Who's got HP? How?
08-13-01, 04:48 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: santa maria, ca
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who's got HP? How?
Alright, I'm starting to get discouraged now. I would like to get my gsl-se up to 185-200hp range. That number is starting to seem out of reach. I don't want to switch to a 13bt or add NOS or anything like that. I just want to build up my stock motor. Problem is that it seems fairly hard to make any real Hp on this motor without bastardizing it in some way. I want to stay with the fuel injection. Can anyone tell me how to get into this range. Has anyone been able to do this?
08-13-01, 07:59 PM
#3
What about weight?
It takes less energy to push a lighter car. And weight removed from the drivetrain will make even a greater impact than weight removed from the non-drive assemblies. Someone put it like, one pound less on the flywheel is like 14 lbs less from the car!
Try an aluminum flywheel, lighter wheels, smaller tires, aluminum or graphite driveshaft, lightened rotors. No A/C, smog pump, or power steering unit. May not be adding HP, BUT it will add to performance much in the same way as added HP.
see Mr Wankles posts to get an idea about interior weight reductions.
ok, this doesn't solve the HP delema. But you'd gotta admit, that this route will also help in the handling dept as well.
I'm bolting on a 1500 lbs MG onto my Fuel injected GSLSE 6-port. That's more than a 1000 lbs savings!!!
I luv E=MC2 because twice the weight requires 4 times the energy to move it. Being that I'll be half the weight as most other cars, will that also mean I'll perform like I have 4 times the energy (HP)? Likely not. I won't be able to keep the tires glued.
It takes less energy to push a lighter car. And weight removed from the drivetrain will make even a greater impact than weight removed from the non-drive assemblies. Someone put it like, one pound less on the flywheel is like 14 lbs less from the car!
Try an aluminum flywheel, lighter wheels, smaller tires, aluminum or graphite driveshaft, lightened rotors. No A/C, smog pump, or power steering unit. May not be adding HP, BUT it will add to performance much in the same way as added HP.
see Mr Wankles posts to get an idea about interior weight reductions.
ok, this doesn't solve the HP delema. But you'd gotta admit, that this route will also help in the handling dept as well.
I'm bolting on a 1500 lbs MG onto my Fuel injected GSLSE 6-port. That's more than a 1000 lbs savings!!!
I luv E=MC2 because twice the weight requires 4 times the energy to move it. Being that I'll be half the weight as most other cars, will that also mean I'll perform like I have 4 times the energy (HP)? Likely not. I won't be able to keep the tires glued.
08-13-01, 08:41 PM
#4
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rex,
I think to get 185-200hp and still be streetable you'll need a streetported motor, less restrictive ehaust, and improved fuel mapping.
The guys running 2nd gen cars in my class are getting 230hp with streetported 6 port 13Bs (and they must use stock throttle bodies).
I think to get 185-200hp and still be streetable you'll need a streetported motor, less restrictive ehaust, and improved fuel mapping.
The guys running 2nd gen cars in my class are getting 230hp with streetported 6 port 13Bs (and they must use stock throttle bodies).
08-13-01, 10:19 PM
#5
Full Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The Greater Wisconsin Area
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some people, myself and Kenny included, have opted to ditch the rotary motor in favor of a Chevy or Ford motor. This has several advantages.
1. Cheaper, more available parts
2. Anyone with 1/2 of a brain can rebuild an SBC motor.
3. easy to get 600 reliable, streetable horsepower on a normally aspirated engine
4. Speed parts are common and cheap
5. Tuning knowledge is immense compared to rotary
6. More durable parts to back it up, like tremec T56 transmissions that can handle that 600 HP safetly and Centerforce dual or triple disk clutches and stuff.
