Aggressive Camshafts
June-9th-2003, 11:42 PM
#31
Use this to install stuff
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 1,069
[QUOTE]Originally posted by zeus
[B]
This is all true, but what Jesse meant I think was related to FS/FP engines. Simply boring the cylinder walls to bring the engine closer to square will not yeild much of a result becuase of the head and smaller valves in the first place. Stock oversquare engines as you said tend to breathe much better and deliver more higher end power in general, but they also have heads designed for that purpose.
FWIW the FS-DE is not ridiculously undersquare. The ZE has the same cylinder dimensions, meaning it is still undersquare, yet produces "oversquare" like numbers (170hp/132lb/ft). I would guess that the FS-DE's breathing problems are more related to the cams and the ECU, rather than simply being undersquare... Also, the FS is a decent revver when brought to ZE-specs. the engine will easily spin around 7000rpm with the occasional couple hundred rpm above, which is definately not that bad for a fixed timing/lift "undersquare" engine...
[B]
Originally posted by PseudoRealityX
bore vs stroke doesnt mean crap....
Bore to Stroke ratio means a whole lot in engine design. High rpm motors need short strokes to achive those revs, and you won't hardly find a motor running 10k with a larger stroke than bore. It's about piston velocity/acceleration much more so than rod angle. Sure it plays on the piston acceleration too, just not as much as stroke. High rod ratio is really just a side benefit of an over square motor and a weakness of an under square motor. Given equal displacement, a long stroke motor (under square) will produce better low end torque due to the extra crank leverage, but suffer a low top due to the limited revs. A short stroke motor (over square) will suffer from poor low end but will rev out better making more power on the higher revs. This is the root of engine design. The F series was not intended to be a high rever and as such became under square, where rod ratio is almost insignificant.
bore vs stroke doesnt mean crap....
Bore to Stroke ratio means a whole lot in engine design. High rpm motors need short strokes to achive those revs, and you won't hardly find a motor running 10k with a larger stroke than bore. It's about piston velocity/acceleration much more so than rod angle. Sure it plays on the piston acceleration too, just not as much as stroke. High rod ratio is really just a side benefit of an over square motor and a weakness of an under square motor. Given equal displacement, a long stroke motor (under square) will produce better low end torque due to the extra crank leverage, but suffer a low top due to the limited revs. A short stroke motor (over square) will suffer from poor low end but will rev out better making more power on the higher revs. This is the root of engine design. The F series was not intended to be a high rever and as such became under square, where rod ratio is almost insignificant.
FWIW the FS-DE is not ridiculously undersquare. The ZE has the same cylinder dimensions, meaning it is still undersquare, yet produces "oversquare" like numbers (170hp/132lb/ft). I would guess that the FS-DE's breathing problems are more related to the cams and the ECU, rather than simply being undersquare... Also, the FS is a decent revver when brought to ZE-specs. the engine will easily spin around 7000rpm with the occasional couple hundred rpm above, which is definately not that bad for a fixed timing/lift "undersquare" engine...
June-12th-2003, 10:26 PM
#34
Use this to install stuff
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 1,069
Originally posted by PseudoRealityX
Hmm, here's an example...
The B18C5, the famous Integra Type R motor has a bore x stroke of:
3.19 X 3.43
The FPDE, which breathes better than the FSDE has a bore x stroke of:
3.31 X 3.27
Ok....so the type R motor, which has a substantially higher powerband is both undersquare, and has a longer stroke than the FP.
FWIW, you don't find ANY motors going to 10,000 rpm other than one-off custom built race motors.
Hmm, here's an example...
The B18C5, the famous Integra Type R motor has a bore x stroke of:
3.19 X 3.43
The FPDE, which breathes better than the FSDE has a bore x stroke of:
3.31 X 3.27
Ok....so the type R motor, which has a substantially higher powerband is both undersquare, and has a longer stroke than the FP.
FWIW, you don't find ANY motors going to 10,000 rpm other than one-off custom built race motors.
June-16th-2003, 12:07 AM
#36
Use this to install stuff
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 1,069
Originally posted by Gregersonsalvag
But the type R motor is balanced and strong enough to handle that. Not to mention they made the piston skirts pretty small to cut out a bit of wieght thus there is a oil consumption issue.
But the type R motor is balanced and strong enough to handle that. Not to mention they made the piston skirts pretty small to cut out a bit of wieght thus there is a oil consumption issue.
This is completely irrelevent...Jesse posted the B18C5 specs to show that bore vs. stroke does not dictate an engine's ability to breathe or rev, to a certain point (in modern 4cylinders, this is not as extreme as the undersquareness of a fire truck's engine or the oversquareness of a F1 V-10)...No one is arguing that engine bottom end balancing or piston design is not related to revving high...It was only showing that a FS-DE's breathing and revving problems are most likely not solely related to it being undersquare...
June-16th-2003, 04:18 PM
#37
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 69
The 1.8 motor has a bore stroke of 3.31 X 3.27 which is'nt all that bad for the person who wants to go n/a.
