HEAD vs HEAD 2.2 turbo = stock vs Ed Peters

[glhs875]

You said "possible Quest", I corrected it to "Reality" because it has already been done and I had thought by now it was common knowledge.

I agree with the "around 6000RPM Max for Peak power on the stock cam, as way back when the Charger was only making 450ish WHP (Mustang dyno) it was making peak power around 5900rpm. Now, having said that, it would only lose something like 7WHP by 6500rpm, still we're talking peak #'s here.

I searched and search and couldn't find a single 2.2 8v dyno sheet that was higher with stock cam. (this was on the 88 turbo roller)

When I swapped out the little 57 trim for the Holset HE351, I was in fact "testing" the cam in the sense that I Knew the larger exhaust side of the turbo and Much larger compressor, should allow the peak HP #'s to go up IF the mtr could breath it.

When I went back and dyno'd 480WHP, peak TQ had gone up something like 500rpm, but peak HP hardly moved. That's when I knew the cam was done (or I was floating valves or both) While almost everyone else cried "the ported stocker exhaust mani is the Cork" (which at that point, Could have been true)

Long story short and I swapped in the F4 cam on the Good word of one Warren Stramer, who was also Famously Known back then for Proving the Taft S3 cam in his own set-up. Results are well known as the Charger has peak #'s in the 6700rpm range now and with only a decently ported G-head with +1mm valves.

Of course, this is small potatoes compared to what I was Really talking about, which also coincides with much of your post;

Warren's set-up IS running much larger than average ports And a Much Larger cam than any other turbo 8v I'm aware of and, according to his project log, Pulls Hard past 8000rpm

I thought this also would be common knowledge by now, never the less, it is the reason I corrected your quote.

It is No longer a possible Quest to make peak power well above 6000rpm, it is in Fact a Reality.............

Good post! Thanks for the correction and for the clarification of my post! Not so sure on this subject being common knowledge though! BTW not saying that my #655 casting sized ports of my #445 head are the best idea in the way I achieved the size, but my combo pulled very hard to 7K RPM (that is where I would shift at) with a 89 T1 cam and pulled hard to over 7500 rpm the point at which my valve springs were becoming an issue when using a Taft S3 cam!

[glhs875]

Imho, In order to make a FB head into a max effort, high flow, high rpm capable head, you end up changing everything that made it "fast burn" to begin with.
You completely change and enlarge the intake port, you completely change the chamber, (especially if you fill with weld).
Also, the one remaining advantage the FB has, shallower chamber, comes with minor drawback of longer heavier valves, not a big deal until you start turning high rpm.
This is why I always just used the G head. If I wanted to run pump gas at only around the 300HP level, I would probably stick with the Fast burn head. Somewhere around the 450+ HP level with serious head mods use whatever is the easiest to reach your goal.
I do not like to weld on these heads. Like Gary said, they move around. They also get soft from welding, and they are pretty soft to begin with stock. I would never heat one above 275 degrees for very long without re-heat treating.
as an example of the material I would have to remove from a FB head to get the same area and flow as my race head check out these photos........one is a 782 head, the other is a G head intake (sorry for the 782 photo poor quality)

Here is a better photo of a 782 casting intake port Warren!

[Shadow]

Good post! Thanks for the correction and for the clarification of my post! Not so sure on this subject being common knowledge though! BTW not saying that my #655 casting sized ports of my #445 head are the best idea in the way I achieved the size, but my combo pulled very hard to 7K RPM (that is where I would shift at) with a 89 T1 cam and pulled hard to over 7500 rpm the point at which my valve springs were becoming an issue when using a Taft S3 cam!

Makes sense; When I was making peak HP @ 59XX rpm on the stock 88 turbo roller, the cam was installed @ 115deg. I never retarded it or played with cam timing because the Charger was Always making serious MPH on the high end of the track. So I'm sure I could have fudged the #'s by retarding cam to show peak power at say 61-6200rpm IF I was that kind of person.

I shifted around 7000rpm first two gears on slicks at the track with that set-up. When the F4 went in, I left my limiter at 74-7500rpm because I didn't want to raise it and overspin something. Remember, this is all on the non CB mtr that was only supposed to be in the Charger for the first year lol.

Last couple of times out I was shifting first gear right off the limiter and second pretty darn close, so pretty sure she'd spin to 8000 easy IF I let it.

