jimlab

Are you calculating that based on the level of your gas gauge or actual volume of fuel consumed?

It's a compact V8 platform with a relatively low price, excellent availability, light weight, high initial (base) power levels, a large aftermarket and support community, and excellent response to upgrades.

True, but they all have shortcomings of one kind or another. Looking past the cost of the initial swap, anything you can get cheap is likely going to have limitations on future upgrades.

slo

iTrader: (1)

Mileage calculated based upon actual fuel consumed.

The Highway figure comes from one long 2 hour trip, in clear traffic. The speed didn't go lower than 75, no higher than 85, and 80 most of the way. The actual figure was like 23.8. This is on an un rebuild japenese market 13b-re, with @ 100 psi of compression, running open loop off a wideband O2. Ive since improved my highway mileage some by re tuning, and am running open loop well above stoic (@ 17.5-1) in the steady cruising ranges with no lean surge. Haven't gone on a trip long enough to verify actual mileage. Though I think I could hit 28-29 at 65. This is not my DD, but the once or twice a week a drive it, if I drive normally I average 18-20 MPG combined.

You make a good point regarding the LS1, but if the goal is a finite 350 HP for example you could certainly do that with another engine for allot less. And when considering reliability, for the same dollars spent LS1 to get to 350 HP win a used engine, you could have a nicley built older platform with basicly all new parts.

jimlab

Describe the process. You wouldn't be the first one to **** up mileage calculations.

Amazing. Ever wonder why no one else can get better than 20-22 mpg?

capn

Exactly why I went with the LS1 platform in my comparison, I could have put the 1UZ in my calculations they float around $500 for the engine; complete. But as you said other engines have thier compromises for the 1uz in my case the base price is rediculously low, but you have to buy aftermarket ECU to run it with a manual and then you have to find and source a tranny that will fit and on top of that you have to do a bit more fab work (what I am doing a lot of right now). So the ls1 platform is just the better "compromise" right now, if I can get my way in a few years the 1UZ will be just as popular and hopefully parts just as abundant.

slo

iTrader: (1)

No doubt.

Fill up gas tank to 100% without overfilling. Re-set, the trip odometer, drive at least 100 miles. Fill up the gas tank to 100% again, without overfilling. Divide miles driven as indicated by tripodometer by gallons used, when refilling. The only possible error comes obviously, comes from whats inicated on the spedometer. My speedo actually reads a little slow, having been verifified with my portable GPS and the highway speed test mileage markers. So my mileage is actually slightly better than that as I have driven farther.

28-29 would be only in the most constrained of conditions, and as said I have only verified 23-24. For the 28-29 estimate, I was using data logs for injector duty cycle at a given speed, before and after.

Most who are driving Rx7's arent willing to drive normally long enough to get an accurate ready. The stock ECU also hides allot. By tuning mostly the timing its possible to lean the hell out of the cruising ranges. Close to 3.5k rpm, I was able to get it to run without lean surge, slightly leaner than 18-1, at very light throttle settings. The EGTs actually go down vs what they would be at stoic. Also, most (who have the equipment and ability) don't take the time to tune their engines for this type of driving. I find that it keeps the plugs nice and clean. The goal really isn't fuel economy, Its not my DD, I just like to play around with things.

photopaintball

no, it would raise the center of gravity
the pvc works really well btw

capn

you're joking...right?

slo

iTrader: (1)

regarding the price debate the original poster can't go wrong with buying something like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...5240222&rd=1,1

Regarding the PVC hood suports, thats just funny, whats next a PVC roll cage, oh wait thats been done:

http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=5163&page=95

photopaintball

of course!

but right now im working on getting my car running stock (megasquirt newbie) so AI is a long way off

capn

Slo that is the funniest freaking thread I have seen in a while!

