what about the intake mani?
it looks different to me
now thats secksy. [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]
what about the intake mani?
it looks different to me
The Intake Manifold is bone stock... what may be catching your eye is the polished Holley 68mm throttle body.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">sorry Jim, I was going to post them today but they beat me to it. Heehe! At least you got them up. thanks for sending the pictures though. They are on our local website now as well.Originally posted by JRCivic:
I E-mailed Jay around 6pm on 1/12 with three pics of the engine bay... he has yet to post them.
No worries Jay... I know you are a very busy man.
What is the addy for your local website ???
Hi Jim,
Great project, hope it comes together soon!
If you're aiming at 300WHP with a JRSC on a 2litre GSR motor you'd need about 10-11psi, right? What pulley combination are you going to use to achieve that boost level?
Also, you write in your original post about "recent findings in the JRSC community" that pointed you in the direction of a rather high CR. Are you willing to unveil the reasons behind this, and how you intend to control detonation?
I'm building my own big block at this time, and I need to decide on both issues. I always value your suggestions!
Best regards,
Mark.
Since there is no way to control blower efficiency at stratospheric speeds (above 15K rpm in a 3G M62), the important details will fall within two other variables.
First, displacement. It certainly appears that larger displacement engines are more responsive to positive pressurization from the Eaton blower at ANY boost pressure. Case in point: BoostedEX's stock JDM B16A @ 10psi made 207 wheel HP. I built him a 10.5:1 compression ratioed CRV shortblock and stuck it under his stock B16A head and blower. NO PULLEY CHANGES WERE MADE. The new combination made 252 wheel HP @ 7.5 psi... and 264 wheel HP @ 9.5 psi !!!
Second, higher compression. Although this is a slippery slope with regards to conventional fuel and timing... it can be overcome. I intend to run the car with 100 octane unleaded all of the time, so I believe I can attain the HP numbers I have hoped to reach. I raised the CR to nearly 11:1... the pistons are actually 11:1 CR, however, I used a slightly thicker head gasket to accomodate the few thousandths removed from the block deck surface and the mating surface of the head. Since I am unsure of the amount of material removed from either part, I merely added ten thousandths... which is probably really close to the thickness of the lost material combined. More compression means more power... as long as you can run similiar timing compared to a flat-top type piston like the stock GSR piece. This also means that one can run slightly lower blower speeds to reach the same HP goal... and keeping the boost at 10-11 psi should be at or near the limits of the M62's efficiency range (just under 15K rpm at redline).
Since the M62 under optimum conditions can flow 635 cfm or air... this is enough air to create about 400 flywheel HP. Factor in drivetrain loss, this would net you about 335 WHEEL HP. If I have planned well, I should be able to reach 90% efficiency with my engine design... which should ultimately net about 300 WHEEL HP.
We shall see very soon.
so after 11 psi, aside from the fact that it's probably bad for the blower..
does it continue to make more and more power?
I know each psi won't have as much affect but wouldn't upping the boost still be benificial?
I also know it would be puking in lots of heat,
but say you used the LHT ic, or water injection to counteract that?
personally I think you can make 300hp,
people make around 250 on stock gsr's.. so yours should do much better.
. . . Makes me wanna get a CRV block. [img]wink.gif[/img]
Hey Jim. . . hope all is well. Just another old-timer reading up on new posts. Can't wait to hear the news about your ride. It's definately been a long time coming.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thats remarkable! And that comparison was based on peak HP alone. I bet the difference between the areas under the respective torque curves is even bigger, is that correct?Originally posted by JRCivic:
First, displacement. It certainly appears that larger displacement engines are more responsive to positive pressurization from the Eaton blower at ANY boost pressure. Case in point: BoostedEX's stock JDM B16A @ 10psi made 207 wheel HP. I built him a 10.5:1 compression ratioed CRV shortblock and stuck it under his stock B16A head and blower. NO PULLEY CHANGES WERE MADE. The new combination made 252 wheel HP @ 7.5 psi... and 264 wheel HP @ 9.5 psi !!!
If you look at Eatons performance charts the effect of boost level on flow is much smaller then what your measurements show, the 10psi and 5 psi lines are already pretty close so the flow difference between 10psi and 7.5psi must be small (only a couple of %):
I think the power difference is mainly timing related. If you look at the blower exit temps there is a large difference between 10psi and 7.5psi:
I think the lower intake temps allowed much more timing on the 2.0 litre block, this could easily cause a large power increases!
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">According to the Eaton performance charts, the M62 flows only 460 CFM @ 14k revs! (see chart above). Or is there a newer version that flows more? I cannot find it on Eatons website.Since the M62 under optimum conditions can flow 635 cfm or air... this is enough air to create about 400 flywheel HP.
What pulley arrangement do you intend to use to arrive at the 1.75 drive ratio? I guess you'd need a stepper pulley, a CRV crank pulley and perhaps even a smaller SC pulley. Belt slippage will be an issue with the amount of torque you'll be transferring to the M62, so smaller blower pulleys are a bad idea IMO. Also, the increased vibration from the larger displacement engine could do with a better then stock harmonic balancer which is available only in stock size- not CRV size AFAIK.
Both problems can be solved by designing a stepper pulley with a bigger step then the "usual" stepper pulleys. I realize the NRE cost would be significant, but on the other hand everyone is doing 2.x litre builds nowadays so there should be a market for it. I'll gladly take one of your hands!
Mark.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks