What kinds of gains do you expect with E / I and tune?

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Yea, but that supports my point because the TRD 3S-GE has basically no low end torque at all. By 4000rpm you're already down to 160Nm which is pathetic, and I bet that the FA20 at idle is better than that TRD engine at 2000rpm.

Not saying I'd care though The top end is like a freaking Ferrari 458 cut in half.

I can't even find my own damn post that had the graph...

But the low end penalty must always be paid for ridiculous top end power. (Hybrid-free, as nature intended, btw... heh...)

Something, something, no replacement for displacement... except a compact electric motor?

[serialk11r]

I spent several minutes finding it heh.
http://trdparts.jp/english/parts_engine-3s-ge.html

13.5 compression, that would definitely help at high rpm where the fuel doesn't have as much time to burn.
No replacement for displacement heh, I guess TRD proved that one wrong. A compact electric motor easily adds like 100Nm to the very bottom end, and it slowly tapers off but the gas engine comes alive as the rpms climb anyways. Cams and stuff can be done certainly, but I wonder how the intake tuning is done on these Subaru boxers since their configuration doesn't give options for shortening the intake runners. (I have no idea if they actually need to be shorter, but ITB trumpets are always short looking).

One day when I have a real job and a car, oh god so much money is going to go into my random ass ideas.

[KeepGuessing]

1: There is no replacement for displacement.

2. The short rods hampering the rev range only come into play when the rest of the engine dynamics can be accessed...

You can't look at a "estimated rod length" and stroke and say This engine can't make XXXXrpm reliably..Just doesn't work like that...

As it sits power production from fueling becomes an issue due to piston in cylinder speeds

we don't know the type of rod angles we're dealing with if it's working off of ej or fb architecture.....we don't know what kind of sideloads it'll have or if the pistons can deal with that type of constant G's due to lack of material etc etc etc

[Bristecom]

This is the problem with newer NA engines. It costs tons of money for only minor gains.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

1: There is no replacement for displacement.

2. The short rods hampering the rev range only come into play when the rest of the engine dynamics can be accessed...

You can't look at a "estimated rod length" and stroke and say This engine can't make XXXXrpm reliably..Just doesn't work like that...

As it sits power production from fueling becomes an issue due to piston in cylinder speeds

we don't know the type of rod angles we're dealing with if it's working off of ej or fb architecture.....we don't know what kind of sideloads it'll have or if the pistons can deal with that type of constant G's due to lack of material etc etc etc

Of course, that's why I said we need to wait for more detailed specs. HomemadeWRX/3MI Racing already has rod specs apparently (but probably can't say), and may have offset already. However I'm just pointing out a few things about the engine that generally aren't good. The engine is very wide already so it can't really grow to accomodate longer rods or a more sophisticated valvetrain (no hope of variable lift or anything). At the same time we have a latest generation combustion chamber and fuel delivery design, which is nice.

I do believe in low levels of boost though.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by Bristecom

This is the problem with newer NA engines. It costs tons of money for only minor gains.

That's why if you buy this car you have to be happy with the stock output or close to it or else you will beat yourself up in the long run. I would love to drive it just to see how it feels in comparison to my RSX acceleration wise since that is the main part of my RSX I dislike.

[KeepGuessing]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

accomodate longer rods or a more sophisticated valvetrain (no hope of variable lift or anything).

Was this sarcasm right? I can't tell.
The car has variable valve lift..

[ChristosG]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

That's why if you buy this car you have to be happy with the stock output or close to it or else you will beat yourself up in the long run. I would love to drive it just to see how it feels in comparison to my RSX acceleration wise since that is the main part of my RSX I dislike.

As a fellow RSX driver I think we'll be more than satisfied with the acceleration. Even though the RSX is rated at 139 lb-ft of torque, you don't get all of that to the wheels and not even until 5-6K RPM. With the FR-S we'll get around 145 at the wheels and at low RPM so it should be a huge difference. Especially for me since mine is not a Type S.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by ChristosG

As a fellow RSX driver I think we'll be more than satisfied with the acceleration. Even though the RSX is rated at 139 lb-ft of torque, you don't get all of that to the wheels and not even until 5-6K RPM. With the FR-S we'll get around 145 at the wheels and at low RPM so it should be a huge difference. Especially for me since mine is not a Type S.

I have a base model too and the torque comes on earlier than the type S but it still feels kind of gutless still.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

Was this sarcasm right? I can't tell.
The car has variable valve lift..

I think he meant a dual system similar to the Vtec in a Type S.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

Was this sarcasm right? I can't tell.
The car has variable valve lift..

Please explain the variable valve lift on the FA20.

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by Dimman

Please explain the variable valve lift on the FA20.

I look forward to his response with amused eyes.

[Subie]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

Was this sarcasm right? I can't tell.
The car has variable valve lift..

It has variable valve timing, not lift...

[KeepGuessing]

Oh i'm sorry I thought he was saying it didn't have variable valve timing....my apologies there bud.