HRforsale

Is not the reason that people are going LS1 and v8 swaps, is for reliability? That and a marginal improvement in gas mileage is the reason I am going LS1/T56. It's not really so much about the money or the horsepower (maybe the torque, mmm so much more sexy than hp), just being able to drive the car when I want is a big factor for me.

capn

From what I have seen its simplicity, doing some R&R is much easier then rebuilding an engine(even a simple one).

remove engine and tranny, replace engine and tranny

as opposed to

remove engine, disassemble engine, spec parts replace out of spec parts, reassemble engine, upgrade engine and replace engine.


to me its simplicity

rarson

The Volvo head conversion totally negates the cheap aspect of swapping in a 2.3. If you're going to spend that kind of time and money, you're better off looking at other engines. It's a neat idea, but to argue for the 2.3 as being a cheaper alternative and then mention swapping in the Volvo head is absolutely ridiculous.

By the way, there's a phrase used to describe a post that includes rattling off other people's numbers and talking about car parts in the future tense: BENCH RACING. I realize from your post that you have yet to enter the real world, but I bet after you drive around for a few years with your 4-puck clutch, no interior, no AC and no heat, you'll be kicking yourself for ruining a perfectly good car. Especially when it's going to cost you a lot more money than you realize just to do it.

You can always tell the bench racers from the people actually working on their cars because they always have the biggest, grandest plans for the car and somehow manage to throw in the phrase "when I can afford it" into the same post. They always seem to think their car will be the fastest and most powerful yet they expect to do it on the lowest budget and half the time, they don't even own the car they're talking about (I won't mention any names...).

importsown

hey.... im one of those guys... wait a minute, im just a broke *** 18 year old who has dreams haha....

oh and for the name mentioning....

*cough*nihi*cough*

photopaintball

you're right, I am doing that a bit

But I am building within my means. I think the volvo head swap can't be ruled out just because it takes a lot of time. If I can do it cheap, thats all the more reason for me to do it.

I am an inch away from having megasquirt running and my engine is in the car, I am aquiring parts for the volvo head conversion already (I just bought stainless valves). Even if my plans take more time and money I can still do them.

I dont have enough money to have two cars, so I would rather have the fast/stripped one. I drove a completely gutted modded 92 325i for almost two years and loved it a lot more than when it has leather on the inside. Do you think people with motorcycles kick themselves in the *** for spending money on something that doesnt have A/C?

ha i do own a car: I've owned 3 and I'm 17

capn

let me know how that goes

it shows

So, that means its a "school project" and if I am not mistaken that means it will be property of the school and not yours.

I would point out the irony here, but...

of people with larger budgets

case in point

well...I dont think there is anything left to say

photopaintball

I have a couple grand left for the car, I have a regular job, and I sell my photography and glass blowing pieces. I've sold over 600 in glass since november. I do other little jobs on the side (like building websites), so cash will not be a problem. I am not a stupid kid.

School project means its a project that counts for a grade. They dont care if I take things. I built a go kart out of aluminum and a fiberglass racing seat they had and I get to keep that. want a picture if you dont believe me? Also I lathed a aluminum shifter, its on my site.

If you think that I am having a pipe dream and thats my problem, then go price some pistons and a junkyard volvo head and get back to me. There are other costs, but I have only spent about 2 grand so far, and I already have the most expensive parts. I could have even saved a few hundred if I wanted to build MSII myself.

If you see my car you know I dont care about looks. Widebody to me is sheet metal or fiberglass and rivets, just like a race car, if I wanted to look pretty, I would have gotten another bimmer. Wheels are used mustang wheels or something, I dont care. But things like these and tires are not part of 600hp so that not included in my price estimate.

I dont need a car in the first place, but if I feel the need to commute, I will get a cheap civic with A/C and heat and all that other soft stuff. I've been biking for almost a year with no problems.

So all I need are manifolds, a holset, pistons, volvo head and parts.
I could get all that at the junkyard if I wanted to
I'm sure I can do my build for what... 3k left in my estimate?

