Narfle

iTrader: (16)

a convertible drag car? absurd.

importsown

Impractical, maybe. Unique, yes. Absurd? No.

Nihilanthic

CHEAP???? YES!!!

He scored a killer deal on it on ebay, lol, what can I say.

I'm hunting for a roller in Florida now cos I finally get to start working for ME tomorrow... heh.

I think I will go 2.3T afterall. Crunching the numbers and checking how involved truck GenII's are, its gonna be extremely cheap (hello holset turbo for $200...) and its simple to work on, aftermarket is huge... and Im in the same town Racer Walsh is, so I dont even have to worry about shipping, I can just drive over there and pick it up.

Plus I'm gonna be working at Advance Auto (In Argyle if any Jacksonville 'Clubbers are here) so... even more cheap ****. HAH.

Besides, otherwise stock 2.3T + header and HX35w nets 300 whp at the least, and if I want to push the rpm range up I can just cam it. Later on I'll get a ported iron head or go aluminum and... well, there I go. heh heh...

Though personally I'm going to go with a damn coupe, wind noise from vert tops drive me nutz.

BTW, Jess, still got your block or did you sell it yet?

rarson

That 2.3T is a pretty damn neat engine. And cheap. I wouldn't call it optimal, but it's strong and cheap. We all know how personal an engine choice is and how everyone's opinions are different, so I won't even get into that.

I personally would like a car powered by that engine, actually. I really think an FC would be the perfect chassis. Problem is I have about 5 other engines I'd also like to play with and no cars and no money to waste at the moment.

I would think a Mitsubishi 14b (stock 1g DSM turbo) would be an extremely good turbo to try on the 2.3. A FWD DSM guy is running low 11's with that turbo, and granted, he's stripped the car out pretty well, but the 14b can consistently make at least 300 whp. The reason I mention it is because, for one, they can usually be found for less than $200, and for two, they are simpler than **** to rebuild. Plus they work pretty damn well.

Anyway... whoever chooses the 2.3T and gets one running in a 7, good luck to you.

AXMDR787BOY

blah blah blah. Dude, you are all talk. You have been talking about doing this **** for at least a year now and you still don't even own an RX-7. lol

Nihilanthic

2.3Ts stock have pretty crummy head flow. But, this is the turbo world we're speaking about... just jack up the boost and force a lot of air through a small port and you get... INSANE VELOCITY.

Im most likely going to get a bo-ported (heh heh) iron or an aluminum esslinger street head down the line. For now, I just gotta figure out how to make some damn money during hour-cap season!

******* fourth quarter

rarson

Well, I'd still like good flow even in a turbo application head, but the good thing is the ability to try home porting. If I screw it up, big deal! I'll just get a new one.

Still, it's a tough call between this engine and a 4g63. Not so much which engine to build, but which to build first.

Nihilanthic

Initial cost and the whole "cheap HX35 + boltons, and make 270-330 to the wheels depending on what you picked" thing kind of sells the 2.3 for me. Well, that and grant's kit.

Also, I think I figured out the source of the whole "flat powerband from spool to redline" effect the things have. Probably "choke flow" being reached BECAUSE of the head flow being so crappy, and when that happens, pressure downstream doesnt matter- flow is dependant on upstream pressure and temperature, and almost entirely that.

Hello rally car powerband!

I got a house Im moving into on the 15th and I should take my jobs urine test (lol) tomorrow, so expect to see some progress on my part...

Also, becuase It clicked to me I'll be running in the 12s like that, I should probably put attention to the chassis before I start massaging the heads for 400+ whp, heh.

Finally, before I forget... http://www.bo-port.com/02-services-01a.html <- take the guesswork out! If you dont mind shipping you can always have good ole Bo' port it for some pretty serious flow, plus he knows what hes doing enough to tailor it for the setup you have in mind if you give him all the information he needs. Plus, he can give you a good port job for pretty cheap and he does more than just port, the head's cleaned up and it tends to prevent cracks which some people *cough* fear on 2.3's so much from forming... even though all the cracked heads dont actually suffer from performance or reliability as a result anyway.

rarson

Nah, I don't want anyone to do any porting for me. For one, a lot of places either have misconceptions about porting, or are just unwilling to port to specific specifications. It's my head, I want my porting. I'd probably send it out to get a valve job, to whatever shop can give me a single-seat grind, but even then they'll have to know what they are doing. Too many places port solely for CFM numbers which are practically irrelevant to power production.

Making gobs of power down low is pretty easy for a decent-sized 4-cylinder turbo; that mostly comes down to turbo selection. If you're trying to carry the power through the rpms, you're going to have to make sure the exhaust side isn't choked. A great example of this is the stock T-25 turbo on a DSM. It spools instantly, makes good power down low, but the exhaust housing is SO choked that the wastegate door blows open at around 5500 rpm and the turbo is physically unable to make more than 15 psi.

I've got a ported 16g on my car and the difference is amazing. I mean there's not a whole lot of difference in spool, but the car pulls much better, to about 6800 or so before it starts to drop off a bit. Which is all the more impressive when you consider I'm now also running a fairly large set of cams.

The new Garrett GT series turbos are so good partly because of their turbine wheels. They're a lot more efficient, allowing for a whole lot more flow in the same size of housing. They theoretically should spool faster and flow better than the older T-series turbos even with standard journal bearing CHRAs.

That's the thing though. I mean, Holsets are great because they're cheap and common (like Mitsu turbos), but they're old technology compared to GT stuff. Not that it would be a bad setup, but if I were going all-out on the power front, I'd be using some GT stuff.

