Dodge SRT Forum banner

41 - 60 of 94 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,162 Posts
your awesome!!!!:thumbsup:
btw the fastest srt-4's run dcr "or realtune" motors....
dcr has ..... fastest 1/4, top speed, and most hp
look up nach0 or walts 44lb s3 build and lmk what other motor give you those kinds of gains.......?
yea im a douche for going with one of the best names out there for srt's:clap:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,162 Posts
and i really dont think you can compare a f1 car to ANY street car.........
if you really car about revs go get a k20 and a ef or crx fully build it add boost and call it a day!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,872 Posts
your awesome!!!!:thumbsup:
btw the fastest srt-4's run dcr "or realtune" motors....
dcr has ..... fastest 1/4, top speed, and most hp
look up nach0 or walts 44lb s3 build and lmk what other motor give you those kinds of gains.......?
yea im a douche for going with one of the best names out there for srt's:clap:
i've actually seen nacho's car in person, and yes it is a beast. love that car and what he's done with it. and while we are on his car, he built it for road course racing, not all out slaughter, which is why the bigger motor is better for what he is using it for. on road courses, you are constantly shifting and not using a whole hell of a lot of RPMs, therefore you shouldn't put a high revving turbo motor in your car, but more of a hard hitting/fairly large powerband motor to give you the most in the turns as well as on the straights. BUT, he won't be able to rev it out and still be reliable, like what kevin is proposing to do by building this motor if he gets enough interest, because of the increase mass and length of the rods. yes, the way he has everything set up, he is able to get a higher than stock rev, but what kevin would be throwing out would be able to rev much, much higher, be more reliable, and have the main power higher in the rpm range.

what does that mean? better launching capabilities and less likelihood of breaking shit while launching. true you won't be able to launch as hard since the power band will be shifted upwards, but you will have way more than enough RPMs to make up for it and then some.

if you really want to get into a car knowledge battle of stuff that we actually know about cars and not what YOU read on the internet, i will more than gladly kick your ass over and over again.

thx. bye
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,162 Posts
ahhh lucky id love to see nachos car!!!!!!!
8k rpms on my stroker is high enough for me.....
130 in 3rd and 160 in 4th....... my car is built for the hwy
the arp +625 aged rod bolts let me rev to 8900rpms....if need be

so then you agree that no other motor has givin those kinds of gains ?
this is what nacho had to say about his stroker .....http://www.srtforums.com/forums/f169/post-here-if-you-have-2-6l-stroker-574332/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,872 Posts
ahhh lucky id love to see nachos car!!!!!!!
8k rpms on my stroker is high enough for me.....
130 in 3rd and 160 in 4th....... my car is built for the hwy
the arp +625 aged rod bolts let me rev to 8900rpms....if need be

so then you agree that no other motor has givin those kinds of gains ?
this is what nacho had to say about his stroker .....http://www.srtforums.com/forums/f169/post-here-if-you-have-2-6l-stroker-574332/
i did not agree that no other motor has given those gains because noone except for kevin has even touched on the idea of a smaller motor producing the same results achieve through higher rpms. that's the whole point of this thread that you are missing. bigger isn't neccessarily always better. yes there are different applications for each motor so some places, like explained before for road racing on semi short track courses with moderate to hard turns and minimal straights, the bigger lower revving motor would be ideal; whereas in other applications such as longer tracks with lots of straights and mild to moderate turns or places such as the drag strip or the occasional hwy race, a high revving motor that achieves the same goal if not more would be the better choice. even then, if you get the right gear ratios, the higher revving motor still may be the better in both situations.

yes, it may take longer rpm wise for a higher, 10k, revving motor to achieve 600whp than it would a 8k rpm motor, but not necessarilly time wise. that is where it gets fun and you get to play with your gear ratios. how do you think crotch rockets get to the end of their tach so quick? partly from being lightweight, but the other aspect is because of the proper gear ratio. not everything is all about power, but how the power is delivered. it's a two sided coin that most easily forget about because they are so narrow minded and caught up in "look at how much power i can make", but it isn't really usable because they have too much power that they can't effectively use it all or their power comes on so late because they have a giant turbo but only have enough RPMs to use it for more than 2k before they have to shift. with stock gearing, yes a 10k rpm range is pointless because 2nd and 4th gear would be useless and you would have to shift 1,3,5, so if you were to get the motor kevin is suggesting, then you would have to make sure you think about the other side of the coin and make sure your transmission is taken care of as well.

if you really think about it hard, you might actually see why a smaller yet higher revving motor is better than a bigger one given that you agree each is more useful than the other in different situation.

i'll give you a little time to try and figure it out.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,313 Posts
Discussion Starter #47 (Edited)
For me it is the ammount of noise that these motors make high up in the powerbands like this. I took the 2.4l to 10k rpm but to do so i had to get a perfect balance on the crank,rods,flexplate assembly and even then no matter what tq and the ammount of loctite i put on bolts i could not keep things from rattling loose. i would tack weld all the bolts just to keep the convertor or clutch assembly on the motor.

