ENGINE SPECS (continued)
 

...after crunching some numbers from the data I missed in my shop manual :rolleyes: (thanks guys) I've come up with some interesting findings regarding the H-6:

piston compression height (distance between wrist pin centerline and piston deck)
2.457" (6.24cm)

combustion chamber volume (*not* including gasket and cylinder volume):
3.453cu/in (8.77cu/cm)

Rod/stroke ratio:
1.33:1 (the polar opposite of the domestics, and also one of the reasons for their longevity)

Connecting rod angle (crank at 90deg ATDC):
20.97deg (why don't they just supply a cylinder gouging kit?!?! :mad: )

*Please* bear in mind that these numbers were carefully *extrapolated* from the measurements I had, accuracy is not guaranteed, YMMV.

The more I look at this motor, the more it screams FORCED INDUCTION. The way I see it, this motor was designed from the jump to be "breathed on" in much the same way the Impreza responds so well to it's turbo. High RPM screamers (a la' S2000) these are not. IMHO, a factory turbo'd SVX would have SMOKED (if not, at *least* soundly beaten) the almighty TT Supra. Imagine, a rally stomping dirt monster *and* a BOULEVARD BRUISER from the company that was "Inexpensive, and built to stay that way...).

Subaru, the Impreza is incredible, but you *definitely* missed the boat on this one...

so build it so we can see it type r.....
 

are you ever going to post some pics of your car? i would like to see the center exit exhaust.

Haven't you noticed that almost every boxer responds well to forced induction and/or 'hot rodding'?

Porsche - need we say more?
Corvair - the biggest problem was the fan, GM and the rest of the car
VW - the leader in $/hp hot rodding
Ferrari - If you had the money you'd be driving a BB and you know it :)

Beav

I thought it was just me...
 

I have an issue of Turbo & Hi-Tech Performance from a few years ago with a 714hp Carerra S4 (similar to what Eddie Bello used, for you import fans). The article stated that accelleration was *unbelievable*. I believe them.

It's been my dream to have Subaru build my design for the next SVX, a mid-engined two seater with two H-6's mated back to back and tuned to within an inch of it's life (think 6.6L, 600hp, *naturally aspirated* flat 12 :D yeah, I knew that'd get your attention!! ), maybe a Magneti Marelli Selespeed trans (think Ferarri 360 Modena and Alfa Romeo 156) or uprated Skyline Getrag with Torsen LSD's and a Lotus Tuned doube-a arm, coilover suspension.

I wonder how the public would respond to a Subaru that kills Vipers...
:cool:

SVX-Type R,

The public would respond by not buying it. They will keep their wallets closed like they did with our SVX.
The fault is not with the car. It is the public perception of Subaru. Just as Honda, Nissan, & Toyota had to start different divisions aka: Accura, Infinity, & Lexus; Subaru needs to do the same.
The American public will not buy high end sport, GT or luxury vehicles with a Subaru nameplate.
If a car company can't sell high end cars in the US of A, they are dead meat.

Just my opinion.

Larry III
Maybe FHI/SOA can name the new division ALCYONE.

SVXtypeR
you read my mind. except it needs to be quad turbo charged, obviously awd and the entire body needs to be carbon fiber. not only would that smoke vipers but machlaren f1's as well.
jacob

...and then we'd all be in the same boat we're in now - wanting and unable to afford such a car....

Beav

very true beav
but that would be a beast of a car.

if someone could just find a reliable...
 

turbo solution for our current svx it could get interesting. :)

whats wrong with forced air techs turbo. i bet if you paid them enough money they could do the major engine mods that need to be done and im sure they could upgrade their turbo from 5 psi to atleast 10. i bet they could even come up with a twin turbo deal of some sort.

you are right......
 

but what i am talking about is a bolt on kit that immediately works.

for my wifes gti you can simply buy a kit and you are in business. bolt it on and hit the highway. chip it and hit the track. :cool:

Aye, there's the rub. If you paid anyone "enough money" you could eventually mod your car into NOT being an SVX. :D

Combustion chamber volume?
 

>combustion chamber volume (*not* including gasket and cylinder volume):
3.453cu/in (8.77cu/cm) <

cyl.vol + combustion vol / combustion vol = compression ratio.

550cc + 8.77 / 8.77 = 63.7:1????
550cc + 60cc / 60cc = 10.1:1

I reckon, the combustion chamber vol with head gasket, would have to be around 60cc, or did I read you wrong.

Keep at it, "seek and you shall find"
Harvey.

Re: Combustion chamber volume? (good catch)
 

Somewhere my math is hosed for the chamber vol. For the cylinder vol, I got 554.237cc, giving a total of 3325.423cc, but lemmie check something...

<LATER THAT SAME MORNING...>

FOUND IT!!!

I have metric *and* standard values for each measurement. My x-lation for combustion chamber vol from metric to standard was WRONG!! :eek:

When I input the metric value, the 8.7cc got (incorrectly) translated to 3.453 cubes, and I used the *wrongly x-lated standard column* as the basis for the compression ratio calculation! Had I been paying attention, I would have noticed that the ratios for the standard and metric value columns were DIFFERENT!! AAAAGGGHHH....

Ok, short answer, I got a combustion chamber + gasket vol of 60.89cc's for a mechanical compression ratio of 10.102:1 (61.54 for a 10.006:1). It's sad, but I can't remember if the shop manual quoted 10.1:1 or 10:1 for the c/r.

Sorry bout' that guys... :D

Well, at 64:1 you would never have to change spark plugs.... ;)

Beav