Like I said; small potatoes compared to Warrens set-up. Pretty sure 8000 is like the old 6000 for him.........

[Shadow]

Here is a better photo of a 782 casting intake port Warren!

Picture is worth a thousand words. Shocks me that after all this time people aren't more familiar with the simple differences in our stock parts.

And yeah, when I said "thought this would be common knowledge" I meant for those who follow this kind of stuff, but I have found that most remain in a state of constant confusion from all of the misinformation and so they forget the Real Meat and Potatoes stuff

[chromguy]

Picture is worth a thousand words. Shocks me that after all this time people aren't more familiar with the simple differences in our stock parts.

And yeah, when I said "thought this would be common knowledge" I meant for those who follow this kind of stuff, but I have found that most remain in a state of constant confusion from all of the misinformation and so they forget the Real Meat and Potatoes stuff

This sort of stuff happens in every topic area.
For example there are lots of beer drinkers out there and very, very few know the real difference between lager and ale.
For a good Canadian lager and ale song.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTkUm1oGZEE

[glhs875]

Makes sense; When I was making peak HP @ 59XX rpm on the stock 88 turbo roller, the cam was installed @ 115deg. I never retarded it or played with cam timing because the Charger was Always making serious MPH on the high end of the track. So I'm sure I could have fudged the #'s by retarding cam to show peak power at say 61-6200rpm IF I was that kind of person.

I wouldn't look down of someone at all by retarding their camshaft to move the HP curve up in the R's along with the possibility of making the peak HP # higher. Especially if it were to lead to a better ET and higher traps speeds. To me it depends on the total combo of the vehicle involved if a person should do it or not.

[tryingbe]

I cleaned up my head a little before bolting it back on the block.



This is the dyno from this cylinder head, on E85.



boost level and afr.

[83scamp]

We could go to PM's if this is bothering anyone. I've never shy'd away from off topic Q's because the only importance to me is the forum. (ie. IF you have the audience, highly viewed topic, then prob best avenue to ask Q's and get solid answers)

And there are more than enough with experience here to answer pretty well any Q you have. (although most aren't going to want to Tell you What to do. That is best left to You)

First thing that sticks out to me; S50 is a Big turbo for a Max goal of only 300hp. You would be giving up a lot of trans response and Great drivability vs say a 46 trim stage 1 which is fully capable of making 300hp at 17-20psi.

2nd would be electronics; If you were going to stick with stock cal I would suggest running the FB head because you will have a better match and I'm not sure you have the experience to set up a G-head on a 2.5 optimally using stock cals.

IF you really want to use the G-head, I would def say Get the stage 5 cal. I have never run anything less.(except when we ran the MP S60 cals before the vendors existed) In the early days I never was interested in Stage 1/2/3 ect. I wanted the most aggressive cal I could get, and then I would fit the rest of the pieces of the puzzle together. Most back then said "you can't do that, it won't work", just like the techs at MP who told one of our customers he couldn't run the S-60 fuel pump/SMEC, +40's and 3 bar map on a TII SMEC based, otherwise Stock car. "It won't work unless you run Everything in the pkg"! lol

Trying to post this for the 5th time.... Grrr... Don't know what's going on with this site, but has me frustrated....


I'm really interested in your opinion on my build, and hope to learn from some of the best.

My theory on using the S50 turbo for my build was that since I was using a 2.5 in an L-body, the slower boost build of the larger turbo may help me get some traction. But you mentioned drivability issues, which I may not have considered. I'm open to any and all suggestions. You mentioned the S46 trim may be better.

As far as electronics, I'm converting the engine bay to 89 SMEC from a Shadow. I have a stock SMEC, but was going to use it as a core exchange for either a Boost Button tune, or a FWP stage 5. I know you mentioned the FWP stage 5. I was planning on using +20 injectors, because I felt they were more than capable of meeting my hp goals, but the stage 5 is listed as using +40's. Is that just something I need to tell Cindy when I order it? I really don't think I need the fuel of +40's.

I am planning on running a TU fuel rail and AFPR. 3 bar MAP, and wideband. Which I know I need.

I'm probably going to use the FB head, since I already have +1mm valves for it, and you stated that it wouldn't be a bottleneck for my hp goals. I can save the G head for another project...