The new motor in the works has already been started and will be one of the best if not the best motor on the market for these cars. I already have the pistons worked out and a set sitting at the shop with custom comp height that doesnt require any mods to the lands or the use of buttons. Then i have sets of custom 4340 billet steel rods that are finished to within +/- .0001” and +/- 1 gram per end. Shot peened for improved fatigue life. Bronze wrist pin bushings. Exclusively using ARP 2000 fasteners. 1.889 rod journal for use of more common race series bearings that will improve life on high hp or nitrous motors

What sets this apart from my original setup i was doing is the new 4340 Billet crankshafts the counterweight placements are designed for improved crankshaft performance. .125" fillet radii. Nitrided for improved bearing life. Straight hole oiling system for better lubrication. Size tolerances held to +/- .0001”.

I dont want to give out the specifics of the measurement but it puts the rod ratio at 1.70!!!


so the setup willl come with
custom Arias pistons in custom comp height any comp ratio
4340 billet h beam rods
4340 billet crankshafts that are designed for the new rod and stroke
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,313 Posts
Discussion Starter #49
ya forged cranks are expensive but it will still be very competitively priced compare to the other motors on the market.. I would rather not release that info untill i have all the kits in my possesion just to cover my butt takes alot of money to get this stuff done I have too much money on parts floating around that should be done soon! Im thinking about calling it the "Destroyer motor" since it is a destroker what do you think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,901 Posts
Sounds badass lol, that's cool I was just curious. Any chance a forged crank will be available in stock design? I wish I would have waited to buy my setup and tried this one out. Will the rotating assembly be a lot lighter over stock?


ya forged cranks are expensive but it will still be very competitively priced compare to the other motors on the market.. I would rather not release that info untill i have all the kits in my possesion just to cover my butt takes alot of money to get this stuff done I have too much money on parts floating around that should be done soon! Im thinking about calling it the "Destroyer motor" since it is a destroker what do you think?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,313 Posts
Discussion Starter #51
possibly in the future i may be offering the 4340 billet cranks in stock stroke and possibly 2.6 stroker cranks if people want them but the demand has to be high. I did this motor first since that is what will be going in my car next.

as for the weight, Rotating mass is not the evil problem some people think it is. Rotating weight is mass that is in motion. Certainly you are accelerating the motion but it is already moving. Reciprocating mass must be stopped and restarted twice every stroke. Think about tying a 5,000 pound weight to a cable and dropping it off a bridge. It takes a lot of energy to stop it. This is what a connecting rod sees in our case 175 times per second. A lightweight rotating assembly will make a little difference but not as much as some think. If your assembly is real light, it will rev very fast when the car is in neutral. When you factor in moving the whole weight of the car, a couple of pounds on the crank does not make much difference. Also, a heavy rotating assembly at high RPM at the starting line is stored energy and will actually launch the car faster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
are you using a nsrt 2.4 block to do this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,901 Posts
Cool, yea I understand about the interest needed since it's costing you money. I just wanted to know how everything weighed compared to stock assembly.


Yea, I'm pretty sure everything is used in our blocks. He uses different crank,rod, and piston setup.



possibly in the future i may be offering the 4340 billet cranks in stock stroke and possibly 2.6 stroker cranks if people want them but the demand has to be high. I did this motor first since that is what will be going in my car next.

as for the weight, Rotating mass is not the evil problem some people think it is. Rotating weight is mass that is in motion. Certainly you are accelerating the motion but it is already moving. Reciprocating mass must be stopped and restarted twice every stroke. Think about tying a 5,000 pound weight to a cable and dropping it off a bridge. It takes a lot of energy to stop it. This is what a connecting rod sees in our case 175 times per second. A lightweight rotating assembly will make a little difference but not as much as some think. If your assembly is real light, it will rev very fast when the car is in neutral. When you factor in moving the whole weight of the car, a couple of pounds on the crank does not make much difference. Also, a heavy rotating assembly at high RPM at the starting line is stored energy and will actually launch the car faster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
sweet! i have the block now i just need a ton of money! lol is this stock bore also?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
gotcha cause the block i have is still stock bore!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,479 Posts
Sounds badass lol, that's cool I was just curious. Any chance a forged crank will be available in stock design? I wish I would have waited to buy my setup and tried this one out. Will the rotating assembly be a lot lighter over stock?
You mean billet right? They are not the same..forged and billet lol..:eeeek::tongue: jk man

possibly in the future i may be offering the 4340 billet cranks in stock stroke and possibly 2.6 stroker cranks if people want them but the demand has to be high. I did this motor first since that is what will be going in my car next.

as for the weight, Rotating mass is not the evil problem some people think it is. Rotating weight is mass that is in motion. Certainly you are accelerating the motion but it is already moving. Reciprocating mass must be stopped and restarted twice every stroke. Think about tying a 5,000 pound weight to a cable and dropping it off a bridge. It takes a lot of energy to stop it. This is what a connecting rod sees in our case 175 times per second. A lightweight rotating assembly will make a little difference but not as much as some think. If your assembly is real light, it will rev very fast when the car is in neutral. When you factor in moving the whole weight of the car, a couple of pounds on the crank does not make much difference. Also, a heavy rotating assembly at high RPM at the starting line is stored energy and will actually launch the car faster.
I tried to say this in the engine section but one guy's opinion had a mass following behind it so I didn't even try. I didn't figure all the physics into it but I figured is if diesels can last so long being as heavy as they are why wouldn't a "properly" built motor? But whatever people and their opinions...

When are you hoping this to be done?
 
41 - 60 of 94 Posts
Top