Tuning the EG33 While Keeping it N/A- Part II

[SilverSpear]

Originally Posted by elvis

Don't you think Subaru did the math and made the cutouts as deep as they could be without messing up the airflow in the chamber?

Why do folks always think that they are better engineers than the engine's designers? Yes the EG33 is basically version 1.0, but Subaru has lots of experience building engines, especially flat ones.

The SVX was supposed to be a giant step forward for Fuji - akin to Lexus for Toyota and Infinity for Nissan. What would be the motivation to introduce a new flagship motor putting out less power than it could? Sure their are design compromises all the time, but I just don't see it.

I am sure there are ways to gain a little power here and there, but without increasing the displacement or compression, I think this is a fools errand.

Besides, this is distracting us from noodling a good Turbo setup

R u saying that a Turbo setup is better than N/A? well at least the N/A is the lighter version in tuning the EG33. Look at the 3000GT mitsubishi, how many times have you heard that these cars were successful concerning their turbos? and this is car developed by the mother company itself !!

Do you think any turbo setup for the SVX will be 100% successful unless R&D'ed professionally by someone and taking into consideration everything starting with the cams duration, high quality internals, lower compression, and proper ECU tuneup?

Well you are mistaken! At least i am trying to achieve here something really correct... and BTW stop contradicting yourself...you said that:"Don't you think Subaru did the math ....." and later: "Besides, this is distracting us from noodling a good Turbo setup ...." Man!! you're funny

[SilverSpear]

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

Actually... if you want to get technical, 1 horsepower is the power it takes to raise 550 lbs up 1 foot, in 1 second. calculate THAT

By the way, i'm giving up on this thread... i've written at least 4 responses that for one reason or another have been lost... (mostly due to IE and our crappy network at work) all of them have been long and detailed with the basic message of... DON"T WORRY ABOUT INTERFERENCE!!!!!

if mess with the piston design to much, you will end up with hot spots on the piston face, and more easily cause detonation. basically what someone needs to do, is be able to measure clearances between the piston and valve at the maximum lift now, and the maximum lift allowed by the springs. also, how adding a larger valve would effect this

and for the 3rd time i'm typing this, Harvey... have you ever said anything about not having enough room for larger valves in the head... i remember reading something, however i can't remember.

I also had issues in replies... but i am trying to keep this thread alive...

As for the thing you mentioned about piston design and the effect of hot spots... well I don't think we have a problem here, I have never heard about changing the piston head design would cause any problems whatsoever...

If you check what aftermarket pistons are available, some have concave design, other convex designs... plus i will be installing forged pistons, so i don't think i have a problem here. I am just playing on the safe side just in case if, and only if something got really scr***d up inside my engine, i won't have to rebuilt the heads again... you know

Well at first we need to check the clearance between valves/pistons, and then we see what we can do

[elvis]

Originally Posted by SilverSpear

R u saying that a Turbo setup is better than N/A? well at least the N/A is the lighter version in tuning the EG33. Look at the 3000GT mitsubishi, how many times have you heard that these cars were successful concerning their turbos? and this is car developed by the mother company itself !!

Do you think any turbo setup for the SVX will be 100% successful unless R&D'ed professionally by someone and taking into consideration everything starting with the cams duration, high quality internals, lower compression, and proper ECU tuneup?

Well you are mistaken! At least i am trying to achieve here something really correct... and BTW stop contradicting yourself...you said that:"Don't you think Subaru did the math ....." and later: "Besides, this is distracting us from noodling a good Turbo setup ...." Man!! you're funny

I am merely stating that I believe that there is more to be gained (for our time and money) by going with a Turbo than by re-engineering the whole engine. Planes, trains, and automobiles have been using forced induction essentially since the invention of the internal combustion engine. If the Mitubishi-Chrysler POS does not work well, that's not Subaru's issue. What's the "Mother Company"?

Each part of the engine has been designed to work with every other piece. What it appears you are looking to do is to make things as large (or small) as they can physically be without bumping into something else. That sounds like a path to disaster to me.

I don't see the contradicion in my statements. Please explain.

