Author | Topic |
Location: New Zealand
Registered: November 2003
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Sun, 23 November 2003 01:43
|
|
No, I don't need convincing as to the strength of the standard pistons
The whole engine package remains as listed in the Zoom article. With the exception of the fuel system. The rods are standard, with polished/shotpeened beams, and ARP bolts. The pistons are std 8:1 GZE 0.5mm over.
I'll admit to being a bit surprised at the ability of the package. In a way, it won't be a big surprise to anyone if it does go pop, but until then we will see what we can do with it. I don't see the need to go for big $$ internals until they prove necessary!
However, what proves reliable for 10 odd secs down the strip, compared to what will hold together for 15-20mins round a circuit are two different things!
The car is tuned by Andre on a Dynapack hub dyno. Before the last dyno session, we had decided to run the car till we achieved 500 rwhp, or 2.0 bar. Unfortunately we hit 2.0 bar first I will happily scan the power/torque, and boost pliots if there is enough interest.
TE72_Turbo - Depends how much boost you want . The full 2.0 Bar isn't available until 5500rpm, but 15 psi is reached at about 5000rpm. At 15psi it still makes over 300 hp atw!
As for further mods..... traction is next on the agenda - not much point having the power if it all turns to smoke.
Gina
|
|
|
| Subject | Poster | Date |
|
was 294rwkw, but now...
|
T1MID | Sat, 22 November 2003 00:26 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Mr DOHC | Sat, 22 November 2003 02:50 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
T1MID | Sat, 22 November 2003 03:43 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
rob_RA40 | Sat, 22 November 2003 03:48 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
T1MID | Sat, 22 November 2003 03:52 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
TE72_Turbo | Sat, 22 November 2003 05:40 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Mr DOHC | Sat, 22 November 2003 06:28 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
BigWorm | Sat, 22 November 2003 12:02 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Sprinter-Saurus | Sat, 22 November 2003 13:17 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Bill Sherwood | Sat, 22 November 2003 17:05 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Grega | Sat, 22 November 2003 20:26 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
T1MID | Sun, 23 November 2003 01:43 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
draven | Sun, 23 November 2003 01:57 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
STR8 2.8 | Sun, 23 November 2003 02:04 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
T1MID | Sun, 23 November 2003 02:11 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
V8_MA61 | Sun, 23 November 2003 07:31 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
THE WITZL | Sun, 23 November 2003 09:23 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Jag7799 | Mon, 24 November 2003 03:54 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
T1MID | Mon, 24 November 2003 07:32 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Mr DOHC | Mon, 24 November 2003 12:13 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
T1MID | Mon, 24 November 2003 21:53 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
bbaacchhyy | Mon, 24 November 2003 23:47 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Jag7799 | Mon, 24 November 2003 23:46 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
no_tofu_speed | Wed, 26 November 2003 15:15 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
Jag7799 | Wed, 26 November 2003 22:29 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
T1MID | Thu, 27 November 2003 04:26 |
|
Re: was 294rwkw, but now...
|
no_tofu_speed | Thu, 27 November 2003 12:32 |
Current Time:
Wed Jan 22 03:15:09 UTC 2025 |
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.0048260688781738 seconds |