There are also several disadvantages
1. No more rotary motor
2. Some people claim added weight, however, i have yet to finish my "lightweight" car and weigh it, so we will see. However, for a straight up easy conversion, yes, there will be added weight
3. Some people claim the balance will be effected. Again, this has yet to be seen in my car, cause its not done.
4. Very easy to lose a large amount of money.
5. Swap cars are tricky to get people to work on and get certified for emissions if you care.
5. Twist unit body and ruin rear end now that it sees so much more power.
However, in terms of wiring and running issuse, a rebuilt carbed 350 Chevy engine is 10 times easier to wire in than a 13BT (closest way to get that much power), and a rebuilt 13BT with a rebuilt turbo is more expensive that a rebuilt Chevy engine. ( A complete rebuild can be less that $1000 for the Chevy)
1. Cheaper, more available parts
2. Anyone with 1/2 of a brain can rebuild an SBC motor.
3. easy to get 600 reliable, streetable horsepower on a normally aspirated engine
4. Speed parts are common and cheap
5. Tuning knowledge is immense compared to rotary
6. More durable parts to back it up, like tremec T56 transmissions that can handle that 600 HP safetly and Centerforce dual or triple disk clutches and stuff.
There are also several disadvantages
1. No more rotary motor
2. Some people claim added weight, however, i have yet to finish my "lightweight" car and weigh it, so we will see. However, for a straight up easy conversion, yes, there will be added weight
3. Some people claim the balance will be effected. Again, this has yet to be seen in my car, cause its not done.
4. Very easy to lose a large amount of money.
5. Swap cars are tricky to get people to work on and get certified for emissions if you care.
5. Twist unit body and ruin rear end now that it sees so much more power.
However, in terms of wiring and running issuse, a rebuilt carbed 350 Chevy engine is 10 times easier to wire in than a 13BT (closest way to get that much power), and a rebuilt 13BT with a rebuilt turbo is more expensive that a rebuilt Chevy engine. ( A complete rebuild can be less that $1000 for the Chevy)
08-13-01, 11:43 PM
#6
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: GA
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well you can get a Racing beat streetport exhaust and some TWM throttle bodies and a haltech computer. That should get at least 180- 200 depending on how the haltech is tuned.
08-14-01, 03:15 AM
#7
8krpm is not enough
Find a 2nd gen intake (upper and lower) and port match it onto your block, or get an adaptor plate machined. (see max7's webpage for a brief overview of how easy this is and how much more it flows) Find an adjustable FPR and crank up the fuel pressure 5-10PSI or so to get the air/fuel ratio back towards stoich. Go find a new ECU if you want to utilize the aux-injectors, or get an AIC, but this is prolly not nessicary as the -SE's fuel system should be ok.
This shouldn't cost you too much (unless you want to get the secondary injectors working), you can prolly port match it in a weekend with some jbweld and a die grinder.
(of course, then yer AFM's gonna cause more of a restriction ;P)
--matt
This shouldn't cost you too much (unless you want to get the secondary injectors working), you can prolly port match it in a weekend with some jbweld and a die grinder.
(of course, then yer AFM's gonna cause more of a restriction ;P)
--matt
Trending Topics
08-14-01, 01:51 PM
#8
Full Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Rotary-MG
What about weight?
I luv E=MC2 because twice the weight requires 4 times the energy to move it. Being that I'll be half the weight as most other cars, will that also mean I'll perform like I have 4 times the energy (HP)? Likely not. I won't be able to keep the tires glued.
What about weight?
I luv E=MC2 because twice the weight requires 4 times the energy to move it. Being that I'll be half the weight as most other cars, will that also mean I'll perform like I have 4 times the energy (HP)? Likely not. I won't be able to keep the tires glued.
First off, E=MC2, only works on relativistic particles, ie...things going near the speed of light...
Secondly, even if it was relavent, 2 x M would not be 4 x E in that equation.
Your math is flawed as is your knowledge of physics...
08-14-01, 07:14 PM
#9
Originally posted by hamster
First off, E=MC2, only works on relativistic particles, ie...things going near the speed of light...
Secondly, even if it was relavent, 2 x M would not be 4 x E in that equation.
Your math is flawed as is your knowledge of physics...
First off, E=MC2, only works on relativistic particles, ie...things going near the speed of light...
Secondly, even if it was relavent, 2 x M would not be 4 x E in that equation.
Your math is flawed as is your knowledge of physics...