My guess is it all depends on engine balance and strength of internals. You'd probably get a maxium of 170-180hp out of it before you went beyond street spec. But looking at the dyno specs of it you could have a fat high end powerband with that bore stroke combo. If you upgrade the valvetrain PNP the valves and upgrade/balance the bottom end that 1.8 could hold over 200whp between 5500 and 9k provided you have a good enough intake manifold. I don't think the G5M transmission would take it though since the syncros would fly apart at 7800 rpms. But the G15m might be a slightly different story possibly a swap from a G25MR would help.
I'd say the potential for the 1.8 L motor is actually quite high with a gude head package oversized valves dual springs, titanium retainers, single plain manifold, Engine management system, Large tube headers and a compression ratio of 11.00:1 You'd need a 4 inch intake tube as well.
But the numbers coming out of that motor are very high potential numbers according to the math charts. I'd almost venture to guess slightly higher numbers than the type R motor.
My guess is it all depends on engine balance and strength of internals. You'd probably get a maxium of 170-180hp out of it before you went beyond street spec. But looking at the dyno specs of it you could have a fat high end powerband with that bore stroke combo. If you upgrade the valvetrain PNP the valves and upgrade/balance the bottom end that 1.8 could hold over 200whp between 5500 and 9k provided you have a good enough intake manifold. I don't think the G5M transmission would take it though since the syncros would fly apart at 7800 rpms. But the G15m might be a slightly different story possibly a swap from a G25MR would help.
I'd say the potential for the 1.8 L motor is actually quite high with a gude head package oversized valves dual springs, titanium retainers, single plain manifold, Engine management system, Large tube headers and a compression ratio of 11.00:1 You'd need a 4 inch intake tube as well.
But the numbers coming out of that motor are very high potential numbers according to the math charts. I'd almost venture to guess slightly higher numbers than the type R motor.
June-16th-2003, 04:21 PM
#38
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,111
Originally posted by Gregersonsalvag
The 1.8 motor has a bore stroke of 3.31 X 3.27 which is'nt all that bad for the person who wants to go n/a.
My guess is it all depends on engine balance and strength of internals. You'd probably get a maxium of 170-180hp out of it before you went beyond street spec. But looking at the dyno specs of it you could have a fat high end powerband with that bore stroke combo. If you upgrade the valvetrain PNP the valves and upgrade/balance the bottom end that 1.8 could hold over 200whp between 5500 and 9k provided you have a good enough intake manifold. I don't think the G5M transmission would take it though since the syncros would fly apart at 7800 rpms. But the G15m might be a slightly different story possibly a swap from a G25MR would help.
I'd say the potential for the 1.8 L motor is actually quite high with a gude head package oversized valves dual springs, titanium retainers, single plain manifold, Engine management system, Large tube headers and a compression ratio of 11.00:1 You'd need a 4 inch intake tube as well.
But the numbers coming out of that motor are very high potential numbers according to the math charts. I'd almost venture to guess slightly higher numbers than the type R motor.
The 1.8 motor has a bore stroke of 3.31 X 3.27 which is'nt all that bad for the person who wants to go n/a.
My guess is it all depends on engine balance and strength of internals. You'd probably get a maxium of 170-180hp out of it before you went beyond street spec. But looking at the dyno specs of it you could have a fat high end powerband with that bore stroke combo. If you upgrade the valvetrain PNP the valves and upgrade/balance the bottom end that 1.8 could hold over 200whp between 5500 and 9k provided you have a good enough intake manifold. I don't think the G5M transmission would take it though since the syncros would fly apart at 7800 rpms. But the G15m might be a slightly different story possibly a swap from a G25MR would help.
I'd say the potential for the 1.8 L motor is actually quite high with a gude head package oversized valves dual springs, titanium retainers, single plain manifold, Engine management system, Large tube headers and a compression ratio of 11.00:1 You'd need a 4 inch intake tube as well.
But the numbers coming out of that motor are very high potential numbers according to the math charts. I'd almost venture to guess slightly higher numbers than the type R motor.
June-16th-2003, 04:54 PM
#39
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 69
It looks like you could get your 1.8L up to a 130whp on doing just cams and building up the flow abilities on the intake manifold and doing smal tube headers with mufflers.
So basically with I/H/E set of cams and a chip the 1.8 motor would get you 130-140whp
So basically with I/H/E set of cams and a chip the 1.8 motor would get you 130-140whp
June-16th-2003, 08:44 PM
#40
Use this to install stuff
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 1,069
Gregers...sorry it seems like I am disagreeing with you a bunch on this thread, but if a "chip" was an 8 year old girl, any third gen Protege would be a convicted child molester...check the FAQ...
June-16th-2003, 09:57 PM
#41
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 69
Well damn you guys just don't have it easy. But I'm saying the potential is there for the 1.8 if a lot of custom work was done you could pull a lot of power out of it.
I guess I should feel lucky I have a ford that has a much broader aftermarket. I'm suprised no one has jumped on the chance to build stuff for the protege seriously I would talk to Gude because thier stuff on the 1.8L motor has some very good potential especially if you can get it into higher revs.
