20G TSi

I'd bet it is noisy hydraulic valve lash adjusters due to too thick of an oil for this cold weather. they can easily get loud enough to sound like piston rock/slap.

fine, I'm neither of them, but I'd guess ~280-290 rwhp

I have seen roots type blowers with a clutch, similar to an A/C compressor.... I'm not sure how wide spread they are yet though.

Newbie question- I looked at Brian's website and saw the Supra. Is this the same one at the top of the list? I am curious as to how he puts that power to the road. Does he race from a "dig"? What ET's does this car run?</font> Yep thats the same guy. Dont think he wants to race from a dig as he'd just spin a circle. Just watch out from a roll with those 136 traps, off the squeeze. not sure if he wants his time posted on here, just look him up on supraforums.com his time and numbers are in his sig.</font>I coulda swore that 136mph was WITH the juice.

woohoo! Fords on top!!

yeah, I dont think so. I think they're reverse rotation, since they pulley is facing the engine.

I'm impressed as well. sounds bad ass.

lol, yeah, that would make the most sense, wouldnt it? I could bend the collectors out of the way, but call me a puss, i'm afraid to muck up a set of $800 headers (1-7/8" & 3.5" collectors for a 351w in a mustang are custom builds) Plus, I take the old mustang apart soo frequently (for upgrades, etc.) that the header bolts never have a chance to seize, so its not too bad. When the 'stang was stock, you COULD swap clutches w/o dropping the exhaust also... but there's only soo much room when you get to changing things almost twice the size as stock Even then, having to work around the exh. would make it more of a pita than just dropping it all together. I still say FWD clutches are easier, but thats my opinion.

you dont have a true dual exhaust and 1-7/8s headers with 3.5" collectors either.... [ 19 November 2002, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: Jasons TSi ]

how the hell do you move the tranny rearward to get the input shaft out of the pilot bearing/clutch plate if you dont unbolt the driveshaft from the rear? I've NEVER seen anyone HAVE to remove an axle in a FWD clutch swap... just take the ball joint, and vehicle/suspension dependant, tie rod end apart, and pop the axle out of the tranny... you can then just move the axle out of the way and remove the tranny... this way you dont have to fool with the rust welded axle nut and the possibility of screwing up the axles threads. [ 19 November 2002, 10:14 AM: Message edited by: Jasons TSi ]

there are some who say fwd clutches are a pita, I'd have to disagree. 1. you dont have to screw with a rust welded exhaust 2. There isnt a driveshaft that is a pita to remove from the rearend. 3. FWD trannys are light and are easy to work with. 4. the FWD driveshafts/axles do not need to be removed, just pulled loose from the tranny. Hell, in the mustang, you even have to unbolt one of the headers to get the bellhousing past the collectors it sux. that said, if I were around the columbus area, I'd help for food and your sister (maybe?). [ 19 November 2002, 08:14 AM: Message edited by: Jasons TSi ]

MAF = Dynamic Fuel Control (fuel maps) - Fuel is added or subtracted on the basis of airflow past the sensor. thus, much more airflow can be added, since the system is dependent on the amount of flow past the sensor, and the fuel maps can be adjusted based on the airflow. SD = Static Fuel Control (fuel maps) - fuel is added or subtracted based on TPS and manifold pressure. the amount of fuel added is directly related to a fuel map stored on the ECU's EPROM (its a bit more complicated than that, since there are a multitude of sensors, and the fuel map is adjusted based on the input from these sensors, but you get the idea). thus, with speed density, if you begin adding airflow, the computer does not know. it just knows that the manifold pressure is X. This is why adding a cam or heads creates a lean condition. If there were an interface between the Speed Density EPROM and a laptop, where the fuel could be added/subtracted based on needs, THAT would be the idea setup. Speed density absolutely DOES have the same flexibility as MAF, it just takes an outside source (laptop/eprom utility) to adjust the fuel maps.

Are they the right heat range plugs? Running too hot a plug will cause knock.....

1. Have you had the overheating problem since the intercooler install? 2. is it possible the head gasket is on up-side-down, possibly blocking coolant passages?