First of, Quantum physics deals with subautomic particles. Relativity is for that on the larger scale. String Theory proposes to combine the two into a universal theory.
Second, you are about as close to the speed of light as you'll ever get. So what makes you think that the state of Physics changes..."near the speed of light."
:o yaaawnnn...if I could enter C[sqared] I would(unless you care to show my how to enter raised characters on this BBS), but I thought that folks would understand its meaning simply enough.
Do I really have to spell it out???
C[sqared] is usually reffered to as the speed of light. But it works the same as "speed." If you increase C from a value of one to two. Then its value in the equation is really the sqaure of it (thanks to the raised 2, meaning squared). So on the other side of the equals sign, you'd need to supply 4 times more energy to provide the power necessary to excellerate M [Mass].
So Mr. math wizard, go ahead a solve the equation for C= and you'll see the answer. It is all very well documented, and I'm not trying to come up with anything new here.
It also works in the reverse. If you are traveling 60 Mph and crash into a fixed object, you hit with the impact of 4 times the energy as you would at 30 Mph.
and you say I'm flawed.
08-14-01, 10:44 PM
#11
Can Barely Afford Gas :(
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Pele
If you drive like me, you are going close to the speed of light.
If you drive like me, you are going close to the speed of light.
08-15-01, 07:46 PM
#13
Right near Malloy
iTrader: (28)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Behind a workbench, repairing FC Electronics.
Posts: 7,841
Received 510 Likes
on
345 Posts
HEY! I feel bad enough as it is, driving her (RX-7) on a bent control arm. (Pre-Wreck, I slid into a curb avoiding some idiot on the snow and slightly bent the passenger side control arm.) I think that had some cause in my wreck. I'm not about to go daily driving her again with damaged parts.
Besides. the Honda is a wagon. Perfect for toting around those large pesky items like transmissions, rear axles, and engines. (When I do get the money to have them taken to the shop and rebuilt.) It's the car I kick when I get mad at it. Which is frequently, since the whole engine bay is clogged with emissions cleaning equipment. Sure it tops out at 90 and gets a 10 (Minute) in the quarter mile. But the one number I can brag about is... 32 MPG City
It's also the chamilion... On the outside, the honda is rusting out, severely dented and scratched, one school bus yellow wheel, one hub cap, exhaust hanging by coat hanger, mangled antenna... Inside, however... 6 disc CD changer, Dolby enhanced Kenwood sound system, plush comfy seating with lots of leg and head room, frosty A/C, and the worn shocks provide a soft ride. It's great to cruise in the bad sections of Washington D.C. late at night and not worry about getting carjacked or having things stolen. Honestly. Who puts $400 worth of stereo equipment into a car that looks like that?
Besides. the Honda is a wagon. Perfect for toting around those large pesky items like transmissions, rear axles, and engines. (When I do get the money to have them taken to the shop and rebuilt.) It's the car I kick when I get mad at it. Which is frequently, since the whole engine bay is clogged with emissions cleaning equipment. Sure it tops out at 90 and gets a 10 (Minute) in the quarter mile. But the one number I can brag about is... 32 MPG City
It's also the chamilion... On the outside, the honda is rusting out, severely dented and scratched, one school bus yellow wheel, one hub cap, exhaust hanging by coat hanger, mangled antenna... Inside, however... 6 disc CD changer, Dolby enhanced Kenwood sound system, plush comfy seating with lots of leg and head room, frosty A/C, and the worn shocks provide a soft ride. It's great to cruise in the bad sections of Washington D.C. late at night and not worry about getting carjacked or having things stolen. Honestly. Who puts $400 worth of stereo equipment into a car that looks like that?
Last edited by Pele; 08-15-01 at 07:53 PM.
06-05-02, 10:08 AM
#19
Originally posted by peejay
What's with all the threads brought back from the dead?
What's with all the threads brought back from the dead?
It's Annoying guys.
EDIT:
It's Annoying kylekyle
I hope the Mods delete all your recent posts, and reset you to ZERO Post counts. Are you happy you got to a hundred @$$hole?
Last edited by Directfreak; 06-05-02 at 10:27 AM.