Thanks again for being willing to help a newby get started...

[Shadow]

I wouldn't look down of someone at all by retarding their camshaft to move the HP curve up in the R's along with the possibility of making the peak HP # higher. Especially if it were to lead to a better ET and higher traps speeds. To me it depends on the total combo of the vehicle involved if a person should do it or not.

What I Meant was that I was not going to do it just for bragging rights The Charger was working well at the track and I was not ready to change anything, just to get a #, then change it back. For a matter of fact, I have Never changed anything while on a dyno. All tuning and changes Real World with REAL load, then see what things look like on dyno if I get the chance.

Practically Every high HP local car that has tuned on dyno, has burnt down in the Real world at the track. This is what happens when you fail to understand the difference between "THE REAL" and chasing a #!

Trying to post this for the 5th time.... Grrr... Don't know what's going on with this site, but has me frustrated....


I'm really interested in your opinion on my build, and hope to learn from some of the best.

My theory on using the S50 turbo for my build was that since I was using a 2.5 in an L-body, the slower boost build of the larger turbo may help me get some traction. But you mentioned drivability issues, which I may not have considered. I'm open to any and all suggestions. You mentioned the S46 trim may be better.

As far as electronics, I'm converting the engine bay to 89 SMEC from a Shadow. I have a stock SMEC, but was going to use it as a core exchange for either a Boost Button tune, or a FWP stage 5. I know you mentioned the FWP stage 5. I was planning on using +20 injectors, because I felt they were more than capable of meeting my hp goals, but the stage 5 is listed as using +40's. Is that just something I need to tell Cindy when I order it? I really don't think I need the fuel of +40's.

I am planning on running a TU fuel rail and AFPR. 3 bar MAP, and wideband. Which I know I need.

I'm probably going to use the FB head, since I already have +1mm valves for it, and you stated that it wouldn't be a bottleneck for my hp goals. I can save the G head for another project...

Thanks again for being willing to help a newby get started...

First off; IF your already concerned about traction, Why run the 2.5l over the 2.2l in an L-body? You will be fighting a Brutal TQ curve that, while Beneficial in a Heavier car, can become a liability in a lighter car like an L-body. Unless your objective is 90% part throttle "Cruising around" drivability, vs 10% step on it and impress?

On the Turbo choice; What you are attempting to do, IMO, is much like those who say "I'm going to make X amount of HP @ X amount of boost", on an unknown set-up. This hss always ended up in a recipe for disaster. IF there is enough Factual evidence (ie. results posted by Reliable sources) of multiple builds running multiple turbo set-ups where you can clearly see, "If I run This turbo with These supporting pieces I Should be able to make This HP @ about This amount of boost". Then fine. Otherwise you would need to have a Vast experience with turbo sizing in order for it not to end in failure. (failure being that it Could have been done Better with another turbo configuration)

How many builds have we seen where someone picks a Way oversized turbo, so they can make some ridiculous amount of power on Lower boost with Jacked Timing? Everyone jumps on the bandwagon and thinks it's going to be Insane once the boost is turned up, and it Never is........

You end up with a Laggy Brutal build that gets retired or sold because Nothing works Together. All in the Name of what Many view as Efficiency! lmao!!!!! (actually, really sad )

Rule #1. RESPECT the ENVIRONMENT!

Understand that as displacement Changes, so does the turbo configuration because the Restriction in Front of it has changed.

So, basing your turbo choice on a traction controlling Hope, is just Not what you want to be doing. IF you want control over traction issues due to excessive HP on the street, buy a Good EBC.

What you Do want, is to chose the Best suited turbo for your goals based on your budget. (budget meaning are you ready to shell out for a BB unit, or are you looking for the best journal bearing turbo that will do the job)

The further you stray from this, the Worse your transient response will become, and the more your set-up will become like an on/off switch. (Lag/ Full power vs Nice linier Pull)

There is no better journal bearing turbo out there for our mtrs than the 46 trim stage 1 for initial upgrade and too the 325-350WHP mark. When I first got into these mtrs, it was believed (and I'm sure it still is in places) that the S60 was The Go To Turbo for an initial upgrade. Very small change in compressor, slightly larger exhaust flow, biggest Plus being a direct bolt-on. Back in 1998-2000 (before I was even on the IN) I was looking for a compressor upgrade that would take Better advantage of the stage 1 .63 A/R turbine housing. Understanding that Chrysler chose to increase the A/R to .63 in an attempt to "Band-Aid" the poor flow from the stock S/V, I Knew that with a Better S/V design, a Large compressor could be run, and at even Lower drive pressure that the S60 with stock S/V.

