|
|
Post by Rock Dawg on Feb 20, 2012 21:15:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by poorboy1 on Feb 20, 2012 21:18:10 GMT -5
I feel very bad for your front shafts.
|
|
|
|
Post by WILLYNILLY on Feb 20, 2012 22:15:48 GMT -5
That thing is nuts looking!
|
|
|
|
Post by 96zjlarado on Feb 20, 2012 22:33:14 GMT -5
what's the expectations for power out of this one?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rock Dawg on Feb 21, 2012 0:24:33 GMT -5
Front driveshafts are cheap :-)... Hmm.. That Dana 60 is looking more like a need..
The HP.. I'm hoping it to be as good as the current one, 400 HR ish. Unless we go with AFR heads and E303B cam :-)... Then, well we may need more everything behind it.
|
|
|
|
Post by WILLYNILLY on Feb 21, 2012 9:07:57 GMT -5
That will be awesome!
|
|
|
|
Post by Rock Dawg on Mar 5, 2012 14:19:01 GMT -5
So, I'm wondering what to do with this new motor. Do I put Aluminum race heads and cam in it (already bought gt40 intake). Or do I keep the stock E7 heads and RV cam that it has and figure out how to install the twin turbo setup? www.ebay.com/itm/1979-1993-FORD-MUSTANG-Twin-Turbo-Kit-750hp-Package-TT-260-289-302-351-5-0L-5L-/350541654730?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item519de92aca&vxp=mtr I don't know much about how to put on the turbo's but this kit looks pretty much to be complete. I've seen turbo'd motors in mud bogs and mudfest before and they seemed fine. I am consirned about the fit. I have a clutch cylinder really close to the drivers side exhaust now and because of that we needed a sharp bend. The end price ends up to be about the same, and I think for the street and mud/sand the twin turbo would be great fun, but I'm not sure about the trails at TSF. Any suggestions? |
|
|
|
Post by chevtech on Mar 5, 2012 15:12:05 GMT -5
Why do u need more power for your son's daily driver, I would leave the motor the way it came.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rock Dawg on Mar 5, 2012 18:38:13 GMT -5
Why do u need more power for your son's daily driver, I would leave the motor the way it came. Well the motor that is currently in it is suppose to be a 400HP motor (back when it was fresh, at the crank HP) The motor I bought in stock form is 225 HP. Not wanting to go backwards to much on HP and tork, I'm looking at the other options to get it back to the same HP as what is in the jeep now. This turbo setup starts making HP and tork starting at 1000 RPM and continues strong up to 5,500 RPM. I figure that is perfect for what we want, and much better then how the motor is setup now. The thing I don't like/ really know about is the amount of heat that they put out. I'm learning and trying to understand more about turbos now. horsepowercalculators.net/turbocalculator/our-turbo-calculator-explainedI CANT just leave it stock. It is either doing a turbo or doing a aluminum head, cam combo to match the new intake and do something different with the exhaust. The Non turbo's HP and tork curvs are show below. They are way high in the RPM range and not a nice as the turbo setups.. www.musclemustangfastfords.com/tech/mmfp_0910_building_400hp_into_a_5_0_l_small_block_engine/photo_19.html |
|
|
|
Post by Jonny tsunami on Mar 5, 2012 20:25:27 GMT -5
I think building the motor up would be more practical for everyday driving.
The twin turbo would be cool but I think there would be a lot of head aches with tuning and dialing it in. plus I would believe that there are a lot of unseen costs with it. would you run a stand alone efi or a blow throw carb? is you motor built to take the extra pressure?
Ive done quite a bit of research on e85 with a blow throw carb on a twin turbo set up for a sbc. I would really like to try it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rock Dawg on Mar 6, 2012 10:49:45 GMT -5
I think building the motor up would be more practical for everyday driving. The twin turbo would be cool but I think there would be a lot of head aches with tuning and dialing it in. plus I would believe that there are a lot of unseen costs with it. would you run a stand alone efi or a blow throw carb? is you motor built to take the extra pressure? Ive done quite a bit of research on e85 with a blow throw carb on a twin turbo set up for a sbc. I would really like to try it. I talked to Russ a long time about it last night. His thoughts were that these trubo's must be junk to be that cheap and they would not last. Also our current ECU would not be happy with the setup so we would need another sand alone computer. Since I already have two computers in the jeep. Adding one more, or replacing one of them does not sound like fun. Another option we are exployering is a root style blower... |
|
|
|
Post by blk01ram on Mar 6, 2012 12:15:42 GMT -5
That and the picture doesn't match the description. Says the turbos have internal wastegates, but the picture shows 2 external wastegates. Russ would be the person to talk about forced induction.
My vote would be to look into what could be done to the new engine to help get more power before getting the adders. If the bottom end hasn't been beefed up at all, the most boost you could probably run safely without damaging the engine is about 8-10 psi depending on compression ratio.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rock Dawg on Mar 6, 2012 13:53:59 GMT -5
That and the picture doesn't match the description. Says the turbos have internal wastegates, but the picture shows 2 external wastegates. Russ would be the person to talk about forced induction. My vote would be to look into what could be done to the new engine to help get more power before getting the adders. If the bottom end hasn't been beefed up at all, the most boost you could probably run safely without damaging the engine is about 8-10 psi depending on compression ratio. Yes, I'll probably end up with the same old 400 HP setup I have now  This is the cam setup I'll problably run. Track Max hydraulic roller cam offered by Trick Flow Specialties. The Track Max cam offered a 0.499/0.510 lift split, a 221/225 duration split, and a 112-degree lobe separation angle. I'll probablly end up with the Aluminum GT 40 heads, 2.02 and 1.60 valves. I'll try and run a lower runner flow of 170-190 to increase tork (and I don't want to spin the motor past 6K). and a 60cc Chamber (9.1 to 1 compression).  With this setup I'll need the 1.6 or 1.7's roller rockers and It will be a pain to adjust them in the jeep, under the intake. The valve covers are really hard to get off. This is a proven formula that I'm just copying. If I go this route the HP and Tork curve will be like what is shown below.  I'm not really happy with how high the RPM's need to be for a jeep, but if that is what it takes... With this setup I know my issues will be 1. The speed density ECU will cause the motor to searge when cold, and sometimes pick the incorrect map for timing and fuel (because of the 112 lobe seperation in the cam). (it really should be 114 or higher for the ECU). 2. My fuel line will need re-ran to the back on the Intake (harder then normal because of the fuel connectors and running injected takes high pressure lines and setup). 3. The Exhaust is currently really close to the clutch cylinder. I'd like to move it further away as a new motor will run more EGT's then my old one and could melt the cylinder. |
|
|
|
Post by mudslinger97117 on Mar 6, 2012 14:27:07 GMT -5
Just throw a bottle behind the rear seat so when your feeling frisky  |
|
|
|
Post by Jonny tsunami on Mar 6, 2012 14:45:04 GMT -5
Just throw a bottle behind the rear seat so when your feeling frisky I second that  |
|
