PDA

View Full Version : OK Motorheads - Let's talk about stock internals limits!!



juno
04-06-2006, 10:15 AM
OK Motorheads!!
There is a lot of talk about what the limit is on our stock motors. Some people claim 450 rwhp or 9-10 psi of boost.
Assuming no detonation the limit appears to be the rods which may stretch at high rpm’s or break at low rpm’s/high load. (Actually, an automatic might eliminate the low rpm/high load problems)
So some food for thought.
It’s been said a million times. It’s all in the tune.
Assuming the tune is safe and the motor in good condition in the following scenarios, let’s talk what-ifs.

If your motor is putting 450 rwhp to the ground safely, what about the difference in an automatic and a standard?. It should be about 5-6%. So an auto car is really making 25 more HP at the motor, but is this still considered safe?

You add UDP’s and an electric water pump which frees up about 20 rwhp. Now your crank and the rods are not seeing any more force, but you just added 20 RWHP.

Now to get to the mythical 450 RWHP mark on a stock motor you have to stuff some air down it’s throat.

Your blower is pushing out 450 RWHP (say 560 crank HP) The belt on the front is consuming another 80 – 100 rwhp. So does that mean the rods are actually seeing 530 + RWHP?

OK, this is where I am headed. A turbo does not load the front of the crank. Say it uses 30-40 rwhp. There is an additional "safe" 50 hp available to go to the wheels. Can you theoretically run 500RWHP safely with the turbo? Can you add another 20 safe RWHP with an electric pump and UDP’s?

Another plus is that the turbo puts a little exhaust pressure on the top of the piston. Will this alleviate some rod stretch? Will it make for a more uniform Rod loading?

The final scenario. Running a turbo with a 3000 stall and limiting the rpm’s to 6200. Will that allow a safe 500 hp tune by eliminating the belt load on the front of the crank, limiting stretch at high RPM’s, and limiting loading at low rpm’s?

Or is the HP limit really the wrong glue we have been sniffing? Is it really torque that is the problem? Is it work over time or just that big peak torque number that does the damage?

What’s the C of C? (Consensus of the Collective)

Zack
04-06-2006, 11:33 AM
Any power level is safe, until it blows up.

Mike Poore
04-06-2006, 12:26 PM
Any power level is safe, until it blows up.

Once again Zack gets right to the point.

It's the difference between theory and reality. Let me explain it this way. The kid asks his dad the difference between the two. Dad tells him to go into the kitchen and ask his sister and mom if they'd spend a weekend in Las Vegas with a stranger, for a million bucks. The kid returns and tells his dad they both said yes, they would, for a million dollars. See, the difference now, dad says? In theory we're millionaires, but in reality we're living with a couple of hookers.

The stock design parameters of these engines allows it to be right at the point of destruction, at peak load, plus a percentage above that, to ensure reliability. Sometimes, even then, a part will fail; but for the most part unmodified engines will sustain performance and reliability requirements within those design parameters.
The minute you start eating into that design safety margin, you're looking for the failure limit of the weakest component. It can be rods, pistons, timing chain, water pump; any one of thousands of pieces-parts. We know, for instance that most engines will tolerate a tuner chip (some have not); but that no engine will tolerate 50lbs of boost or enough nitrous to produce 1,000HP. There's going to be a failure distribution curve starting with most all are safe, to the point where all will destruct.
Your question asks where is the point where it's safe to take these engines, and the answer is: the place where you can afford to go, and suffer the loss. You can spend a fortune building an engine, only to have it fly to pieces the first time it's started.
So, once again we return to the reality and theory question. The answer lies with Bobby Burger's long ago statement. Speed costs money. How fast you wanna go? :dunno:

juno
04-06-2006, 12:36 PM
OK, Next!

Anyone want to talk about the motor besides the Zen Masters! :D

GreekGod
04-06-2006, 12:49 PM
{Quote]:

"The answer lies with Bobby Burger's long ago statement. Speed costs money. How fast you wanna go? :dunno:"

Burger? Was he with Hamburger University @ McDonalds?
<!-- / message -->

BruteForce
04-06-2006, 01:29 PM
OK, Next!

Anyone want to talk about the motor besides the Zen Masters! :D

You must BE the engine, grasshopper.:P

duhtroll
04-06-2006, 03:09 PM
Snatch the tuner from my hand.



It's me, Ed Gruberman! I got the pajamas, now when do I get to start wasting bozos?

MarauderTJA
04-06-2006, 03:21 PM
[quote=Mike Poore]no engine will tolerate 50lbs of boost or enough nitrous to produce 1,000HP. quote]

Mike, actually you could run 50 lbs of boost and a 1000 shot with a stock engine, if you drove it under 2000 rpm around town:lol: .

Seriously, there are so many variables and factors involved in this discussion, Zacks answer is the easiest explanation. Where is this millionaire guy?

juno
04-07-2006, 06:19 AM
[quote=Mike Poore]no engine will tolerate 50lbs of boost or enough nitrous to produce 1,000HP. quote]

Mike, actually you could run 50 lbs of boost and a 1000 shot with a stock engine, if you drove it under 2000 rpm around town:lol: .

Seriously, there are so many variables and factors involved in this discussion, Zacks answer is the easiest explanation. Where is this millionaire guy?

Not really. I mentioned very specific parameters and all the responses were very vague. Not really adding anything to the discussion that everyone did not already know.The equivalent of "use the search button" . I have looked all around here and other sites and really have not found anything pertaining to this particular example in this detail.

I am not trying to knock anyone here but I was hoping someone with some specific knowledge could weigh in for the edification of us all.

MarauderTJA
04-07-2006, 02:56 PM
[quote=MarauderTJA]

Not really. I mentioned very specific parameters and all the responses were very vague. Not really adding anything to the discussion that everyone did not already know.The equivalent of "use the search button" . I have looked all around here and other sites and really have not found anything pertaining to this particular example in this detail.

I am not trying to knock anyone here but I was hoping someone with some specific knowledge could weigh in for the edification of us all.

I think the only answers you can realistically receive in this area is from Ford. I would search out detailed information from the Ford Motor Engineering branch specifically on our engine. There must be some data available from Ford on all aspects of the engine with breakage, stress parameters and more in the area you seek. That is where I would begin the research for your answers.