Oh, then why would a machine shop need to know the weight of the pistons and rods? Or have to add or subtract weight from the counter weights on the crank? Maybe that's just their way of getting more money out of us?</font>Re-read... I think I read too far into what he said. I was thinking, as a whole, a mfg does NOT say, "well, we'll make these counterweights 35oz cuz the customer will probably use aluminum rods, and these counter weights 45 for use with IRON rods". Its a given that during the balancing process the crank and usually the flexplate have material added/removed. I guess it was just the way I read it. Regardless, this thread contains some very good info!

I agree, this is a great post. The first was definately answered, and I assumed the second was implied. Any time you put together a rotating assembly and you expect to spin it over 5000, it should ALWAYS be balanced.... NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER assume a crank/rod/piston manufacturer has machined/balanced ANYTHING correctly. I've seen "ready to assemble" 'kits' need severe machining and balancing. Everything should be checked and double checked, IMO. [ 08 November 2002, 05:17 PM: Message edited by: Jasons TSi ]

I would have to totally disagree with you. the counter weights are to counteract the crankshafts rod journal "throw" and has nothing to do with maching rod/piston weight.

The angle (the degree of angle actually) and speed in which the piston is in is what causes the side loading, more so than any other factor. With a big stroke/short rod, the piston speed is greater than with a big stroke/big rod. Because the piston is moving slower, it spends more time at TDC allowing a more complete burn. so, say a motor has a 1.46 rod ratio... at 4000RPM, the piston speed will be the same as in a 1.6 rod ratio motor at 6000rpm. Since the piston speed is slower: 1. the weight of the piston is not as critical 2. the rings do not wear as fast [ 08 November 2002, 08:59 AM: Message edited by: Jasons TSi ]

sure it does, thats why they make aluminum rods... It just becomes less of an issue with the increased torque that cubic inches bring. Especially when you're only talking about a few grams (a good h-beam steel rod should weight roughly the same as an iron I-beam, or just a tad more). I had Bischoff (tony bischoff/gary rohe) balance my stroker, so I dont know exact values going from a stock 351 rod to a 6.25" H-beam... but since you typically use a shorter piston, you'll gain some weight differential back there.

to add, a shorter piston is not necessarily a weaker piston. the biggest drawback to shorter pistons is that sometimes the piston wristpin is into the oil rings. this obviously results in poor oil control.

piston side loading has alot to do with the rod/stroke ratio. a long rod with a mediocre stroke will not cause much side loading. a large stroke with a short rod WILL cause excessive side loading/cylinder wall scaring. As far as power is concerned, the shorter rod will make the more high end power, however, when longevity is a factor the shorter stroke/longer rod will last longer w/o scaring the cyl. walls and compromising cyl. pressure. A good median is 1.61 rod/stroke ratio. My 408w has a 6.25" rod/4" stroke, making a 1.56 rod ratio. A stock 454 chevy has a 1.54 ratio. anything less than 1.48 is considered a race only combo (regardless of what someone is trying to sell you). The combo this guy has is a good one, 3.75" stroke/6" rod = 1.6 rod ratio, which is ideal. [ 07 November 2002, 08:02 PM: Message edited by: Jasons TSi ]

Rod length coresponds to the size (height) of the piston. Shorter piston = longer possible rod length.

I know I'm not elegible for the list, and probably will never be, since I doubt I'll ever drive my 8mpg car up to columbus (may trailer it, but...), here's my dyno sheet. It is FWHP, not RWHP, however.... http://forums.cincinnatistreetracing.com/viewthread.php?action=attachment&tid=3213&pid=28397 Naturally aspirated. I dont have any sheets with it on the 125 shot. Before you point out, I know we leaned it out on that run... we corrected it on the next run with 82/90 jets (but dont have that sheet scanned in). It made two more HP and stayed constant 14.2-15.2 throughout. Check out that torque curve! 500lb/ft from probably 3000rpm to 6000rpm Gotta love Cubic Inches

dont discount the powerdyne blowers. They're not the highest quality, but they're cheap and they work. You should easily see 275-300 (dependant on state of tune) FLYWHEEL HP from an otherwise stock shortblock and the blower. Add good heads, and you'll likely pick up another 75. turn the boost up from 6 to 9 and you'll pick up another 25-30. 400hp bone stock 5.0 short blocks are commonplace.