KPower Industries K24 swap

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by captain awesome

I think it's doing something but hard to say. The angle of my bracket is the only thing that I'm unsure about. It seems solid though.

The fact that the OEM intake had a brace makes me think it's needed whether ASM says so or not. Until it was brought up I didn't think much of it, but now I can't see a reason to not run one.

A more vertical brace would provide more compressional and tensile resistance vertically, and if it was at an angle to the block then it would provide a component of compression and tensile resistance for forces that pull and compress in the horizontal plane towards the side of the block and against the bolts. These would be lateral G-forces, which are relatively minimal compared to vertical forces.

Your brace combines all planes, including forces in the frontal plane from acceleration and deceleration, which is also not insignificant, but far less.

The lateral and frontal forces are not only less intense or abrupt, but their occurrence is dramatically less by several factors, and that should be obvious. The motor vibrating and the repeated cycle of road vibration is significantly more frequent and destructive. This also is the case because of the design of the manifold. The bolts and structure of the manifold provide plenty of compressional and tensile resistance in the lateral and frontal planes, but the short height of the flange and long length of the runners and weight of the manifold creates a significant lever where minimal vertical forces can play a larger role in material deflection.

I think I will make a brace too, if not to avoid manifold fracture, it may help to reduce NVH too. Where did you get the tubing?

[captain awesome]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

A more vertical brace would provide more compressional and tensile resistance vertically, and if it was at an angle to the block then it would provide a component of compression and tensile resistance for forces that pull and compress in the horizontal plane towards the side of the block and against the bolts. These would be lateral G-forces, which are relatively minimal compared to vertical forces.

Your brace combines all planes, including forces in the frontal plane from acceleration and deceleration, which is also not insignificant, but far less.

The lateral and frontal forces are not only less intense or abrupt, but their occurrence is dramatically less by several factors, and that should be obvious. The motor vibrating and the repeated cycle of road vibration is significantly more frequent and destructive. This also is the case because of the design of the manifold. The bolts and structure of the manifold provide plenty of compressional and tensile resistance in the lateral and frontal planes, but the short height of the flange and long length of the runners and weight of the manifold creates a significant lever where minimal vertical forces can play a larger role in material deflection.

I think I will make a brace too, if not to avoid manifold fracture, it may help to reduce NVH too. Where did you get the tubing?

3/4" tube from Lowe's I think. The sticker says Hillman and when I pull up the info on Lowe's it says 1/8 or 11 gauge thickness. It was a 36" stick and I think I used maybe 20"?



If I triangulated the bracket towards the alternator I think it would be better but there's not much space or bolt area available that screamed "use me". This is the first version, possibly the last, but it could be improved I think.

[Kelse92]

I am thinking about revisiting this idea you guys had... After seeing just the DIC's and thinking on it for awhile, I think even with the DIC's on e85 I'm going to fall a little short of the power goals I'm trying/needing to make.
My car is stupid light for an 86, but I have a feeling if my avg pwr is only around 220-225 I'm going to be disappointed and looking for other ways to take points that aren't worth it for classing. I also want to finish the front-half of my cage at some point so I'd like to future proof power numbers for a little added weight to the car and maybe give myself the option to run non-DOT tires and up-class.

I found a pretty good deal on a machined RBC head with valvetrain upgrades... Leaning towards just going that route at this point. Any reasons I should avoid it? I was trying to do this swap cheap-ish but now here I am considering a built head lol but the price on the one I found seems worth the gamble.

[captain awesome]

Originally Posted by Kelse92

I am thinking about revisiting this idea you guys had... After seeing just the DIC's and thinking on it for awhile, I think even with the DIC's on e85 I'm going to fall a little short of the power goals I'm trying/needing to make.
My car is stupid light for an 86, but I have a feeling if my avg pwr is only around 220-225 I'm going to be disappointed and looking for other ways to take points that aren't worth it for classing. I also want to finish the front-half of my cage at some point so I'd like to future proof power numbers for a little added weight to the car and maybe give myself the option to run non-DOT tires and up-class.

