SVX Network Forums Live Chat! SVX or Subaru Links Old Lockers Photo Post How-To Documents Message Archive SVX Shop Search |
IRC users: |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
If you bought a $7500 supercharger kit, but already had all the supporting mods like an engine that won't explode under boost, a transmission that can handle the power, fuel system that works, etc..... .
You wouldn't have a 14.9 sec car. It would be much much faster. The problem is that the $7500 you are looking at has ALOT of supporting mods included. Its actualy one of my pet peeves how people look at a "all inclusive" setupd and ***** about the cost, then run out and spend 1.5 times as much getting the same stuff, just $300-500 at a time to make thier $2500 turbo/supercharger kit run at all. The TRD supercharger kits are terrible for doing that. Its a supposedly OEM quality kit, and yet has no safe provisions for dealing with timing or fuel in the one I saw. Nothing like running lean and NA timing on a moderately high compression motor with a supercharger slapped on. Oh and if you want to look at some BAD supercharger kits? I know some of the Jacksonricing kits were completely useless. Spend as much money as the Focus SVT crate engine to bring your base 2.0 zetec car upto... stock focus SVT crate engine power. Sounds great!!! where do I sign up. So given that Subaru never made a EG series motor based off of the TURBO EJ line of engines, We don't have a completely bulletproof base to start from, and thus must limit power until the engine can handle the power. That said, once the EG33 gets built, power should be insane. I really don't like the SVX heads compared to what we see today on the STi's and the like, but on the other hand you have 6 ports sharing the flow instead of 4 so, even these old style heads will beat thier 4cyl versions. We don't have enough cam. Its being solved as we speak. Pistons and rods are weak, Easy to get and already figured out. Even better these old SVX's have some advantages. More cylinders to devide the power across, means lower cylinder pressures for a given HP. Not only that but you have more bearings to handle the pressures. Firing pulses are closer together and smoother making for less stress on the driveline and crankshaft. Thier ignition style means that you CAN run a MSD DIS-4 box on them where as the STi's according to MSD need to retrofit some stuff to get it to work. So the potential once ALL the pieces are together is going to be insane. 1000HP skylines do it on alot smaller engine, less stiff bottom end, longer crank, etc. |
#47
|
||||
|
||||
Clearly, you play too much gran turismo. Horsepower is just a number...and is usually represented in such a way that it makes it seem more than it is.
400 PEAK hp...Meaning that only at a certian rpm, for a second of it's rev range..its making THAT horsepower. The rest of the time...meh. Probly making power over stock, but nothing to write home about. (More notably on turbochargers) Also keep in mind the svx isnt a light car, by any means. 3700 pounds might be light compared to a battleship, or a 58 fleetwood...but the fact of the matter is it's alot of weight to push around when you have similar displacement as a jumbo sized bottle of soda...Or an average cup of coffee, as trends seem to be going. Then there's the engine itself. It was engineered and manufactured to produce 230 bhp and 229 ft lbs tourque, making those numbers at (I forget) rpm. Here's where things get technical: Some pople are under the misconcepion that a cold air intake will make 5 or 10 more horsepower...Such may be the case on say...a poorly engineered large displacment V8 out of an older americian car..but nowadays, car manufacturers genrally make their intakes flow more air than the car needs. And the same goes for exhaust systems.... Although simple bolt on accesories may make a few more horsepower...all your doing is making the stronger links of the chain stronger. the engine, at this point, becomes the issue the heads need to be ported, to flow the extra air in and exhaust out. The cams have to be adjusted, to hold the valves open longer. The springs need to be stiffened, to close the valves faster. The pistons need to be reinforced, and anything that moves could do so better if they're lightened. An engine build on sn svx is just...Well, not feasable for the average svx owner. Im sure if you read all the research that LAN, Tom, Old Tom, Mychalo, and other have done, youd realize its no a one man effort. You cant exactly order engine parts from summit, and having peices custom fabricated to specs that YOU have to figure out is not only time consuming, but mony consuming as well. The fact is...The svx engine was never meant to make THAT much horsepower (Though some things would surely point that it CAN) The SVX wasnt even supposed to be that that fast either...otherwise it wouldnt be a luxury car, it wouldnt be built like a panzer, and it would weigh as much as a bag of potato chips. If anyone is going to break into the 12's, itll only be with the engine rebuilt, to better handle the power theese guys are making, or with 1,000 lbs take out of it (Of course, 1,000 lbs means it just isnt an svx anymore...so guess what Tom is doing?)That said, xt6wagon guy is correct...And beat me to this post by 7 minutes
__________________
R.I.P Cool Signature. You're gone but not forgotten. I mean, sure, I kindof don't remember some of the finer details..but I remember you were funny, and at one point you said spaghetti in Dutch....but definantly not forgotten Last edited by It's Just Eric; 06-06-2007 at 12:08 PM. |
#48
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Then there's the engine itself. It was engineered and manufactured to produce 230 bhp and 229 ft lbs tourque, making those numbers at (I forget) rpm. Here's where things get technical: Some pople are under the misconcepion that a cold air intake will make 5 or 10 more horsepower...Such may be the case on say...a poorly engineered large displacment V8 out of an older americian car..but nowadays, car manufacturers genrally make their intakes flow more air than the car needs. And the same goes for exhaust systems.... Quote:
Quote:
Again, not trying to 'crap on the parade', I just don't understand. An increase of 170hp should make more of a difference than 1.5 seconds, especially if it's a manual. Something seems funky here. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
I love how you counter our points by using all factory turbo cars, all with built 6cyl engines from the factory. Oh and all with ECU's designed around the needs of boost. Even more imporantly you ignore the cubic $$ these peopel spend too. Its not a case of you wake up one morning and suddenly you have a 600HP supra.
