up more but my 525 couldnt handle the 16psi...

[cordes]

If you can run ethanol I would run it.

I think the killer with the log is going to be the efficiency you'll lose from sucking through that tiny TB. That thing is minute.

[Warren Stramer]

If you can run ethanol I would run it.

I think the killer with the log is going to be the efficiency you'll lose from sucking through that tiny TB. That thing is minute.

I agree. That is why valve timing events will be important, and parasitic losses parred down to a minimum.
I went a best of 13.1 with a stock G body @15psi. and I mean stock. only removed spare tire and jack. 100octane unleaded VP pump gas. nothing done to the stock engine except super 60 cam and boost bleed, 84 electronics,2 1/4 downpipe, manual trans. and Goodrich drag radials.
was my first attempt at four cyl. turbo racing. The scan tool intake charge temps were in the 240 degree range.

EDIT.......Now I am embarassed to have to say I will have to go back and look at some time slips from 1996 to see if I ran that with the over-the-back IC. I'm second guessing my memory but I think that is right

[roachjuice]

I agree. That is why valve timing events will be important, and parasitic losses parred down to a minimum.
I went a best of 13.1 with a stock G body @15psi. and I mean stock. only removed spare tire and jack. 100octane unleaded VP pump gas. nothing done to the stock engine except super 60 cam and boost bleed, 84 electronics,2 1/4 downpipe, manual trans. and Goodrich drag radials.
was my first attempt at four cyl. turbo racing. The scan tool intake charge temps were in the 240 degree range.

Holy crap!!

[RoadWarrior222]

Oh? do tell...

Well it ain't all that effective, but could help stop detonation on the top half of the track...

First, create vacuum that will pull air out the bottom back of the engine bay by making a spoiler out of a bit of conveyor belt or similar that you dangle between the wheels at the back of the K-frame...

Then use the pressure ahead of the windshield by venting the hood over the TB to turbo area and log.

Thus you have fresh air flowing over your intake side, which has some cooling effect, depending on how "incidentally" large you can make your charge pipe, and how much surface area you can sneak in.

Not great but it's something.

[turbovanman²]

If 250 whp is not easy to do on a blow thru with an IC, then is it really feasible on a log engine with no IC?

Pistons can be made to any size so that shouldn't be an issue.

Fuel would be a big part like Warren said. E85 would be a nice, cheaper alternative to race fuel. Wonder how it compares to say, C16?

Awesome thread,