View Single Post
Old 05-29-2009, 02:58 PM   #46
KriTiKaL AspecT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: (under my car) Tyler, TX
Posts: 482
My Ride: 2001 AW 330Ci
Quote:
Originally Posted by aggieE46 View Post
I think you mean the wallet.
Lol. That is a problem I wish I had! As long as its internal pressure and not external.
X
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTUnit View Post
The materials used dont mean anything if the structure cannot support the forces involved. The body on my car is made of steel. I can punch a large size dent in the side of it. If that body were 1/4 thick of the same material I would break my hand. See the difference? The shape/structure also matters.
So we need a thicker block. Your analigy isn't structure but quanity/size. I see what your saying but ally will still be just as soft. Now a larger dia. stud or more of them will help but this isn't a viable solution. The timesert suggestion is probably the best economical and logical solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtunit View Post


Coming out of a turbo the IAT will be closer to 100 degrees.
Aluminum is better for turbocharging because it conducts heat away from the combustion chamber faster. Lower burn temperatures allow you to run more boost or a higher compression ratio.
Cast iron is always better unless your conserving weight in a na motor. That heat is what you want. Heat is what...? Energy... it increases pressure which drives the turbo. There are other routes to lower charge temps without sacrificing the turbo. But the need for cast iron vs ally from this standpoint is highly competative and application specific IMO.

I just don't see our engines being 500+ hp motors and being reliable at that. As said earlier builders and tuning companys don't see our engines as having enough potiential and this makes non-m somewhat of an afterthought. But there are those of us who would like a 400hp setup which I fell is good as it needs to be for anyone who still plans to dd their car and if its from a turbo then the added torque will be a nice plus in our engines. But as I pointed out the kits are just too expensive for what you get and in comparission to the value of the car in question. I understand the developers put time and effort into producing and need to get paid for what I'm sure is a very well made system. Its just that it don't take rocket science to construct your own. Which is how this will have to be approched. No company in their right mind will ever make a non-m kit that pushes this close to the limit, there are no records to be set that will outweigh the potiential for mechanical failure (ex. HPF M3).

So yea I would like to know what maxes we can obtain but for me achieving these limits is just not logical or useful in my situation. If my car was a race car it would have the best engine for a foundation and we know that would be an s54 so this debate wouldn't even be relivant.
__________________

Headers - KW V2 - Hotchkis Sways - 55w 6000k HID - 35w 6000k HID fogs
EVO 3 SSK mit ein DSSR - EE Tails - Meyle LCA, FCAB, & RTAB w/ Rogue Limiters - M3 Mounts ....

-Paul   BSME           
ASME & SAE Member


Last edited by KriTiKaL AspecT; 05-29-2009 at 03:02 PM.
KriTiKaL AspecT is offline   Reply With Quote