3.1, 3100, 3500?? build options

[Mach 5]

I found something that might work for that and keep it very simple.. there is a company that makes quad stage boost controllers. I have to find the link but its pretty cool. Ive even seen it in person. It uses a bunch of solenoids and valves flip a switch you get one boost then another..

[pocket-rocket]

You will probably want to run some sort of progressive boost controller so you don't get that sort of boost in 1st, lol.

[Mach 5]

Im not expecting to have traction but I do plan on adding and modifying some parts so I can increase traction. This car wouldnt be ran at that boost all the time only at the track. I think it will be pretty interesting.

[pocket-rocket]

Well, I'm assuming this is the engine you plan on running 30psi that you mention in your sig. That being said, that's just over 2 atmospheres on top of our natural atmosphere. There's no way you will get traction (let alone get the chassis to play nice with that sort of power) with an engine like that with that sort of boost running FWD, especially in a platform that wasn't made to handle that kind of power.

[Mach 5]

You better move to RWD or you are going to rip the wheels right off of that poor GP.

Too Funny!!

[pocket-rocket]

You better move to RWD or you are going to rip the wheels right off of that poor GP.

[Mach 5]

No you want the opposite. For torque you want the valve as far open as possible in a short amount of time when compared to a cam made for high end power. Shorter duration maximum lift builds torque down low. But your limited to how aggressive you can be by the size of the cam journals and the lifter diameter or wheel diameter depending on what setup your running.

This sounds right...

ok so after talking to my machinist he suggested that the reason we should make it a stroker is so that when the motor isnt in boost yet the motor can have more power to move the car. I want lag because of the traction issues.

so I have picked a build and its gonna be a 3500 stroker w/ a custom plenum, program billet main caps, SBC H-beam rods, hardened crank, WOT-TECh Race Heads and Race cam, Im working on a tensioner setup for the chain, custom headers, Precision ball bearing turbo- unsure yet S-K Speed is gonna put me on the phone with them to choose the correct one, daughter board equipped factory ecm, and some other things.. Build will start next month will my AE86 is officially done for the time being and I will use this thread as my build thread

Thanks for everyones input
-Jarek

[geoffinbc]

No you want the opposite. For torque you want the valve as far open as possible in a short amount of time when compared to a cam made for high end power. Shorter duration maximum lift builds torque down low. But your limited to how aggressive you can be by the size of the cam journals and the lifter diameter or wheel diameter depending on what setup your running.

[Mach 5]

was that a boosted test or a NA test??

[ericjon262]

Uhhhh... Can I see those dyno graphs? Because I call bullshit. Unless the test was done with the exact same cam then it is possible. You cannot compare hydraulic to solid on the same exact cam because the lash required by the solid lifter will greatly reduce duration and max lift. A solid roller cam is capable of TONS more velocity than a hydraulic one so it is possible to extract much more torque and RPM out of the engine.

it was a comparison of the exact same cam, just swapping lifters. I don't remember where I saw it, I think it was in car craft or hotrod mag, I remember reading a whole article on it.

actually, a hyd cam should provide better low end torque because it doesn't open the valve as fast, it would help to keep the velocity up when piston speeds are lower.

[Mach 5]

ok so after talking to my machine shop they told me that the rev kit is a waste and is old technology. He has them in stock too and could make a plate to work if we wanted but advised against using it. he said that it increasing friction and was designed intially because of the lack of proper spring pressure back in the day. Now that valve spring technology is beter he feels that there is no reason to use it. He said it still wont help with overboost when the valve cannot stay seated and boost overcomes spring pressures. He also said that I should stroke the crank exactly what everyone is telling my on here and that it still shouldnt have a problem being able to handle 6800rpm..

[geoffinbc]

Uhhhh... Can I see those dyno graphs? Because I call bullshit. Unless the test was done with the exact same cam then it is possible. You cannot compare hydraulic to solid on the same exact cam because the lash required by the solid lifter will greatly reduce duration and max lift. A solid roller cam is capable of TONS more velocity than a hydraulic one so it is possible to extract much more torque and RPM out of the engine.

[ericjon262]

Your still going to need solid lifters. A rev kit wont help hydraulic lifter pump up. Solid rollers along with good rocker and poly locks on the studs will virtually eliminate the need for adjustment.

I have seen dynographs of engines swapping between hyd and solid rollers, and the hyd rollers made better low and mid range torque, without sacrificing top end performance, I imagine running a rev kit with tighter lifter springs, and a little less seat pressure could get you to 7000 RPMs.

[pocket-rocket]

Won't 3500 valves interfere with cylinder wall bores on a 3100, or am I mistaken?

[geoffinbc]

Your still going to need solid lifters. A rev kit wont help hydraulic lifter pump up. Solid rollers along with good rocker and poly locks on the studs will virtually eliminate the need for adjustment.