Nate1647545505

A stock bottom end LS2 being fed via L92 heads through a L76 intake should make 500 and some change at the crank on the some-what cheap.

Regarding the past posts on injector sizing, keep in mind BSFC plays a big role in capability

I thought crackheads/bums were for target practice??? How else am I going to keep my shooting skills sharp?

Check your driving habits, confer google on things like "hypermiling". As gay as it sounds, it works.

It can log UEGO and with the FIC8, an RTD input - but cant use them (yet?).

Jesse, where is the position located?

dad?

One caveat with the FIC that looks to still exisit - There's no density correction. If you were to use it to clamp the MAF voltage/freq and use the internal MAP sensor for additional fueling, there's no temp sensor integrated into the unit, nor a reference in the code. What does that really mean? D = P / R * T, while you may be netting similar pressure readings, a change in air temperature, compressor efficiency, or even intercooler efficiency nets a change in overall air density -- forwarding a change of the engine's mass flow rate -- and finally, fucking up the required fuel mass. A 20 deg change in temp can net roughly a point in air:fuel ratio.

If you haven't already, check out AEM's FIC, http://www.aemelectronics.com/engine-management-9/fuel-ignition-controller-f-ic-12/ While not a perfect solution, it has some pretty powerfull features....

You know what really grinds my gears? paying so damn much for a Vet's plate.

Nice build, are you using the MAFterburner alone for tuuuuning?

While not pretty, it is atleast functional...to some extent. http://www.lesoft.co.uk/files/freeware_software.exe Great for those stuck in 300-400 Mech classes that deal with single cyl deign. Documentation can be found under the Downloads > Freeware section at: http://www.lesoft.co.uk/index1.html

Like others -- chip away at dept; try to keep a 50/50 high risk-low risk plan. Might not hurt to take a wise look at your current asset allocation.

Our passed down ROE is shoot to warn before shooting to kill, I had to ask why the hell would we shoot to warn when we have authorization to shootin the first place?? A+ command.

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/4070/sany0933.jpg It's amazing what you can find on ebay.nigeria.com....to bad they didnt have one from Kettering Phil

I wouldn't say never.

Just doing some thinking from an engineering point of view: The move towards lower displacement (and lower cylinder count) with forced induction is aimed at conserving fuel usage but providing similar power. The general idea being: · There isn't a constant need to operate at 100% throttle and at 100% power · Higher mechanical efficiency from lower loss -- namely in reduced frictional loss (e.g. moving 4 pistons vs. 8 pistons) However, there are some interesting concepts that should be taken into consideration: · All SI engines are subject to pumping loss, namely, the throttle (excluding GDI systems) · As [cylinder] displacement grows, consumption will fundamentally be less, due to a boost in thermal efficiency (surface area : volume ratio) Can we have our cake, and eat it too? Our cake (fuel consumption) favors a reasonably sized >n cylinder engine operating with a large throttle opening and relatively low rpm (2500-3500rpm). Without comparing powertrain [e.g. transmission & gearing] and road loss [e.g. areo], this is possible with your Sti, Evo, GSX, etc… But what compromise do we need to make to eat our cake? Power (digestion of our beloved cake) is a function of many things, but namely cylinder pressure. If one can fill the cylinder with air (oxidizer), provide a fuel (octane), and ignite the mixture at the optimum time without abnormality, one has eateded their cake. Common sense dictates an engine that displaces 2L with 4 cylinders has to at least triple the cylinder pressure as 6L 8 cylinder, thus, there will be a considerable amount of additional force on components in >n cylinder/displacement engine. For argumentative purposes – there is an invisible line of limitation to engine size and output – the size of an engine is still a major factor in power output. We might not be able to fully engulf our cake, but with the help of technology, we can devour a few forks worth….

In an over-generalized-statement, 3,000 RPM just might be where the engine is most efficient provided proper loading (e.g. 6th gear). Most SI Gas engines operate best in the 2500-3500RPM range at high (~70-80%) load -- V8, I4, etc..

Purdue was working on an LPG/Natural Gas concept single cyl with a similar laser ignition setup - they set up a small sapphire window just outside the spark plug port ahead of the lense system. A conversation with one of the post-doc's about window or lens damage/fouling led me to believe they weren't experiancing any.

Ray did you take your meds today?

MEAT LOAFFFFFFFFFFFFF

Your common aftermarket/production turbo, namely the exhaust wheel, is still subject to the quantity of exhaust energy (flux, mass flow, etc). The question becomes, "What compromise(s) can I endure to make XXX H.P.?" A 2.n litre engine can only produce so much exhaust energy, while the most advanced non-electrically aided turbocharger requires so much of said energy to become functional.

A misconception about turbos: They defy physics.

M1A is the civilian term for an M14 (M14 has a full-auto reciever), much like M16:AR15 - you probably know this but I've been caught mixing the two. I sport a Springfield Armory synthetic M1A with just a Douglas Barrell and some goodies. I love the gun, break down is fairly simple. Main difference between the M1A/M14 and AR platform is grease...they don't need oil, just grease. You can buy them in a few variations: match, super match, etc. Most of the factory guns go for 1000-1200$, where match and super match can get up to 3,000$+. If you plan to build, I'd recommend a well known (Fulton, Smith Ent, etc) production reciever.

Back when coat hangers, a cherry bomb, and some JB Weld were all you needed for a performance exhaust....