For years, I struggled to find any build that ran better #'s with a comparatively sized turbo and such a Simple build. This, before we had even gotten our feet wet and Before I even had a clue about driving a big HP FWD at the track!

Since then I have seen that the 46 trim works well even With the restrictive stock S/V (boost levels of 20psi or below) and even on Stock long block configurations. It is a Very Forgiving turbo! (You almost Can't scew up your build no matter what supporting mods you have)

In 2004, when I first got on the net, it was just me saying this. Now, all these years later, there Are others who have listened and can Confirm what I'm saying here.

So; IF you wanted 350-400WHP (or slightly more) I would say by all means, run the 50 trim, but since you are Sure that 300hp is the Max limit that you will be Happy with, the 50 trim becomes a wasted venture, and the ability to "tune it" to a linier PB becomes much more difficult.

Keep in mind; this is just My opinion, others will vary

[83scamp]

First off; IF your already concerned about traction, Why run the 2.5l over the 2.2l in an L-body? You will be fighting a Brutal TQ curve that, while Beneficial in a Heavier car, can become a liability in a lighter car like an L-body. Unless your objective is 90% part throttle "Cruising around" drivability, vs 10% step on it and impress?

On the Turbo choice; What you are attempting to do, IMO, is much like those who say "I'm going to make X amount of HP @ X amount of boost", on an unknown set-up. This hss always ended up in a recipe for disaster. IF there is enough Factual evidence (ie. results posted by Reliable sources) of multiple builds running multiple turbo set-ups where you can clearly see, "If I run This turbo with These supporting pieces I Should be able to make This HP @ about This amount of boost". Then fine. Otherwise you would need to have a Vast experience with turbo sizing in order for it not to end in failure. (failure being that it Could have been done Better with another turbo configuration)

How many builds have we seen where someone picks a Way oversized turbo, so they can make some ridiculous amount of power on Lower boost with Jacked Timing? Everyone jumps on the bandwagon and thinks it's going to be Insane once the boost is turned up, and it Never is........

You end up with a Laggy Brutal build that gets retired or sold because Nothing works Together. All in the Name of what Many view as Efficiency! lmao!!!!! (actually, really sad )

Rule #1. RESPECT the ENVIRONMENT!

Understand that as displacement Changes, so does the turbo configuration because the Restriction in Front of it has changed.

So, basing your turbo choice on a traction controlling Hope, is just Not what you want to be doing. IF you want control over traction issues due to excessive HP on the street, buy a Good EBC.

What you Do want, is to chose the Best suited turbo for your goals based on your budget. (budget meaning are you ready to shell out for a BB unit, or are you looking for the best journal bearing turbo that will do the job)

The further you stray from this, the Worse your transient response will become, and the more your set-up will become like an on/off switch. (Lag/ Full power vs Nice linier Pull)

There is no better journal bearing turbo out there for our mtrs than the 46 trim stage 1 for initial upgrade and too the 325-350WHP mark. When I first got into these mtrs, it was believed (and I'm sure it still is in places) that the S60 was The Go To Turbo for an initial upgrade. Very small change in compressor, slightly larger exhaust flow, biggest Plus being a direct bolt-on. Back in 1998-2000 (before I was even on the IN) I was looking for a compressor upgrade that would take Better advantage of the stage 1 .63 A/R turbine housing. Understanding that Chrysler chose to increase the A/R to .63 in an attempt to "Band-Aid" the poor flow from the stock S/V, I Knew that with a Better S/V design, a Large compressor could be run, and at even Lower drive pressure that the S60 with stock S/V.

For years, I struggled to find any build that ran better #'s with a comparatively sized turbo and such a Simple build. This, before we had even gotten our feet wet and Before I even had a clue about driving a big HP FWD at the track!