BTW dont pick on nihi. who gives whether someone has a car or not. I give advice on things I have only researched and help people who havent found information elsewhere. If this didn't happen forums wouldn't exist. Do you think the experts are going to answer every question the noobs throw at them: "Can I do a 400 shot on my stock 5.0?" Hell no, some other noob is going to say that he already found out you cant.

IMO there is nothing wrong with "bench racing", as long as people aren't annoyingly already flaunting what they WILL do or lying about what they own. I admitted to doing this a little because I got all worked up trying to protect my idea.

I still dont see why my age matters, or the fact that I dont have as much money as others people might. If I was 3 months older (age 18) you, like most people would probably respect me a lot more. I bet I have done a lot more with cars and spent more money modifying them than lots of 40 year olds. Thats why I usually don't tell people online my age; its irrelevant to the topic anyway.



Which is rotary vs piston a price debate:

IMHO
if you are doing a ground up build than rotary can be just as cheap and reliable as a piston engine.

the first piston engine were not reliable or cheap im sure, so why would rotaries be? but because ford used the same engine for like 40 years its now very cheap.

rotaries have a future, but I still want a six stroke revetec engine

digitalsolo

iTrader: (2)

Your logic here makes absolutely no sense; I'll give you rotary power cheap/reliable if you're talking ~200-250 HP, beyond that, you're in trouble.

As far as your project goes; bench racing (especially you and Nihil's style of "someone else did this, so if I duplicate it, I will too") assumes equal skill, talent and luck across the board. Just because Bob on turbofords made 600 HP with this setup doesn't mean if you buy the same parts and put it together it will make 600 HP. It doesn't even mean that if Bob bought the parts and put it together for you, that it will make 600 HP. It just means that Bob happened to get 600 HP out of the setup.

My family builds drag bikes, we've sold identical copies of our drivetrain to people for them to race. The exact same parts that run 5.80 second passes in both of our bikes. The next fastest pass using this equipment? 6.3x seconds. Why? because they don't have the knowledge and experience to properly utilize their components.

Bench racing, especially in your case, tends to assume the best case scenario in everything. I'm assuming I can make ~700 RWHP out of my L92/L76 370" motor. That's a 300 shot (which I know my 800 HP capable direct port nitrous sytem can output) on top of 400 RWHP out of a heads/cam/intake/exhaust LSx motor. Both are very conservative estimates. Why don't I say 850 RWHP, considering it's entirely possible for that engine to make that and more? Because this setup may be a slug and only make 700 or so. I don't know, it's not completed yet. The numbers you quote are on the HUGELY optimistic side, yet you seem to think they're no problem at all.

You also fail to factor in all of the other problems you will have with that car. Bushings, brakes, suspension, transmission, rear end, etc.

If making 600 HP with your setup for that price was so damned easy, everyone would do it. This isn't some secret formula you figured out in your mad scientist lab. Wake up.

rarson

Umm, no. Motorcycles don't need A/C. Do you think people with motorcycles kick themselves in the *** for driving it to work only to have to drive home in the pouring rain? Yes, they do, as I know several people that did that on a regular basis in Guam (it's practically impossible to tell at any given moment when it'll start raining on Guam since it pretty much rains multiple times a day no matter how sunny it is).

The point is, a motorcycle is not a car. I took the heat out of my daily driver/track car and now I live in Michigan. Yeah, it's not a daily driver anymore, but I've got other cars to drive.

That's nice, I'm 24 and I own a house (and 2 cars).

rarson

Okay, first off, you said you had spent $400 on the car so far, now it's 2 grand. Secondly, you're talking about buying pistons and other parts and then talking about how you don't care if the engine lives less than a year. You say money isn't a problem but you know what? It doesn't matter how much money you make if you aren't responsible with it.

It's easy to plan out projects to be dirt cheap when you start pricing some used junkyard parts. But I know damn well that there's a ton of little costs that will be popping up that you aren't planning on. It always happens. A hundred bucks here and there have halted more projects than I've ever tried to take on.

