Interest in a Turbo?
Registered User
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
From: Wayne
I'd think the low boost kit would have to be in the 6-7k installed range with the high boost kit in the 7-9 range installed to really have much of a market.
Stroked and blown is going to have a pretty limited market as I don't know how you could do this for under 12k.
Hugh
Stroked and blown is going to have a pretty limited market as I don't know how you could do this for under 12k.
Hugh
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 398
Likes: 1
From: Denver
EZE, that is a good point. The motor work could easily be adapted to go with the SC, then if comptech could run more boost, viola, good SC power. Keep in mind though, that the SC is centrifugal, and will still need RPM to make the most power, but increase in displacement can only help.
As for the bored, stroked, turbo, with all of the systems installed, I know the market will be limited, if not just me, but I thought I would offer. The stock internal motor, as well as an all stock except for pistons (lower compression) motor is what you are all saying you want, correct? I will see what the price would be for all of the scenarios, and let you decide.
As for the drivetrain, I am not sure that it is completely as fragile as people think. I for one think that it is not the torque that is causing the problems, but the ultra high engine speed that is required to make the torque necessary for a good launch. In other words, if you had more torque down low you would not need to rev as high, or mabey even slip the clutch to get a good launch, where as now you need to rev the crap out of the car and completely side step, thus causing massive shock to the drivetrain, not only induced by torque, but also induced by an object that is moving (crank) at 7200 RPM, jolting movement into a stationary object (dif, drive shafts, etc). On my S4 I was putting down 430 hp with 500 ft pounds at 1850 and never had any problems with the drivetrain, while others had half shafts break often on stock cars because of the higher RPM needed to create the same amount of launch force. In the long run I never had problems and had no problems winning, and yes I drove that car HARD, much harder than people that did have problems. This may or may not be true for this car, but we shall see in due time I guess.
Mark
As for the bored, stroked, turbo, with all of the systems installed, I know the market will be limited, if not just me, but I thought I would offer. The stock internal motor, as well as an all stock except for pistons (lower compression) motor is what you are all saying you want, correct? I will see what the price would be for all of the scenarios, and let you decide.
As for the drivetrain, I am not sure that it is completely as fragile as people think. I for one think that it is not the torque that is causing the problems, but the ultra high engine speed that is required to make the torque necessary for a good launch. In other words, if you had more torque down low you would not need to rev as high, or mabey even slip the clutch to get a good launch, where as now you need to rev the crap out of the car and completely side step, thus causing massive shock to the drivetrain, not only induced by torque, but also induced by an object that is moving (crank) at 7200 RPM, jolting movement into a stationary object (dif, drive shafts, etc). On my S4 I was putting down 430 hp with 500 ft pounds at 1850 and never had any problems with the drivetrain, while others had half shafts break often on stock cars because of the higher RPM needed to create the same amount of launch force. In the long run I never had problems and had no problems winning, and yes I drove that car HARD, much harder than people that did have problems. This may or may not be true for this car, but we shall see in due time I guess.
Mark
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
From: The Woodlands, TX
Yep...good post...and great thread.
I think you have something there, we will be hard pressed to find parts that will take the 6-7k rpm drops. More torque down lower will make the high rpm drops un needed, decreasing the shock that is passed through the tranny, drive shaft, diff, and half shafts!
I think you have something there, we will be hard pressed to find parts that will take the 6-7k rpm drops. More torque down lower will make the high rpm drops un needed, decreasing the shock that is passed through the tranny, drive shaft, diff, and half shafts!
Registered User
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
From: Wayne
I agree completely that the drivetrain suffers by orders of magnitude more from high rpm clutch drop than the increased torque of the engine.
If somebody had the time to calculate it just figure out the mass of the parts rotating at 9000 rpm and the near instantaneous connection to a non-rotating part and the momentary torque under this situation probably exceeds 1000lb/ft at the drive shaft, if not higher.
The creation of soft hp through a turbo would minimize this problem.
Motor Trend recently tested the M3 and found the best launch RPM was 1500 (this car has 262lb/ft) of torque.
Hugh
If somebody had the time to calculate it just figure out the mass of the parts rotating at 9000 rpm and the near instantaneous connection to a non-rotating part and the momentary torque under this situation probably exceeds 1000lb/ft at the drive shaft, if not higher.
The creation of soft hp through a turbo would minimize this problem.
Motor Trend recently tested the M3 and found the best launch RPM was 1500 (this car has 262lb/ft) of torque.
Hugh
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 8,601
Likes: 1
From: La Habra
Here's a volume sales consideration for you -- I suspect you'll get more takers after their factory warranty is up. So that means many more potential sales in 2002 and 2003 than in 2001.
Mdigrappa, you made a comment about possibly being able to slip the clutch to modulate power and cause less damage. While that sounds reasonable the stock clutch doesn't like to slip and then lock up. That's how most of us end up spinning the clutch (too slow a lift). If I had more power it would slip and still keep slipping unless I backed off the gas to hook it up.
Mdigrappa, you made a comment about possibly being able to slip the clutch to modulate power and cause less damage. While that sounds reasonable the stock clutch doesn't like to slip and then lock up. That's how most of us end up spinning the clutch (too slow a lift). If I had more power it would slip and still keep slipping unless I backed off the gas to hook it up.