I found a pretty good deal on a machined RBC head with valvetrain upgrades... Leaning towards just going that route at this point. Any reasons I should avoid it? I was trying to do this swap cheap-ish but now here I am considering a built head lol but the price on the one I found seems worth the gamble.

If the deal is good it can add 5-10 hp depending on who you ask. If you already have upgraded valves jump to the DC 2.2 and put them to work.

[RedReplicant]

The more I read about the ported TSX head / RSP / RBC head on a K24 the more it kinda sunk in that you really need to be above the DIC area cam wise for them to work well and not just trade midrange for top end.

I dunno though.

[captain awesome]

Originally Posted by RedReplicant

The more I read about the ported TSX head / RSP / RBC head on a K24 the more it kinda sunk in that you really need to be above the DIC area cam wise for them to work well and not just trade midrange for top end.

I dunno though.

I'm curious about this as well. Your DIC numbers have had me consider getting them and selling off the DC4, 2.2 and the head. Less hassle but still some gains. I think I'm in that paralysis by analysis stage right now. Just need to make a decision and stick with it.

[RedReplicant]

Also, Kelse92, you might want to talk to Dai, if you haven't yet. He doesn't post here, just lurks, but he had his 13:1 / ported K20A2 head / DC 2.2 on the dyno a couple of weeks ago and made in the area of power that you're looking for.

[Kelse92]

That's what I don't want to get into, analysis paralysis. Cause it's easy to do!
This head I found seems worth the gamble, I'm not a huge fan of the cams the owner chose (Skunk2 Tuner Stage 1) but suppose those could be swapped again again down the line, valvetrain building beyond a DIC isn't something we necessarily want to mess with around here so having the valves/springs done is a big plus and opens up some more options down the road I think. Guess I'll at least try it out and see what happens numbers wise

[Kelse92]

Originally Posted by RedReplicant

Also, Kelse92, you might want to talk to Dai, if you haven't yet. He doesn't post here, just lurks, but he had his 13:1 / ported K20A2 head / DC 2.2 on the dyno a couple of weeks ago and made in the area of power that you're looking for.

And yeah, I talk to him quite a bit, his is a bit more built than I'd like to do on the bottom-end, but the power numbers were spot-on for what I need which got me thinking...I think the range can be had with just the head

[RedReplicant]

Any of you ever managed to fault ABS? I had something weird happen yesterday where ABS stopped working after spinning the tires through 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in some water. Restarting the car, replugging the ABS unit, unplugging rear wheel speed sensors didn't change their reported speed, etc.

I had to clear the ABS codes and recalibrate with Techstream before it started working again.

Originally Posted by Kelse92

And yeah, I talk to him quite a bit, his is a bit more built than I'd like to do on the bottom-end, but the power numbers were spot-on for what I need which got me thinking...I think the range can be had with just the head

The problem (imo) with this on a track car is that the cams / head shift the power right, so you're forced to rev the motor higher than is 'safe' with stock rods/pistons for reliability when beaten on. Street cars can get away with it forever but yeah.

This is why I picked DICs, they peak by 7300-7400-ish.

[Kelse92]

Yeah, I am going to need to consider the rev range a bit. I'm thinking the car will lose some weight with the swap and will gain some weight with the remaining parts of the cage added, so in a perfect world hopefully peak power I get is more than I need so I can limit the revs a bit and tune to where I want to be and best-case ballast up if I need to.

[ML]

Not sure if anyone was thinking about doing the cd009 swap but it was really easy, but holy shit is the fitment need a lot of work. Took me about 3 days of cutting, hammering, bending, grinding to get everything to fit and then find the header just slightly hits the transmission...also the pipe with the o2 sensor just straight will not work. Hits the new mount and I think it would probably melt the plastic in the mount its so close anyway.

[RedReplicant]

That looks... not fun. Curious to see how you end up routing the thing.

[captain awesome]

Yeah, looks like after the merge you may have to cut and start from scratch. Good time to weld on a v band and skip the three bolt flange too. I don't know if it will gain any room but make assembly a lot easier.