Since then I have seen that the 46 trim works well even With the restrictive stock S/V (boost levels of 20psi or below) and even on Stock long block configurations. It is a Very Forgiving turbo! (You almost Can't scew up your build no matter what supporting mods you have)

In 2004, when I first got on the net, it was just me saying this. Now, all these years later, there Are others who have listened and can Confirm what I'm saying here.

So; IF you wanted 350-400WHP (or slightly more) I would say by all means, run the 50 trim, but since you are Sure that 300hp is the Max limit that you will be Happy with, the 50 trim becomes a wasted venture, and the ability to "tune it" to a linier PB becomes much more difficult.

Keep in mind; this is just My opinion, others will vary

Awesome information. You pointed out a lot of things I hadn't considered, thank you!

As far as the 2.5 vs 2.2, I just lucked into a really nice 2.5 short block assembly this summer from a friend of mine. That was the deciding factor, nothing more, nothing less.

Since I'm still in the "gathering parts" phase, I am fully able to switch gears, and go with parts recommended. That's why I'm asking questions now, instead of regretting later. So please, keep the information coming, I'm like a dry sponge trying to soak up all this knowledge. I'm the kind of guy who like to research a project like this for quite a while before diving in. I obviously didn't consider a lot of negatives of running an S50 turbo. From your description it most certainly sounds like an S46 is a much better fit for my build. I've even considered running the stock garrett I have, but would really like to use that as an upgrade on my TI Daytona next year to replace the mitsu.

I've read through "The Pope's" stage I thread, and your stage II thread over on turbododge.com, and I think at this point, a stage I build will suffice for me. Like I said before, I'm not trying to build a drag strip terror, but a fun summer driver for the street, with some occasional drag strip runs. I really don't see myself going past 20 psi, because from what I've read, that gets into the breaking parts stage, and I really want to avoid that...

[Shadow]

Awesome information. You pointed out a lot of things I hadn't considered, thank you!

As far as the 2.5 vs 2.2, I just lucked into a really nice 2.5 short block assembly this summer from a friend of mine. That was the deciding factor, nothing more, nothing less.

Since I'm still in the "gathering parts" phase, I am fully able to switch gears, and go with parts recommended. That's why I'm asking questions now, instead of regretting later. So please, keep the information coming, I'm like a dry sponge trying to soak up all this knowledge. I'm the kind of guy who like to research a project like this for quite a while before diving in. I obviously didn't consider a lot of negatives of running an S50 turbo. From your description it most certainly sounds like an S46 is a much better fit for my build. I've even considered running the stock garrett I have, but would really like to use that as an upgrade on my TI Daytona next year to replace the mitsu.

I've read through "The Pope's" stage I thread, and your stage II thread over on turbododge.com, and I think at this point, a stage I build will suffice for me. Like I said before, I'm not trying to build a drag strip terror, but a fun summer driver for the street, with some occasional drag strip runs. I really don't see myself going past 20 psi, because from what I've read, that gets into the breaking parts stage, and I really want to avoid that...

I hope what I'm about to post is not offensive to you, as my only intent is to Help in any way I can. I am in no way trying to single you out, but there is an opportunity here to clear up some "confusion" when it comes to figuring out the Right pieces of the puzzle.

Running the 2.5 is fine since you already have it. You can compensate with cam timing if needed.

Now, you said;

"I think at this point, a stage 1 build will suffice for me"

" I've even considered running the stock garrett I have"

"I was planning on using +20 injectors, because I felt they were more than capable of meeting my hp goals"

"My theory on using the S50 turbo for my build was that since I was using a 2.5 in an L-body, the slower boost build of the larger turbo may help me get some traction"

Three of these trains of thought are Consistent, one of them is Not.

IF you were at all considering using the Stock Garrett turbo, an S50 should have Never entered the equation. We're talking a World apart in response and performance from those two turbos. The only real choice if you were already thinking of staying with the stock Garrett, Should have been an S60 or 60 trim T3, for a Slight upgrade.

So the Q is; What did you read/research that would lead you to almost two completely different ends of the scale when it comes to turbo selection?

Again, this is Not a shot at you, I'm just trying to clarify where individuals can go way Wrong on their builds be reading the Wrong info on the net, and then try to incorporate it into their builds.

