I thought the SVX had no performance support. - Page 2

Twinboosted · #16 05-25-2008, 04:04 PM

I don't know how stout the internals of an EG33, but are there any performance part manufacturers for forged internals such as pistons and rods? I am just as curious about this guy's car as much as you are except I don't know as much about them as you guys.

Crazy_pilot · #17 05-25-2008, 06:28 PM

The only thing you'll find on this board for build engine parts is those done by ECUTune. Forged 8.5:1 (?) pistons, rods, and cams. There are other sets of cams out there, but for the bottom end that's all there is. Unless this guy had a set of one-off forged pistons done, I'm extremely skeptical. One member here, TomsSVX (also called YT, or Young Tom) blew up a stock motor running 12 lbs of boost with his supercharger.

SVXRide · #18 05-25-2008, 06:34 PM

Yeah, what Chris said

Twinboosted · #19 05-25-2008, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crazy_pilot

One member here, TomsSVX (also called YT, or Young Tom) blew up a stock motor running 12 lbs of boost with his supercharger.

I take it he had stock pistons, correct?

By looking through some pictures, sites, and information that you have given me, if one were to build up an SVX to this level, he would have had to...
-build the low end with upgraded rods and 8.0-8.5:1 pistons
-head port work done with cams
-complete custom exhaust work
-complete custom intake and intercooler piping
-upgraded fuel system
-engine management system
-custom oil lines for the turbos
and after that it would be details such as tuning

I would really like to see this car for myself since there seems to be a lot of
custom work done. I like that.

With that kind of work, 565 HP to the wheels should be achievable as long as the crank holds or the structural integrity of the block is up to the task. As for the running 10s, a Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4 can be in the mid/low 10s at about 500WHP and they are generally a 3700 lb. car. Their times are usually a result of a killer AWD launch and the tight ratio 6 speed tranny.
I have no clue as to what kind of abuse the SVX driveline can take power wise, but he has supposedly upgraded to a 6 speed manual. It seems this will be a unicorn until I get to see this thing for myself.

SVXRide · #20 05-25-2008, 07:33 PM

On with the unicorn hunt!!

-Bill

Twinboosted · #21 05-25-2008, 11:10 PM

Best thing I could find on a Twin Turbo EG33..
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...en-us%26sa%3DN

It is being built for an airplane. No HP claims that I could find, but interesting nonetheless. Hope this isn't a repost.

YourConfused · #22 05-26-2008, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twinboosted

Best thing I could find on a Twin Turbo EG33..
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...en-us%26sa%3DN

It is being built for an airplane. No HP claims that I could find, but interesting nonetheless. Hope this isn't a repost.

That's a pretty motor, but the tb looks like a restriction to me. It's still better than mine though.

SVXRide · #23 05-26-2008, 09:16 AM

You should be able to find plenty of aircraft and sand buggy-based pics of turbocharged EG33s. They are very popular in both applications. Just nothing comparable actually in an SVX (yet, at least

).
-Bill

JLHollowX13 · #24 05-26-2008, 09:57 AM

im surprised that with all turbo charged eg33's out there that someone hasnt thrown one in an svx even for a test. does anyone know the specs on the buggies with the turbo'd eg33's?

Twinboosted · #25 05-26-2008, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YourConfused

That's a pretty motor, but the tb looks like a restriction to me. It's still better than mine though.

That's a possibility, but I would be more concerned with the plenum runner design. Sharp 90 degree angle with no tapering of the runners would create a lot of turbulence and loss of intake air velocity. Expanding the diameter of the runners where they meet the plenum, installing velocity stacks within the plenum for each runner and enlarging the surge tank would greatly improve the efficiency of the engine and yield more power.

Hocrest · #26 05-26-2008, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twinboosted

That's a possibility, but I would be more concerned with the plenum runner design. Sharp 90 degree angle with no tapering of the runners would create a lot of turbulence and loss of intake air velocity. Expanding the diameter of the runners where they meet the plenum, installing velocity stacks within the plenum for each runner and enlarging the surge tank would greatly improve the efficiency of the engine and yield more power.

I'm not positive about it, but I think that intake was posted about on here before (years ago) with links to the site with more detail. If it's the one I'm thinking of, they did a lot of calculations and testing to come up with that design. There were trumpeted stacks for each runner. Also to note is that it was designed to run at a constant, high RPM. Probably somewhere around 5000 or so. When they were designing it, they didn't really care about low end torque.

SVXyGirl · #27 05-26-2008, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twinboosted

Yes, the engine compartment for the Z32(90-96 300ZX) is very cramped ....

I helped my brother replace the engine in his 300ZX not too long ago. And that was a pain in the @$$...but definitely worth it.

He has a 91 Twin turbo, t-top. They are awesome cars..

Crazy_pilot · #28 05-26-2008, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hocrest

I'm not positive about it, but I think that intake was posted about on here before (years ago) with links to the site with more detail. If it's the one I'm thinking of, they did a lot of calculations and testing to come up with that design. There were trumpeted stacks for each runner. Also to note is that it was designed to run at a constant, high RPM. Probably somewhere around 5000 or so. When they were designing it, they didn't really care about low end torque.

They also made the intake to save weight. When you're hanging an engine on the front of a plane, saving weight counts for a lot.

Turbocharging aircraft engines is not meant to increase power, so you won't see claims for anything more than what the engine does N/A. In aviation, turbos are used as the plane climbs, to maintain sea level pressure. A naturally aspirated plane loses engine performance as it climbs, due to the thinning air. The turbos keep the air pressure constant, so the engine maintains performance to a much higher altitude.

Twinboosted · #29 05-26-2008, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crazy_pilot

They also made the intake to save weight. When you're hanging an engine on the front of a plane, saving weight counts for a lot.

Turbocharging aircraft engines is not meant to increase power, so you won't see claims for anything more than what the engine does N/A. In aviation, turbos are used as the plane climbs, to maintain sea level pressure. A naturally aspirated plane loses engine performance as it climbs, due to the thinning air. The turbos keep the air pressure constant, so the engine maintains performance to a much higher altitude.

Very true.

TomsSVX · #30 05-27-2008, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crazy_pilot

They also made the intake to save weight. When you're hanging an engine on the front of a plane, saving weight counts for a lot.

Turbocharging aircraft engines is not meant to increase power, so you won't see claims for anything more than what the engine does N/A. In aviation, turbos are used as the plane climbs, to maintain sea level pressure. A naturally aspirated plane loses engine performance as it climbs, due to the thinning air. The turbos keep the air pressure constant, so the engine maintains performance to a much higher altitude.

And that is why many aviators running the EG33 scrap the turbos and opt for a supercharger, which is much easier to tune and calculate for optimal pressure....

Tom