Also, you do know that the head isn't a straight bolt-on part, right? You've got to modify it to make it work. Now if you can manage to do that yourself, then good for you, but I just don't see it happening. Plus, since the DOHC head is bigger, you'll probably have more of a chance of running into hood clearance issues. Isn't the SOHC 2.3 already a tight squeeze in an FC?

But hey, I do have to give you credit (if that is your picture), at least you have the engine and the car and one is actually inside the other.

Oh my god, you just said that TIRES are not part of a 600hp build. PLEASE do not drive your car on the street anywhere near me. It's obvious you have no idea what kind of utter excess 600 hp is.

You guys that are stuck on Holsets would have much better builds if you used a turbo designed in the last decade or two. Holsets are good, but when Mitsubishi turbos are selling for like $500 and ball-bearing GT's for a little over a thousand, it doesn't make any sense to me to throw on a Holset. Perhaps if you saved some of that money you were making, you'd be able to buy a better turbo and even that Civic you 'might' want and I don't know, a house down the road maybe?

People building cars asking for advice care whether someone has a car or not. Especially when the bile spewing from him is as matter-of-fact as can be, as if he's some expert who has been there and done that before. But no, he's just a keyboard jockey repeating crap he's read on the internet.

It's fine to quote someone else's information, but you can't quote it as if you own it if it's not your info. For example, a simple "I read this" would suffice. Or in your example, maybe a response such as "Most things I've read suggest not exceeding a 100-shot on a stock engine, so I'd very much assume that a 400-shot would be too much."

There is something very wrong with bench racing. If you don't see how it gets in the way of the dissemination of real information, then I can't help you.

It doesn't matter. I would've assumed you were at least 20, even with the school comments. I never mentioned your age but it IS a common thing for a young person interested in cars to research about them and start posting dreams or posting about stuff they don't really have any personal experience with. The tone of your post made it seem like you could've been a young person, but I didn't assume that just off your post.

I'm going to have to go with the man, digitalsolo, on this one. And keep waiting for that revetec, that'll probably come to market about the same time as the quasi-turbine.

rarson

Okay, now I'm sorry for posting so many times in the same thread, but my dial up connection is a pain in the *** (satellite is supposed to be installed today... no cable in my area ).

This is a really good point. I've been modifying my DSM for about 9 years now. It's been a slow process as I've never had tons of cash to blow on car parts, but each step along the way, my car has done well for it's mods. I will toot my own horn for a second and say that I'm a pretty capable driver, but at the same time, a 1.69 60-foot isn't anything to write home about. I honestly think my car is just a freak. It was running 13.7 on the stock turbo with practically no mods, and I only knew 1 other guy that had a car like that.

I've still got a small turbo on it, a Mitsubishi small 16g. That turbo is "supposed" to max out at about 325 crank horsepower, yet I'm pushing it to almost 400 crank. I remember someone quoting something like the compressor would flow a max of 32 lbs/hr, yet I'm seeing almost 36. Yeah, it's way off the map, but the car is fugging fast. I'm one of the few DSMs (according to dsmtimes.org) with a small 16g that is running 11's. One of these days I'll throw a shot of nitrous on it and see if it runs 10's... on the original factory headgasket (engine's never been cracked open before).

Oh yeah, one more thing about this car: I was told not to bother with the 2g engine because it "would" crankwalk. Well it hasn't yet, and I don't plan on it ever walking, so here again, the internet wizards didn't tell the whole story. The point is, there's a lot of expectations people have about what has already been done and what is capable and there will almost always be someone to show the contrary.

It's nice to look at other people's setups to get an idea of what's possible, but to assume that every car with the same setup will give the same numbers is ludicrous. There are a lot of "freak" cars out there like mine that make the average car look bad. Then there are guys like John Shepherd which everything they touch turns to gold, and they totally shame freak cars like mine. I have no delusions of ever catching up to any of his old setups.

