285 whp! - Page 15

RallyBob · #**211** 05-29-2008, 10:52 AM

Yes, that is correct.

TomsSVX · #**212** 05-29-2008, 11:08 AM

thanks for the clarification... I am a little surprised at the results though...

Tom

RallyBob · #**213** 05-29-2008, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomsSVX

thanks for the clarification... I am a little surprised at the results though...
Tom

As was I. And a little bummed out too. I guess I should have expected it, up 'til now everything has increased fairly dramatically in leaps and bounds (relatively speaking), so we were due for a step backwards...

But I guess that's why they call it 'research and development'.

Tom, did you still have that spare engine available BTW?

SVXRide · #**214** 05-29-2008, 11:17 AM

Bob,
Have you been able to establish how much volume the stock intake "holds"? I'm interested how it stacks against the thought of "holding" as much as the engine displaces.
Thanks.
-Bill
p.s. how did the volume of the fabricated intake compare with the volume of the stock intake?

RallyBob · #**215** 05-29-2008, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SVXRide

Bob,
Have you been able to establish how much volume the stock intake "holds"? I'm interested how it stacks against the thought of "holding" as much as the engine displaces.
Thanks.
-Bill
p.s. how did the volume of the fabricated intake compare with the volume of the stock intake?

I never got to physically cc any of the intakes. However, dimensionally (as in measured via a tape-measure), the new plenum is 'about' 3 times the volume of stock.

TomsSVX · #**216** 05-29-2008, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RallyBob

As was I. And a little bummed out too. I guess I should have expected it, up 'til now everything has increased fairly dramatically in leaps and bounds (relatively speaking), so we were due for a step backwards...

But I guess that's why they call it 'research and development'.

Tom, did you still have that spare engine available BTW?

Yeah but is a bare bones long block if thats enough

Tom

RallyBob · #**217** 05-29-2008, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomsSVX

Yeah but is a bare bones long block if thats enough

Tom

Should be plenty. I am forwarding your contact info to Andrew, he's the guy who is building the next recipient car for an EG33 transplant. He said he's heading to VA so he might want to pick it up.

oab_au · #**218** 05-29-2008, 08:33 PM

Bob I have looked at the inlet, as to modifing it to allow the torque to be produced at a higher rpm where more power can be produced. The govening factor is the length of the inlet track runners. This is what sets the rpm that the maximum torque is produced. At the moment it resonates at about 4500/5000, to bring this figure up to where the camshafts want to work at, 5500/6000, the length of the tracts have to be shortened.

To do this, you may want to build a new manifold, knowing your metal work skills

but there is a way you could test the theory first, by cutting the underside of the manifold where the dividing walls are either side of the center runner, cutting the division back to have the runners open into the plenum 1" earlier. This will effectively shorten the tuned length of the tract, to allow it resonate at a higher rpm.
What do yeh reckon, worth a try?

Harvey.

TomsSVX · #**219** 05-29-2008, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RallyBob

Should be plenty. I am forwarding your contact info to Andrew, he's the guy who is building the next recipient car for an EG33 transplant. He said he's heading to VA so he might want to pick it up.

He is gonna drop by tomorrow and pick it up... If there is anything else you guys need let me know... I am also gonna give him a set of cams as there are none in the engine right now

Tom

dynomatt · #**220** 05-29-2008, 10:08 PM

Bob, we've seen the standard dyno run graphs...are the 285whp ones available for comparison?

Tom, in my case, we specifically built the ECU to control the IRIS valve, and given the cams had changed, assume the switch point was going to move too. However, when we dynoed it side by side with the valve open and the valve shut (two power runs) the valve made no difference. We were hoping to be able to plot a point to open and close the valve, but with no difference in output, I think we ended up leaving it open.

Matt

zukiru · #**221** 05-29-2008, 10:40 PM

OMFG BOB! awesome build! almost makes me want to rethink my EJ25 swap. (86 XT)

I will PM you when I get ready to get a nice all motor tune for that.

RallyBob · #**222** 05-30-2008, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynomatt

Bob, we've seen the standard dyno run graphs...are the 285whp ones available for comparison?

While I've seen them, Jack prefers not to post the most recent dyno plots. So it's out of my hands.

RallyBob · #**223** 05-30-2008, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oab_au

Bob I have looked at the inlet, as to modifing it to allow the torque to be produced at a higher rpm where more power can be produced. The govening factor is the length of the inlet track runners. This is what sets the rpm that the maximum torque is produced. At the moment it resonates at about 4500/5000, to bring this figure up to where the camshafts want to work at, 5500/6000, the length of the tracts have to be shortened.

To do this, you may want to build a new manifold, knowing your metal work skills

but there is a way you could test the theory first, by cutting the underside of the manifold where the dividing walls are either side of the center runner, cutting the division back to have the runners open into the plenum 1" earlier. This will effectively shorten the tuned length of the tract, to allow it resonate at a higher rpm.
What do yeh reckon, worth a try?

Harvey.

I would have loved to have built an intake with a variable plenum chamber volume (via spacers) as well as variable-length runners (again via spacers). But alas, Jack is not that patient a person! He just wants to bolt on parts and go racing. He hates testing.

RallyBob · #**224** 08-05-2008, 11:11 AM

A little update. The last track event (Pocono) proved terminal for the EG33 powered Impreza. A combination of a stock shortblock being run for 3+ years at racing speeds, the extra loads of near-300 whp, the 8200 rpm shift points, and the stock soup-bowl oil pan (which has horrible oil control for road racing) finally took it's toll.

The net result is #5 rod bearing virtually fused to the crankshaft and #6 damn close to doing the same. Luckily, the heads were intact and the cams are unscathed, but it did bend a few exhaust valves thanks to the extra vertical rod movement at the spun bearing(s).

Another interesting wear item: The forward moveable cam gear (don't know the technical term) which is apparently there to reduce noise and gear slop...it's nearly totally burned up. Wasn't made for those rpms apparently, nor the added loading from the aggressive cams and springs. So we'll probably need to make some billet cam gears, preferably straight cut to reduce fore/aft loading.

I've been consulting with Jack on an oil pan, but the fabricator seems to want to build a drag-race pan only. So I may end up having to build this one myself.

A new shortblock with billet rods and high compression pistons has already been started on.

SVXRide · #**225** 08-05-2008, 11:41 AM

Bob,
Sorry to hear about the race EG33's demise

Is your issue with the oil pan the pan design itself or the way the oil pickup sets in the pan (or both?) I'd been told by others that the stock pan's baffling wasn't bad (in response to my inquires about running a dry sump)

Please keep us all informed as to the new engine build!

Thanks.

-Bill