Consider using a group buy method to make more performance parts for your cars. Its worked for us escort owners for years. Thus the reason we have a lot of body kits and performance parts availible. But we also kinda steal a bit from the focus glory parts.
The only thing I could think of is look at the new mazda 6i motors they are 2.3L and they use the G5M transmission so they might make a good swap provided you can get bellhousing to fit. ALthough again you may have the same problems because the 2.3L uses a large bore x stroke of 3.44x3.7 .
I tried to give you guys some numbers to play with. So far the only engine that seems to be worth any wieght on the aftermarket is the 1.8 due to its potential.
I guess I should feel lucky I have a ford that has a much broader aftermarket. I'm suprised no one has jumped on the chance to build stuff for the protege seriously I would talk to Gude because thier stuff on the 1.8L motor has some very good potential especially if you can get it into higher revs.
Consider using a group buy method to make more performance parts for your cars. Its worked for us escort owners for years. Thus the reason we have a lot of body kits and performance parts availible. But we also kinda steal a bit from the focus glory parts.
The only thing I could think of is look at the new mazda 6i motors they are 2.3L and they use the G5M transmission so they might make a good swap provided you can get bellhousing to fit. ALthough again you may have the same problems because the 2.3L uses a large bore x stroke of 3.44x3.7 .
I tried to give you guys some numbers to play with. So far the only engine that seems to be worth any wieght on the aftermarket is the 1.8 due to its potential.
June-16th-2003, 10:22 PM
#42
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,111
Originally posted by Gregersonsalvag
Well damn you guys just don't have it easy. But I'm saying the potential is there for the 1.8 if a lot of custom work was done you could pull a lot of power out of it.
Well damn you guys just don't have it easy. But I'm saying the potential is there for the 1.8 if a lot of custom work was done you could pull a lot of power out of it.
June-17th-2003, 01:21 AM
#43
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 69
Well as far as the bore stroke it seems to have more potential as a starting motor. I don't research the protege engine as much. I just remember a time when the same block would be used across 5-10 years and several different models thus you could swap a lot of stuff between them.
Its more along the lines of being a great n/a motor but its limited production is what kills its potential for a profitable aftermarket.
I know Gude will do some custom stuff for you since they do a lot of small market type things. Check with them and see what they can do for you. You might have to send them your stuff first.
Its more along the lines of being a great n/a motor but its limited production is what kills its potential for a profitable aftermarket.
I know Gude will do some custom stuff for you since they do a lot of small market type things. Check with them and see what they can do for you. You might have to send them your stuff first.
June-17th-2003, 07:01 PM
#44
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 69
They've pulled higher numbers out of zetecs than just about everyone else but esslinger.
Also the syncros will fly apart with the G5M transmissions at around 7800 rpms the G15m is very close brother to the G5 so I'd assume its close. This has been tested with extensive tranny breaks on a friend of mine who had his rev limiter set to 8500 rpms with a gude head package. Remember the zx2 uses a Mazda transmission.
It will go out to 8500 rpms about half a dozen times sometimes a little more but it will fly apart the syncros up there. The point we found that the stock brass syncros did'nt fly apart was if we kept under 7800 rpms.
The gears are good as they are steel. The differential is the weakpoint due to its weak metals thus differential replacements are not far off. Using something along the lines of a quafie or something else to help people boost it over 200whp to the wheels.
If the syncros could be replaced with something better than brass we would have less problems with them literally flying apart. The only problem after that is if you use steel syncros you will have heat issues inside the transmission so you need to add a transmission cooler to help bleed the heat.
Also the syncros will fly apart with the G5M transmissions at around 7800 rpms the G15m is very close brother to the G5 so I'd assume its close. This has been tested with extensive tranny breaks on a friend of mine who had his rev limiter set to 8500 rpms with a gude head package. Remember the zx2 uses a Mazda transmission.
It will go out to 8500 rpms about half a dozen times sometimes a little more but it will fly apart the syncros up there. The point we found that the stock brass syncros did'nt fly apart was if we kept under 7800 rpms.
The gears are good as they are steel. The differential is the weakpoint due to its weak metals thus differential replacements are not far off. Using something along the lines of a quafie or something else to help people boost it over 200whp to the wheels.
If the syncros could be replaced with something better than brass we would have less problems with them literally flying apart. The only problem after that is if you use steel syncros you will have heat issues inside the transmission so you need to add a transmission cooler to help bleed the heat.
June-17th-2003, 07:46 PM
#45
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Central Maryland
Posts: 152
Greg,
You are talking about the BP motor found in the escort gt, protege 1st gen, 323 gtx, gtr, 2nd gen had them too. Also Kia Sephia had them as well. The miata is a RWD verson of the BP Motor. I had an all motor escort that did 11.5 @ 110 MPH. 235 WHP. No tranny problems at all. That was a g series transmission too.
You are talking about the BP motor found in the escort gt, protege 1st gen, 323 gtx, gtr, 2nd gen had them too. Also Kia Sephia had them as well. The miata is a RWD verson of the BP Motor. I had an all motor escort that did 11.5 @ 110 MPH. 235 WHP. No tranny problems at all. That was a g series transmission too.