[SilverSpear]

Elvis, i meant to say that if Mitsubishi Japan was not successful with the turbo setup of the 3000GT do you think that you can realize that easily with the non-turbo or you can say never turboed EG33 (FROM SUBARU JAPAN i MEAN)? i know some guys did it and successfully but under limited constraints to the stock engine. A proper turbo setup needs other setups to the internals and especially lowering the compression and changing the cams config.

And what do you think the lifetime expectancy of the stock EG33 gone "wild"? (I mean boosted) And we are also talking about a used engine!!

And the only disaster i will be facing is that if the cams configuration i am going to attempt have a lower output than expected!! Other than that, it is realistic and easy to achieve!

As for the contradiction thing, re read the beginning of your statement and the end of it, you will know what i mean...

[TomsSVX]

lets not turn this into a pissing contest and focus on what we can actually do for an N/A build up. If you do not want to use race fuel adn you don't want to use a stand-alone engine management your best bet would bet you simply uprgade cams.

Good #'s have been tossed around for cam specs, but they are all speculation and estimates... Lets chill on the subject for a little while and see what we come up with when the product is tried and tested

Tom

[SilverSpear]

Speaking about a stand alone... what options do I have at a reasonable price?? I am gonna go with the Z32 MAF and either LAN's 2V4 or the SAFC-2 (recommended by Deruvian).
Any other "reasonable" Stand alones anybody can recommend?

[TomsSVX]

there are plenty of standalone brands to choose from. The only thing keeping me from getting one w/ the tt is that the tunning ivolved takes MANY hours and it comes at a price tag that most people would not be willing to pay

Tom

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

Actually... if you want to get technical, 1 horsepower is the power it takes to raise 550 lbs up 1 foot, in 1 second. calculate THAT

By the way, i'm giving up on this thread... i've written at least 4 responses that for one reason or another have been lost... (mostly due to IE and our crappy network at work) all of them have been long and detailed with the basic message of... DON"T WORRY ABOUT INTERFERENCE!!!!!

if mess with the piston design to much, you will end up with hot spots on the piston face, and more easily cause detonation. basically what someone needs to do, is be able to measure clearances between the piston and valve at the maximum lift now, and the maximum lift allowed by the springs. also, how adding a larger valve would effect this

and for the 3rd time i'm typing this, Harvey... have you ever said anything about not having enough room for larger valves in the head... i remember reading something, however i can't remember.

Ok, I'll do those calculations for you.

550 ft/lbs per second * 60 seconds in one minute = 33,000 ft/lbs per minute.

Put a 1 lb weight 1 ft away from the crank on your engine, and you've got a rotating diameter of 6.2832 ft.

33,000 ft/lbs per minute / 6.2832 ft = that magical number 5252.

This also explains why horsepower and torque always "cross" each other at 5252 rpm (on a dynograph).

And by the way, I highly agree with you on the issue of interference. It's for amatuers. Honestly, just change the belt when you're supposed to and there won't be an issue. You'll get way more power from a much higher lift.

I'm going to take Harvey's stance on it though. What Danny wants to do isn't necessarily what Harv or I would do, but it's Danny's "bucket of fish."

[SilverSpear]

Originally Posted by TomsSVX

there are plenty of standalone brands to choose from. The only thing keeping me from getting one w/ the tt is that the tunning ivolved takes MANY hours and it comes at a price tag that most people would not be willing to pay

Tom

I am more worried about the standalone price and not tuning. I can get tuning for a fixed price over here and it is mostly not above $200. But what standalone can give me the best "bang per buck" and of course at a reasonable price... and which one fits my 94 OBD-I ?

Originally Posted by SilverSpear

Speaking about a stand alone... what options do I have at a reasonable price?? I am gonna go with the Z32 MAF and either LAN's 2V4 or the SAFC-2 (recommended by Deruvian).
Any other "reasonable" Stand alones anybody can recommend?

Yes, I recommended the Apexi SAFC for your project due to its simplicity and cost. It compares MAF readings to engine RPM, and lets you modify the MAF signal throughout the RPM range. The latest version also supports knock sensors.

I would guess that it would be compatible with the SVX, since it supports all sorts of line signals. However you should get in touch with Apexi, or a distributor that knows what they're doing, regarding its compatibility with the EG33.

