SR20VET build up...

Thread Tools
 
Old 06-08-2011 | 08:35 PM
  #11 (permalink)  
Jr_SS's Avatar
Thread Starter
S one 4
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Default

Thanks for posting that up Ep. I had been looking for his plot for awhile now. I think he just ran out of turbo on this setup. I believe that this head flows so well it needs to have a higher flowing turbo on it. I had contemplated running a 35R on it, and I may still because I haven't purchased the GTX3076r yet. Of course it would be the GTX series.
Old 06-09-2011 | 04:30 AM
  #12 (permalink)  
Epstein's Avatar
Retired
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,095
Likes: 0
Default

I found this neato picture online comparing the 3076, 3582, and their gtx versions.


You're running around 2.5 pressure ratio (18-20ish psi after losses). The GTX3076 has about 5lbs more in it than the GT3076. There's 50hp more. The regular GT3582 is 5lbs more than that, and the GTX3582 is 5lbs more than that.

That all sounds great, but you'd never make it out to the 65lb area of the map if you're staying on pump gas (18-20psi max) and revving to 8500rpm. Take a look at that dyno plot. In the mid-band where there are no flow restrictions from the turbo and the VE is at it's peak, it's making 350-360tq. If the head can maintain that VE farther into the rev range, that is, if the tq fall-off is due to the turbo losses/restrictions alone, you'd theoretically have 350ish tq all the way out. Well, 350tq at 8500rpms is (350*8500/5252) is 566hp. The GTX3076 will flow that much at 2.5PR. This math isn't the traditional way to calculate, but if you did the flow math and corrected it based on the dyno plot and assumptions you'd wind up with similar numbers.
__________________
Old 06-09-2011 | 06:33 AM
  #13 (permalink)  
Jr_SS's Avatar
Thread Starter
S one 4
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Default

I had planned to run race gas occasionally, but after posting that up id never fully use the 35R to it's designed parameters. I'll stick with the 3076R. Even with the 3076R I'll make, or should make close to 600 on race gas which is what I am aiming for. Thanks again for those plots Ep.
Old 06-09-2011 | 09:27 AM
  #14 (permalink)  
Anthony R's Avatar
SAL-T
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3,159
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Jr_SS
I had planned to run race gas occasionally, but after posting that up id never fully use the 35R to it's designed parameters. I'll stick with the 3076R. Even with the 3076R I'll make, or should make close to 600 on race gas which is what I am aiming for. Thanks again for those plots Ep.

E85 will be your friend
__________________
Matthew "RudeBoy" Nugent 2/03/88-04/01/09
Old 06-09-2011 | 11:21 AM
  #15 (permalink)  
Jr_SS's Avatar
Thread Starter
S one 4
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Default

Yes, it would be however, i dont have any E85 pumps around here and I'm not driving to TPA to fill my tank.
Old 06-09-2011 | 11:35 AM
  #16 (permalink)  
BABILLARACING's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3,191
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Jr_SS
Yes, it would be however, i dont have any E85 pumps around here and I'm not driving to TPA to fill my tank.
is no e85 pumps in tampa , the closest on is in lakeland. I bought two 55 gallons drums to have it fill and storage at the shop
__________________
My shit still slow
618 whp 492 ft/lbs at 22 psi (Low Boost)on pump gas ,
stock block ,more power coming soon ,stay tuned
Tuned by Alpha @ Induction Performance
Old 06-09-2011 | 12:12 PM
  #17 (permalink)  
Jr_SS's Avatar
Thread Starter
S one 4
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Default

Yeah, well I'm not willing nor do I have the space to store 55gal drums... So pump gas is my friend
Old 06-09-2011 | 06:21 PM
  #18 (permalink)  
Z28ricer's Avatar
Doesnt see what you did
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Epstein
I don't think it's going to make much difference at all. The head flows so well that you'll be up against the limits of the turbo. That's conjecture, though. It may be that the head flows so well that the cam profile has more effect. I just remember changing between huge HKS step3's and JWT's smallest C-series (C1) and only seeing 5-10hp here or there at 430whp total.

I'd agree with you, on the surface, but the point I was talking about, wasnt in reference to the actual lift/duration differences, as much as the P11 cams with the differences in timing on the high side vs the low side, compared to the P12, with either one you can change lsa with cam gears, the issue is that the low and high profiles have a different angle each, so if you get the low profiles in a good spot, the high side wasnt that great, and vice versa, with the P12 cams things were able to come out a lot closer to where the factory, and aftermarket cams put things.
Old 06-10-2011 | 06:32 AM
  #19 (permalink)  
Jr_SS's Avatar
Thread Starter
S one 4
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Default

You what you're saying Z28 is that it'll have to find a middle ground on the stock cams with gears? Meaning, If I optimize the high lobes, I'll have the low lobes out of whack?
Old 06-10-2011 | 07:18 AM
  #20 (permalink)  
Epstein's Avatar
Retired
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,095
Likes: 0
Default

Let's be clear from the start that we're talking about optimizing NA cams for an FI setup. I'd love to see it all play out, but I think the DE->VE advantage will be 10 times that of the P11/P12/LSA tweaks you add on top.
__________________



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:44 AM.