Also, in speaking with me, it's neither here nor there, because I Still would have suggested the 46 trim To4e over the S60 for your goals of 300HP anyways. Why? Simple, the 46 trim will get you there with as much or More transient response, because it is a Dynamic turbo combo. To get the same level of Dynamics out of the S60 you need to run the .48 A/R housing in a typical Average build. As well as the Fact that the 46 trim will do it on much lower boost and with pump gas

On the +20 inj's, I've never run them and never will. They were from another era when a little more fuel on stock ECU's was required. When you go to a 3 bar map ECU, the +40's become part of the pkg and it's always nice to have More fuel than you need, rather than Not enough. Remember, MP switched from the +20's on an S60 set-up, because they found that it was slightly Under fuel'd. So really, for anything larger, best to go with the +40's as I believe the price is about the same

[83scamp]

I hope what I'm about to post is not offensive to you, as my only intent is to Help in any way I can. I am in no way trying to single you out, but there is an opportunity here to clear up some "confusion" when it comes to figuring out the Right pieces of the puzzle.

Running the 2.5 is fine since you already have it. You can compensate with cam timing if needed.

Now, you said;

"I think at this point, a stage 1 build will suffice for me"

" I've even considered running the stock garrett I have"

"I was planning on using +20 injectors, because I felt they were more than capable of meeting my hp goals"

"My theory on using the S50 turbo for my build was that since I was using a 2.5 in an L-body, the slower boost build of the larger turbo may help me get some traction"

Three of these trains of thought are Consistent, one of them is Not.

IF you were at all considering using the Stock Garrett turbo, an S50 should have Never entered the equation. We're talking a World apart in response and performance from those two turbos. The only real choice if you were already thinking of staying with the stock Garrett, Should have been an S60 or 60 trim T3, for a Slight upgrade.

So the Q is; What did you read/research that would lead you to almost two completely different ends of the scale when it comes to turbo selection?

Again, this is Not a shot at you, I'm just trying to clarify where individuals can go way Wrong on their builds be reading the Wrong info on the net, and then try to incorporate it into their builds.

Also, in speaking with me, it's neither here nor there, because I Still would have suggested the 46 trim To4e over the S60 for your goals of 300HP anyways. Why? Simple, the 46 trim will get you there with as much or More transient response, because it is a Dynamic turbo combo. To get the same level of Dynamics out of the S60 you need to run the .48 A/R housing in a typical Average build. As well as the Fact that the 46 trim will do it on much lower boost and with pump gas

On the +20 inj's, I've never run them and never will. They were from another era when a little more fuel on stock ECU's was required. When you go to a 3 bar map ECU, the +40's become part of the pkg and it's always nice to have More fuel than you need, rather than Not enough. Remember, MP switched from the +20's on an S60 set-up, because they found that it was slightly Under fuel'd. So really, for anything larger, best to go with the +40's as I believe the price is about the same

I don't find your post offensive at all. In fact, I was hoping you would be very honest and blow holes in my setup if I had it wrong. It's how we all learn. Like I said before, I really have no experience doing a build up like this. I just keep reading more and more info hoping to become more knowledgeable. But reading only gets you so far. It's real world experience like you have that separates the truth from the BS. That's what I'm looking for.

I'd much rather have a guy like you blow holes in my theory than buy a bunch of parts, and find out later they don't work together. Doing it right once, is far cheaper than doing it twice wrong...

Part of the draw to the S50 was that FWP offers it in a nice package deal. turbo, S/V, lines, waste gate can, etc. In my minds eye, that made me think it's a popular package. Obviously, somewhere along the line, I missed something in my research to tell me that was way too big of a turbo. Just to be clear: at no point did I talk to anybody at FWP about this combo, nor did they suggest it to me. I came up with this idea on my own. I just don't want somebody thinking one of our good vendors tried to steer me wrong. FWP has been great to me in my dealings with them.

I'm sure if I give Cindy a call, we can work out a similar combo for an S46. Which seems to be the way to go.

Looking them up, the +40's are about 60% more than the +20's, but in the grand scheme of a motor build, that's not bad for peace of mind.

So to recap, a better balance combo for my goals would be:

2.5 turbo motor
2 piece intake w/52mm TB
ported exhaust mani
S46 turbo
+40 injectors
AFPR
FB head with +1mm valves & mild port job
Stage 5 ECU(or similar)
3 bar MAP
Wideband O2

[wheming]

I'll just interject a quick comment/observation...
Good on both of you for the dialog and information without drama. I appreciate reading stuff like this where the information is genuine and helpful, as well as the explaining of certain component selection reasons.
As well as the information originally posted and developed from the initial part of the thread. It'll be a good reference thread for the ages!

