KA - In Memory of my Mom (Vincee) and best friend Michael J. Maring
#2296
We have come to the point where we can share a little more information. KA's bore is 102 mm. We looked at 104 mm, but after doing some investigation decided that 104 mm would not leave enough material on the liner walls.
We want the torque of a 4.0 liter motor. In addition to the stock crank, we had two stroker cranks made. One is 72.1 mm and the other is 80.4 mm. The difference in the two set ups is the rod angle and length. The longer stroke will have more torque ....... but also has some reduced longevity issues. Should have a final decision after the Holidays.
Either way, our displacement will be 3.985 L.
We want the torque of a 4.0 liter motor. In addition to the stock crank, we had two stroker cranks made. One is 72.1 mm and the other is 80.4 mm. The difference in the two set ups is the rod angle and length. The longer stroke will have more torque ....... but also has some reduced longevity issues. Should have a final decision after the Holidays.
Either way, our displacement will be 3.985 L.
Last edited by cjv; 12-16-2006 at 02:28 PM.
#2297
Originally Posted by cjv
We have come to the point where we can share a little more information. KA's bore is 102 mm. We looked at 104 mm, but after doing some investigation decided that 104 mm would not leave enough material on the liner walls.
We want the torque of a 4.0 liter motor. In addition to the stock crank, we had two stroker cranks made. One is 72.1 mm and the other is 80.4 mm. The difference in the two set ups is the rod angle and length. The longer stroke will have more torque ....... but also has some reduced longevity issues. Should have a final decision after the Holidays.
Either way, our displacement will be 3.985 L.
We want the torque of a 4.0 liter motor. In addition to the stock crank, we had two stroker cranks made. One is 72.1 mm and the other is 80.4 mm. The difference in the two set ups is the rod angle and length. The longer stroke will have more torque ....... but also has some reduced longevity issues. Should have a final decision after the Holidays.
Either way, our displacement will be 3.985 L.
Thanks for sharing this info with us . I have quick questions are you sleeving this monster since your using oversize pistons 102 mm ? .
3.985L will be so bad with our two turbo's ... I can't hide my interest in your projet . If you have any chance of posting pics let your self loose for christmas
Last edited by cjv; 12-16-2006 at 11:06 PM.
#2298
Originally Posted by mt72
CJV ,
Thanks for sharing this info with us . I have quick questions are you sleeving this monster since your using oversize pistons 102 mm ? .
3.985L will be so bad with our two turbo's ... I can't hide my interest in your projet . If you have any chance of posting pics let your self loose for christmas
Thanks for sharing this info with us . I have quick questions are you sleeving this monster since your using oversize pistons 102 mm ? .
3.985L will be so bad with our two turbo's ... I can't hide my interest in your projet . If you have any chance of posting pics let your self loose for christmas
Thanks for sharing this info with us . I have quick questions are you sleeving this monster since your using oversize pistons 102 mm ? .
3.985L will be so bad with our two turbo's ... I can't hide my interest in your projet . If you have any chance of posting pics let your self loose for christmas
mt72,
These are the pistons which are SO1 coated sides, ceramic coated top and tops designed for high lift. To give you an idea how big the intake valves are, these are 102 mm pistons, take a look at the edges. The cylinder wall is barely large enough for the valve clearance.
Last edited by cjv; 05-18-2010 at 07:46 PM.
#2301
Originally Posted by mt72
OMG you made my day !!! The edge of those pistons are so thin that's crazy
those are custom production made piston right ?
Those pics just made my day !!! thanks
those are custom production made piston right ?
Those pics just made my day !!! thanks
I'll post a few more engine parts.
#2302
I could not imagine driving a 911 with that type of power, I have two turbos myself and they are super quick, both pushing between 525-575hp, I could not imagine a true 750 + hp
Christian
Christian
#2305
Originally Posted by Christian
I could not imagine driving a 911 with that type of power, I have two turbos myself and they are super quick, both pushing between 525-575hp, I could not imagine a true 750 + hp
Christian
Christian
During our testing we have achieved 1400 crank hp already.
#2306
Originally Posted by Christian
What type of weight is your turbo, CJV?
Christian
Christian
#2307
The case has been shuffle pinned to keep the crank from walking. Note the 962 three index oil pump. It has three pick ups (one picks the oil up off the heads). This pump costs over 8k today by itself.
Last edited by cjv; 05-18-2010 at 07:47 PM.
#2309
The valves are Inconnel. The material is the same as used in a Top Fuel Dragster. They are extremely light, and designed for high boost and nitrous. In addition the stems are coated with SO1 and the upper valve is ceramic coated.
Last edited by cjv; 05-18-2010 at 07:47 PM.