Yeah, like I mentioned with the tires. If you're going to cheap out on parts, don't cheap out on tires. Especially if you do make all that power. The rest of the suspension is no less important.

photopaintball

I think you missed my point entirely
When I said 5k for 600 horsepower. I meant 5k for JUST the 600 horsepower. I would not drive a 600horsepower car with the spare tires I have on the car now lol. I meant only for the horsepower specific stuff. Just what the engine needs, not the whole car. 5k into just the engine is a respectable amount, especially considering the motor cost me $400.

I know there are other things need to actually use that power, but since its not engine specific its not part of my horsepower/cost estimate.


Digitalsolo - I dont disagree with you at all. It will be a pain in the ***, probably unreliable if I used it at 600hp every day, and I am being optimistic.


Rarson - 400 on the engine, 2k on everything listed under "what it has" on my website was under 2200.

Its a race car for all practical purposes; I want it to make power, luxuries and reliability are second. I enjoy biking (i mean with pedals) around and have been almost a year since I have no car, no problem. It will still work in the rain and my sweatshirt is a good heater. A/C is optional since the weather is really mild here.

When a job replaces school I can afford another car or house just like you, but since I dont have responsibilities that require those things yet, I spent my disposable income on my car.

Thanks for the credit. I cranked it over today and all I need now is the IAT sensor and two short sections of fuel line.

I've driven fast cars BTW, none with 600hp I admit. But I did drive a 69 shelby 350 with 450hp track preped 10 pt cage gutted the works at thunderhill. I also drove a 928GT at infineon.

Holsets are like 200 on ebay, thats why its part of my 5k plan. Maby if I get some more cash I can afford something better. We will see I guess. I do want a house, the civic would be nice, and all that good stuff. I have to finish what I start though. Oh definately when I started I did not know what the hell I was doing at all. Now I do though.

Your right about the Bench Racing thing. I was defining it poorly and confusing it with the "Most things I've read suggest not exceeding a 100-shot on a stock engine, so I'd very much assume that a 400-shot would be too much." response. This was the first I'd heard of the term after all.

Hey the revetec will be cool!.... when im 80 hehe.

Tires will be 275 or 285 khumo mx stretched over 9.5s or 10s the rear will break before the traction.




I may be full of **** in my expectations but either way I am not dreaming, I am doing something no one has done before, not even close. Everyday I work on my car, and I aquire new parts every week for the volvo swap. I have to be proud of that because its more than most could do, especially at my age and still in high school. I know probably a lot of you think my head is up my *** but thats not what this is. This is a formula for my build that I cooked up and will finish hopefully very soon, regardless of the outcome I will be happy to have done it.


besides... mabey ill get lucky with this car

88IntegraLS

Bench racing rules. It's so much more fun than wrench turning.

photopaintball

lol

rarson

Okay, I'm jealous of you. Just based on the fact that you've actually had the opportunity to drive on a real track (okay, I know it's really my fault, my priorities are all screwed up :p ).

Basically, the reason your post threw off bells and whistles is because we've heard the EXACT same thing before. You're not the first person to come in here with the 2.3 idea and talk about the Volvo head swap, Holset turbos, and massive amount of power "on the cheap."

I really dig the way you took the opportunity to explain yourself, rather than making insulting posts or just in general acting like a jackass. We really are trying to help after all, because anyone going into any build expecting huge numbers doesn't want to be disappointed. I hope you can understand that at the core of our argument, we're just trying to keep you grounded. No ill intentions from me, even though I can sound pretty harsh at times.

And you should be proud of what you're doing, you're already farther along than most people planning "builds." As someone pointed out before, they usually just end up being dreams. Hell, I've had a few dreams before, too. Everyone wants something better, but when you start posting with a know-it-all attitude and you have no experience AT ALL (obviously not referring to you, but... let's just say "other people"), then you deserve a slap in the face.