[Force Fed Mopar]

FWIW, my stock 2.5 swirl w/ a stock Garrett on 20+psi made roughly 240+ at the wheels and would blow the 17's off in the 1st 2 gears, and slightly haze them in 3rd from a roll at 3k rpm. This is why I pretty much always recommend the 2.2 for L-bodies, same as Shadow. 2.5 torque comes on like a light switch at 3k or 3500 (depending on turbo). DodgeZ had a big 57 or some such trim on a 2.5 in a gutted GLHS Omni, it spooled at like 4k and would spin drag radials on the hwy at 70mph. Although I have seen/ridden 2.2 Omnis that did the same...

If I was building a Rampage or Charger DD, I'd run a swirl head 2.2 w/ a 50 trim, like this one:

https://www.fwdperformance.com/Store...&ProductID=448

and a boost controller capable of boost by gear (ie, speed dependent), or utilize MP Tune and Turbonator to do so. 2-pc, 3-bar, +40's and ported exhaust mani assumed, would make good power even on a stock head (I'd guess 300 easily), should pull from 3kish to 6k which a good powerband, controllable in lower gears and hang with most any average weight 400hp rwd muscle/sports car. Ported head would enhance all this. Good intercooler is a must-have.

My .02 worth

[83scamp]

I'll just interject a quick comment/observation...
Good on both of you for the dialog and information without drama. I appreciate reading stuff like this where the information is genuine and helpful, as well as the explaining of certain component selection reasons.
As well as the information originally posted and developed from the initial part of the thread. It'll be a good reference thread for the ages!

Thank you for the comments. I know Rob is a no BS kind of guy. Sometimes his posts are taken wrong, and that is sad, because he is only trying to help. Never had the pleasure of meeting him in person, but he seems a lot like myself, a very analytical, straight to the point guy. I like that.

Like I said, that's what I want. Somebody who isn't afraid to blow holes in my theory and tell me it won't work, and why. The why is important to me. I like to know the reasons. Don't just tell me no, explain why. He did exactly that, and I see his point. There was stuff I never considered, and he showed me the right direction. That kind of info is invaluable to someone like me.

FWIW, my stock 2.5 swirl w/ a stock Garrett on 20+psi made roughly 240+ at the wheels and would blow the 17's off in the 1st 2 gears, and slightly haze them in 3rd from a roll at 3k rpm. This is why I pretty much always recommend the 2.2 for L-bodies, same as Shadow. 2.5 torque comes on like a light switch at 3k or 3500 (depending on turbo). DodgeZ had a big 57 or some such trim on a 2.5 in a gutted GLHS Omni, it spooled at like 4k and would spin drag radials on the hwy at 70mph. Although I have seen/ridden 2.2 Omnis that did the same...

If I was building a Rampage or Charger DD, I'd run a swirl head 2.2 w/ a 50 trim, like this one:

https://www.fwdperformance.com/Store...&ProductID=448

and a boost controller capable of boost by gear (ie, speed dependent), or utilize MP Tune and Turbonator to do so. 2-pc, 3-bar, +40's and ported exhaust mani assumed, would make good power even on a stock head (I'd guess 300 easily), should pull from 3kish to 6k which a good powerband, controllable in lower gears and hang with most any average weight 400hp rwd muscle/sports car. Ported head would enhance all this. Good intercooler is a must-have.

My .02 worth

All good info to have. Thank you for sharing your experience as well. I catalog all of this in the back of my mind. There may come a day when I decide to build an all-out 2.2 for the Scamp. If I do, this info will help.

I know I'm "going against the grain", so to speak with a 2.5, but it's what fell into my lap, and I'm going to run with it for now. Maybe I will need an EBC to make it all work on the street, I guess I'll find that out eventually.

With the suggestions and help I've been given in this thread, I think I have a much better handle now on which direction I need to go. Hopefully you guys will get to see a transformed Scamp at SDAC-27 next year!!!!

