2.6L EVO - every been done in the usa
Apr 24, 2008, 01:35 PM
#34
Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apr 24, 2008, 01:39 PM
#35
Newbie
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Enfield , CT
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why is it not extreme?
the 4g64 is a bored 4g63 is it not? as you increase the size, you are thinning the walls and making it weaker.....i think thats right. please correct me if i am wrong, but i think im somewhat on the right track.
and both the 4g64 and 2.4+ size engines shouldnt really go past 8k. the pistons are moving too fast and heat up too quickly, so high RPMs are not good on them.
the 4g64 is a bored 4g63 is it not? as you increase the size, you are thinning the walls and making it weaker.....i think thats right. please correct me if i am wrong, but i think im somewhat on the right track.
and both the 4g64 and 2.4+ size engines shouldnt really go past 8k. the pistons are moving too fast and heat up too quickly, so high RPMs are not good on them.
Apr 24, 2008, 01:54 PM
#36
Evolving Member
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: #1 Land
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is definitely an extreme build. I don't see the point of it thought. Most of the high HP Evo are 2.0-2.2L. If you really want something wicke for the road course, you can always get a well built, proven 2.0L engine and have your tranny build with really tall gears.
Apr 25, 2008, 11:42 AM
#38
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
low down torque and response is the key and what we should have in the end product .
I have a 2.16 stroker now to be exact , and rev to 7000rpm with it - dont need anymore because that also has awesome spool up and this one should be even better but just produceing more power with the bigger turbo and displacement
Barrie
I have a 2.16 stroker now to be exact , and rev to 7000rpm with it - dont need anymore because that also has awesome spool up and this one should be even better but just produceing more power with the bigger turbo and displacement
Barrie
Apr 25, 2008, 11:56 AM
#39
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks a nice build , i just cant read it
Apr 25, 2008, 12:08 PM
#41
why is it not extreme?
the 4g64 is a bored 4g63 is it not? as you increase the size, you are thinning the walls and making it weaker.....i think thats right. please correct me if i am wrong, but i think im somewhat on the right track.
and both the 4g64 and 2.4+ size engines shouldnt really go past 8k. the pistons are moving too fast and heat up too quickly, so high RPMs are not good on them.
the 4g64 is a bored 4g63 is it not? as you increase the size, you are thinning the walls and making it weaker.....i think thats right. please correct me if i am wrong, but i think im somewhat on the right track.
and both the 4g64 and 2.4+ size engines shouldnt really go past 8k. the pistons are moving too fast and heat up too quickly, so high RPMs are not good on them.
Your comment about why you cannot rev these motors that fast is due to the change in the dynamics of having a significantly different stroke/rod length combination, and has NOTHING to do with pistons heating up too fast.
Scorke
Apr 25, 2008, 05:34 PM
#45
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Work - New York, Alaska, Mexico or the Caribbean. -Home - Tx Hill Country
Posts: 1,858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's nuts. I've never heard anything like that. Can you post where you read that. Not calling you out, I'm just curious.