Like I said, If there was an OEM EG33 built for boost put into any car in the world, we would be very much better off since even if you don't own that exact motor its alot easier to swipe parts from it than to do all the R&D yourself. BTW, I've dragraced a 500+ HP supra and won.... With my bone stock Jaguar with a full tank of gas. Nothing says poor modification plan when you run a 13.4@114 with a 2.0 + 60ft. Reaction time was over a second too given the poor launch capiblity of the Supra. Mind the Jag takes a week and a 1/2 to shift gears and covers the entire MPH trap shifting from 3rd to 4th. 100 less HP and a ford 8.8 solid axle and a GM auto transmission would have that supra running mid/high 12's easy with less engine wear. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Our Situation
Kelvin......a lot of the fun in developing the SVX motor, is that it is a challenge. After building the motor we may find out that it exceeds the capabilities of some of the afore mentioned turbo autos. Or it may show that we are all a bunch of dumbasses for trying it.
I would definitely agree that upgrading an STi or a low milage supra takes a lot less money because you don't need to rebuild the motor. But don't forget, we are working on older cars, that have much less value to start with. So if it works out, it may actually cost a bit less to mod the car. If you get into a project I would suggest a couple of things. Don't have it a as your daily driver, and be prepared to spend a lot of time on it. If you don't have these things, save your money and get an STi.
__________________
Chuck D. 1992 Subaru SVX LS-L - Heavily modded turbo 2002 Subaru Impreza WRX- Turboxs stg3 & Susp. Mods |
#51
|
||||
|
||||
Well all im gonna say "is not too bad Tom" Now you have given me a time to beat. I was equal to your time before but now i must smoke your time.
Be prepared for a challenge in the soon to almost soon...perhaps distant future.
__________________
92 SVX #772 140k 6speed, ECU Tune stage II, Koni/Ground control, 3,270lbs. 91 Legacy Turbo 5spd. FMIC, crappy stock turbo, ACT clutch. 78 BRAT (New toy) (Soon to be EJ22T powered) 90 240 SX. RB25 powered!! DRIFT!!!111!!! (GF's car) To many cars to spend time on teh web! |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Man, all this talk of weight makes me want to go nuts with a few hole saws this summer.
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Note also that both SVX and twin turbo 3K/S started out at about the same price. And how has time treated them? Its hard to find a twin turbo 3K/S for less than 6 grand whereas SVXs have difficulty selling for a grand. The market has spoken as to which is the better car... |
#54
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Former: 1994 Barcelona Red(x2), 1995 Brilliant Red, 1992 Liquid Silver, 1992 Ebony(x2), 1992 Pearl White (x2) Current: 2017 Ford Raptor 2017 Kawasaki KLR 1995 Guards Red Carrera 1995 Spec-ish Miata - track car 1957 CJ-5 |
#55
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." '92 Dark Teal SVX LS-L, >146,000m 3 pedals, 5 speeds., restoration underway. 2012 Honda Insight, slow but cute. Last edited by NikFu S.; 06-06-2007 at 05:25 PM. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
The 3K/S is far more common? Lets look at production numbers for US and Canada combined: 3000GT VR4 - 15539 Stealth TT - 9651 ---------------- Total = 25190 vs SVX = 15199 So about 10k more. Not the huge numbers you are probably thinking though. Although, I don't understand your logic in saying that because its "far more" common, people will pay through the nose for them. I'm not here to attack the car. I'm just pointing out something that seemed to be overlooked. I know some of you are more worldly and don't think that the SVX is the bestest car in the world but others seem to have blinders on... |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I agree Minjin. I mean, with the SVX putting about 280hp TO THE WHEELS, and only turning a 13.9, I think something is running badly. It just doesn't add up. Weight is 3525+ driver, mitsu 3000Gts are around there, make only 300hp, and turn faster times. You're talking ALMOST AS MUCH HP to the wheels as a 3000GT makes at the crank, and it's slower? I don't get it. There's definitely a bottleneck, somewhere.
|
#59
|
||||
|
||||
How hard is it to understand the SVX has not had ANY tuning until very recently? This is new ground being covered. You are comparing two cars because they have similar shapes and weight but fail to realize there is a great deal of engineering differences under the surface.
The cars are not alike. At all. The eg33 was not designed with FI in mind. Why don't we compare the SVX to the NA 3S. Which one is faster? Which one is nicer? Which one lasts longer? Thought so.
__________________
"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." '92 Dark Teal SVX LS-L, >146,000m 3 pedals, 5 speeds., restoration underway. 2012 Honda Insight, slow but cute. Last edited by NikFu S.; 06-06-2007 at 06:15 PM. |
#60
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Hah.......... ha ha ha. The SVX doesnt sell more because of obsurity. The 3K/RT is also known to be a death trap. Subaru but much more money into safety and relieability. The 3k/RT engines are far less reliable, and the drivetains are only slightly more dependible and 10 times as complicated. |
|
|