[SilverSpear]

Originally Posted by deruvian

And by the way, I highly agree with you on the issue of interference. It's for amatuers. Honestly, just change the belt when you're supposed to and there won't be an issue. You'll get way more power from a much higher lift.

I'm going to take Harvey's stance on it though. What Danny wants to do isn't necessarily what Harv or I would do, but it's Danny's "bucket of fish."

The reason that i don't want to go interfierence Garrett was that i remember someone on the forum was posting the benefit if we increase the compression to 12:1 in the EG33, the gains if i still remember were around +7 horses... so the EG33 developed 237HP's... which isn't good enough for someone to feel the "kick" out of it... so why risking all this rebuilt and all those $$$ I will be paying for a louzy 7 horses?? anyway i still have time for my project, i guess a lot of ideas and improvements will be mentioned and developed. My aim is 300HP N/A EG33 if possible!

[SilverSpear]

Originally Posted by deruvian

However you should get in touch with Apexi, or a distributor that knows what they're doing, regarding its compatibility with the EG33.

I already did like 2 years ago, but they seemed to me that all they care was to sell me a standalone without replying my question of "does it work on my car ???" . I still got their replied saved, they number around 15

One was honest to me (Matt Elletson <matte@jrponline.com>) and he told me:

"Danny, since your car is not really supported in the US market, our options for managment aren't that numerous. My personal recommendation would be a Greddy E-manage.
You can also use the Profec E-01 to help tune the E-manage.
And if you are not looking to get that deep into tuning, you could use a A'pexi S-AFC."

That was the most honest reply I got!!

Anyway Garrett, i will contact Apexi as you advised... will post their reply later. thanks.

[oab_au]

Originally Posted by SilverSpear

Harvey, the picture is in my locker, just go into my locker and you will see it, last picture on the main...

Danny,I see the pic now(different comp). The sections that you have marked in blue, can't be built up, as that flat area comes up, within .030" of the cylinder head, to form the squish area.
The section you can build up is the flat area, between the 4 valves, that fits up into the head, the raised bit.

Harvey.

[oab_au]

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

Actually... if you want to get technical, 1 horsepower is the power it takes to raise 550 lbs up 1 foot, in 1 second. calculate THAT

By the way, i'm giving up on this thread... i've written at least 4 responses that for one reason or another have been lost... (mostly due to IE and our crappy network at work) all of them have been long and detailed with the basic message of... DON"T WORRY ABOUT INTERFERENCE!!!!!

if mess with the piston design to much, you will end up with hot spots on the piston face, and more easily cause detonation. basically what someone needs to do, is be able to measure clearances between the piston and valve at the maximum lift now, and the maximum lift allowed by the springs. also, how adding a larger valve would effect this

and for the 3rd time i'm typing this, Harvey... have you ever said anything about not having enough room for larger valves in the head... i remember reading something, however i can't remember.

Sorry if I missed something Greg. The valves are really large enough, for the cylinder size. It would appear that, faced with the desire to keep it noninterferance, they used two large 37mm inlet valves, with the low lift.

Are you having trouble with the Submit Reply button also, it is so frustrating.

Harvey.

Originally Posted by SilverSpear

The reason that i don't want to go interfierence Garrett was that i remember someone on the forum was posting the benefit if we increase the compression to 12:1 in the EG33, the gains if i still remember were around +7 horses... so the EG33 developed 237HP's... which isn't good enough for someone to feel the "kick" out of it... so why risking all this rebuilt and all those $$$ I will be paying for a louzy 7 horses?? anyway i still have time for my project, i guess a lot of ideas and improvements will be mentioned and developed. My aim is 300HP N/A EG33 if possible!

Yes but I'm not referring to making the engine interference via a longer stroke (usually creating higher compression). To increase the compression from 10:1 to 12:1 you'd probably need to fabricate a new crank anyhow...

I'm talking about using a real large lift. Although, if you went past a 0.8 - 1.0mm increase in lift, you'd probably need to ditch the hydraulic lash adjusters and use a shim-style setup. This would be a fair bit of work and a lot of research.