[glhs875]

FWIW, my stock 2.5 swirl w/ a stock Garrett on 20+psi made roughly 240+ at the wheels and would blow the 17's off in the 1st 2 gears, and slightly haze them in 3rd from a roll at 3k rpm. This is why I pretty much always recommend the 2.2 for L-bodies, same as Shadow. 2.5 torque comes on like a light switch at 3k or 3500 (depending on turbo). DodgeZ had a big 57 or some such trim on a 2.5 in a gutted GLHS Omni, it spooled at like 4k and would spin drag radials on the hwy at 70mph. Although I have seen/ridden 2.2 Omnis that did the same...

If I was building a Rampage or Charger DD, I'd run a swirl head 2.2 w/ a 50 trim, like this one:

https://www.fwdperformance.com/Store...&ProductID=448

and a boost controller capable of boost by gear (ie, speed dependent), or utilize MP Tune and Turbonator to do so. 2-pc, 3-bar, +40's and ported exhaust mani assumed, would make good power even on a stock head (I'd guess 300 easily), should pull from 3kish to 6k which a good powerband, controllable in lower gears and hang with most any average weight 400hp rwd muscle/sports car. Ported head would enhance all this. Good intercooler is a must-have.

My .02 worth

I am a big fan of a boost controller!!!! Had a home made adjustable speed based setup on my combo! It had 3 stages of boost control. Designed and installed it personally. Made a huge difference in lowering the ET's!!!! I never realized the full potential of it on my GLHS though. There is no doubt in my mind that my combo would have run deep in the 7's and cracked the 100 mph range (1/8th mile) on the street radials by running more boost for each stage. But life got in the way!

[Shadow]

Looking them up, the +40's are about 60% more than the +20's, but in the grand scheme of a motor build, that's not bad for peace of mind.

Wow! I had not noticed that +40's became so much more expensive. I was still under the impression they were around 50.00 each.....

So to recap, a better balance combo for my goals would be:

2.5 turbo motor
2 piece intake w/52mm TB
ported exhaust mani
S46 turbo
+40 injectors
AFPR
FB head with +1mm valves & mild port job
Stage 5 ECU(or similar)
3 bar MAP
Wideband O2

I have never seen an S46 (To4e) compressor wheel, but I'm aware of the S50. Larger Major which gives it a Higher PR and capable of sustaining Higher boost pressures, albeit at the cost of a slightly heavier comp wheel.

You are not looking to exceed the PR of a normal 46 trim To4e,(ie, your only looking to run around 20psi or less) so there is no need to drag the extra weight of a heavier comp wheel if you don't have to

I never realized the full potential of it on my GLHS though. There is no doubt in my mind that my combo would have run deep in the 7's and cracked the 100 mph range (1/8th mile) on the street radials by running more boost for each stage. But life got in the way!

No doubt at all as you had the Right turbo for the job And running a Proven Performer when it comes to the Taft S3 cam.

[Shadow]

I cleaned up my head a little before bolting it back on the block.



This is the dyno from this cylinder head, on E85.



boost level and afr.

I kind of floated right by this; Were you looking for critique on the chamber? Or just posting for comparo purposes?

[glhs875]

I kind of floated right by this; Were you looking for critique on the chamber? Or just posting for comparo purposes?

I was going to get around and say That I thought "tryinbe" has a good looking torque/HP curve going on! Curious of the combo.

[2.216VTurbo]

So the head I had that I *thought* was fully prepped by a known Cylinder Head Porter in this community was either:

1)An 'Off' day for the guy doing the work

2) A rush job

3) Not from that guy at all, I bought it used 2-3 years ago maybe it was misrepresented by the seller, Can't imagine such marginal product came from someone with such a good name.

I thought it was going to be bolt on and go as I bought it advertised as a +1 low mileage head(I did just bolt it onto Woody my turbo Mini about 5K miles ago but as you may have seen in another thread that motor grenaded) but thought I'd better have my cylinder head shop check it out. After taking one look at the dissasembled head I just couldn't run it on RedBox like that so I ordered some new +1 swirl valves from FWD (turns out the NOS +1's I'd been saving a few years are shorter G head valves) and put about 15 hours of grinding/porting/polishing into it over one full Saturday and two half days. I'm taking it back to the shop in a few minutes for seat touch up, decking, cleaning and reassembly(they already installed new EX guides and opened up the seats for me).

A few teaser pics till I get it back then I'll put up the rest