The problem though is that I could afford to build a 2.3T/Holset especially since it'd be pretty cheap, but at the same time, I'm having a hard time convincing myself that I would need such a vehicle more than I would need a comfortable retirement.

Nihilanthic

New holsets are out...

and how is a 2.3T gonna ruin my chances at retirement unless I crash it into someone and die? LOL

Also, bo can port your specifications... just read the page. Very good guy, you should see his posts on Turboford!

rarson

I'm not saying it'll "ruin your retirement" specifically, I'm saying that personally, I'm having a hard time trying to convince myself to spend money that I could be saving.

I found an interesting page here. It's cool that you can actually swap the Volvo head on, but I actually think the page is neat because of the pre-production piece pictures.

rarson

I've been doing some research on this engine. I found a head comparison chart here and it's interesting to note the flow characteristics. I know I hinted earlier that the flow numbers are a small part of the picture, but it's interesting to see that it takes even the Esslinger head .400" of lift to break 200 cfm. Whereas, a stock Honda K20 cylinder head breaks 200 cfm at around .225" (see chart here). Now naturally, we're seeing years of development and design differences here, but it goes to show how good a well-designed 4-valve head can be. In fact, there's not much to be gained from porting the K-series.

The engine still interests me though because of the extremely low cost. Leaves a lot of room for experimenting with different things in the engine and such, and it still makes power pretty easily. I'm looking for more information, if anyone has it, specifically deck height, rod specs (length, journal diameter, etc.), and bore spacing.

Nihilanthic

K series is something honda made from the ground up as a package. Esslinger's NASH head was designed to be a "stock replacement" with a slightly better casting than what it has. Essy aluminum heads can break 280 cfm (at .7" lift...) and bo's ported irons have broken 250 @ .5. Also, the particular volvo head that can be swapped can be outflowed by bo's "stage 4" ported iron head, believe it or not. Somewhere on turboford there's an excel sheet with flow curves over lift for various heads and the ported iron of his, and the DOHC head.

The valves are not canted and its on a 3.8" bore, its not gonna be the same as a K series but yes, we know DOHC heads are superior... and I wish ford didn't abandon the 2.3T. I'd blame the average consumer, but meh, thats prolly why they're so dirt cheap now.

Also, I doubt anyone would ever argue a ford 2.3 can hold a candle to the K series, unless its cost effectiveness per dollar!

I'd do a Volvo head if I could find a local machinist whose capable and willing to do the welding and machine work required, and if I can find way to do a timing belt... though that would proably NOT help the whole hood clearance issue, plus I dont know jack squat about the cams available for that head, and it costs more than getting bo to port it. Good idea though.

rarson

Right, that's why I said there's a big difference in the technology due to the years between them and basic design (4-valve versus 2-valve). I'm not saying the Esslinger head is bad, by all means it fairs well against the stocker and is 30 lbs lighter to boot.

You notice the K-series graph doesn't go above .550"... that's because that's a freaking huge amount of lift. Most street cams won't go near .500". And a grind with .700" of lift isn't going to live very long above 7000 rpm.

I'm assuming you're comparing the ported head to a stock DOHC Volvo? Because surely the Volvo head can benefit a bit from porting also.

Actually, the bore is 3.78" (96mm), but I want to know the bore spacing. I wasn't trying to suggest a direct comparison, merely the advantage and progress the DOHC has made since the 2.3 came out.

Yes, that's the best part. The K-series is great but it's WAY more expensive. By the time you've paid for a complete K20 long block, you could have a 2.3T with the Essy head, a built bottom-end, new turbo, the works. The fact that it's a SOHC with 8 valves is a benefit and a relief coming from 16-valve DOHC engines.

Right, it's more of a novelty than anything. Because first of all, you can make all sorts of power without the head. And second of all, all that extra cost kind of defeats the purpose of using the engine. Maybe if it were an all-out attempt with a vehicle that actually came with the engine, but for someone swapping to a different engine, it wouldn't be worth it. Personally, if I wanted a DOHC engine, I'd pony up a bit more cash and get a 4g63. Weight between it and the iron-head 2.3T would probably be very similar. Although I have to say, even that iron headed engine isn't all that heavy.

pinknuggit

You usually won't see 4v heads even get over .500" lift, because the curtain area is based on valve size and the biggest intake valve size I've seen on any 4v head so far is around 1.5". That's why I like 4V heads - with the right ports, you don't need crazy lift to get good headflow.

Eville140

Wow, that dyno graph a few pages back look familiar

Should of stuck with the 2.3 just for the WTF? factor. Mine was done on the cheap and ran pretty good.

http://www.eville140.com/video/1088.wmv
http://www.eville140.com/rx7.html


Building another one right now for a friend


Later
Randy

rarson

Sweet car, sucks what happened to it.

Whizbang

im planning on taking on the lastest round of 2.3T FC -age.

Ill fill in details later. But its my ultimate bang for buck deal.

AND to appease some people, i have detailed price sheets down to the bolt.

full-cruise

iTrader: (5)

a friend of mine has a ford Makur that these motors where in and i can only say there week under hard loads. the car did make it into the mid 12s around 4.5 bars years ago but thats when it was completely fresh, last summer he went threw 3 or 4 MSD distributor gears under hard loads. he never figured why it did it so he found another engine and the same thing was starting to happen. now the car sits waiting for its new owner. they were good cars back in the day

if your interested in a chipped ecu and custom intake PM me and ill see if he will part from it.

Whizbang

intake maybe. Im going Megasquirt.

LETHAL RX7

iTrader: (1)

I have a complete 2.3 turbo head and tubular exhaust manifold I am wanting to sell. Email me at 2jzrx7@comcast.net I dont get on here alot so please email
Greg