Those with 240 wbhp wish they had more, like closer to 300 wbhp?

[raven1231]

what is wbhp? I know what whp and bhp are but not wbhp?

[King Tut]

Originally Posted by raven1231

what is wbhp? I know what whp and bhp are but not wbhp?

Weak British Horse Power

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

We may have purchased a single OEM spring to test the rate... we were going to increase our redline until we had it in our hands.

Remember, we come from Honda backgrounds... we like high redlines.

Originally Posted by DAMotorsports

Mike we would have given you the information about the springs as we have posted about the poor spring which are in the FA20. We found they have an install pressure of 35 lbs and at .005 lift it was 55 lbs. The rocker designs in similar to the 2AZ motor. However we have some advantages over the 2AZ uses a hydraulic lifter and the rocker arm has a slightly smaller pocket for the valve lash cap and lifter. The FA20 uses a solid lifter and the rocker that has a touch deeper slotting. We meet with Papadakis Racing last week and compared the 2AZ stock part, their upgraded 2AZ kit and the FA20 parts. At this time the best solution to control the rocker is to upgrade the springs as we have already done.

•Gracias señores!

[enwave]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

On a centrifugal supercharger the loss isn't as bad as people think.

This is true. I think boost noobs often forget that even with parasitic loss, your car is still going to be significantly faster than stock in any realistic scenario unless you drive at crazy low RPM all the time. The loss is relative to the rest of the power band and is perceived when compared to boost kicking in, not compared to what it was like at stock numbers.

But I think lots of people forget that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dezoris]

Repeatable stable horsepower. Seldom talked about in the dyno dicck swinging SC/Turbo discussions.

And the people who talk the most trash on the topics rarely if ever post any worthwhile data anyway. As in lap over lap track data, where heat is real.

[King Tut]

Originally Posted by Dezoris

Repeatable stable horsepower. Seldom talked about in the dyno dicck swinging SC/Turbo discussions.

And the people who talk the most trash on the topics rarely if ever post any worthwhile data anyway. As in lap over lap track data, where heat is real.

As much as I wish it wasn't true, the facts are that only about 1% of the owners on this site will ever track their car. I never tracked mine, or I would have posted any data people requested.

[Victor Draken]

Originally Posted by enwave

Got it. I mentally merged your comment with Victor's. Victor saying that ESC wasn't going to be linear and then you talking about supercharger curves confused me. Shoulda quoted Victor in my question.

My primary concern still remains charge. The graphs are pretty dreamy.

Thanks man!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What I'm saying is: with ESC you are: wot or not wot. Period.
With other s/c you can modulate the throttle and so the power and you still use the S/C but without having a kick of tq out of no where. I mean the ESC is like the nitro button in cartoons, at least that's the idea that gives me. Like a super small turbo that spool up at 2500rpm giving you 200+tq but only at wot.

Now I don't know really how turbo works and if you are not at wot you can still keep full boost and so keep a steady 200+tq without accelerating to much.


Most of what I say comes from guessing and different experience with other types of car. I have always driven N/A so I'm no expert of FI

[Boxer486]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Remember, our supercharger can flow a LOT more than what it's flowing now. Same supercharger, same-ish supercharger RPM, same-ish boost, different (better flowing) engine. We just need to get the engine to flow as well, and the power will come.

I've been trying to get an answer to this for awhile now. Very curious about how well these heads flow and how much improvement can be had. Look forward to seeing what you guys get out of it.

[jamesm]

Originally Posted by Dezoris

Repeatable stable horsepower. Seldom talked about in the dyno dicck swinging SC/Turbo discussions.

And the people who talk the most trash on the topics rarely if ever post any worthwhile data anyway. As in lap over lap track data, where heat is real.

i agree in that my top priorities go in this order:

1: reliability
2: drivability
3: area under the curve
4: peak power

but i disagree that lap after lap track data really matters. it does to a very, very small subset of the market, but the fact is 99+% of the FI 86's in the world will never take a lap on a track. and stock cars aren't even reliable in that scenario, so to expect one with 100+ extra horsepower to be so is a little much.

people who do track their cars don't need other people's data because they're generating it on their own, and are likely smart enough to realize that all of the variables at play would make it pretty much worthless to them.

[enwave]

Spot on jamesm. The only thing I would add is that the people who track their cars FIRST don't need other people's data.

I've waited to FI my car mostly because I got married a few months ago and my attention is elsewhere. In the meantime, gathering up as much knowledge as possible helps me be at least a single step closer to where I want to be when everything settles down.

Oh and weather is a bitch. Can't track at 19deg and snow.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[coyote]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Easy. Do 10 back to back pulls on the dyno, hood closed.

All my dyno pulls are done with the bonnet down. Don't know if I did 10 back to back before taking it to the track, but it certainly did 7 or 8 ... repeatedly.

Track testing was done at 42C ambient and the only things that had trouble were brakes and tyres (and me).

Just because the made in The USA turbo kits have heat issues, doesn't mean they all have to.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[King Tut]

Originally Posted by coyote

All my dyno pulls are done with the bonnet down. Don't know if I did 10 back to back before taking it to the track, but it certainly did 7 or 8 ... repeatedly.

Track testing was done at 42C ambient and the only things that had trouble were brakes and tyres (and me).

Just because the made in The USA turbo kits have heat issues, doesn't mean they all have to.

Do Australians have some technology that I am not aware of? Can we have pictures of these amazing AUS turbo kits?

[Boxer486]

Originally Posted by jamesm

but i disagree that lap after lap track data really matters.

I disagree with your disagreement. That data goes directly to your priority list which has reliability high up on it. Endurance racing and tracking is still a preeminent means by which manufacturers test their vehicle's reliability.

Why you wouldn't want a system developed after rounds and rounds of pulverizing treatment is beyond me.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by jamesm

i agree in that my top priorities go in this order:

1: reliability
2: drivability
3: area under the curve
4: peak power

but i disagree that lap after lap track data really matters. it does to a very, very small subset of the market, but the fact is 99+% of the FI 86's in the world will never take a lap on a track. and stock cars aren't even reliable in that scenario, so to expect one with 100+ extra horsepower to be so is a little much.

people who do track their cars don't need other people's data because they're generating it on their own, and are likely smart enough to realize that all of the variables at play would make it pretty much worthless to them.

I should clarify that I'm looking for 1 lap data, which could somewhat represent a few back to back street pulls.

Sustainability = reliability. That sustainability is important, because if you can't sustain it, then there's a really hard limitation somewhere...