2.5 shor stroke engine, my plans Options

[brant]

I know when Henry Schmidt put my 67S 2.0 together, he bothered to upgrade to the 2.2 rods over the 2.0 rods...
(For a STOCK motor no less)

I certainly don't have the experience or expertise regarding building... but I've heard more than a few times from people that I trust, that upgrading from the 2.0 rods is a very good Idea if you want the motor to last at more than casual rpm.

brant

[TimT]

Ill mention the connecting rods again.. Porsche reinforced the bottom end of the rods when they increased displacement from 2.0 to 2.2L. Your building a high revving 2.5. You said you planned on winding this engine out to 8000rpm, stout connecting rods are a must.

Ive seen a case almost sawn in half by a broken connecting rod, it aint a pretty sight.

2.2E heads are pretty choked .. the port size is 32/32. 2.7 US& ROW heads were 35/35. I had the heads on my 2.2 opened to 38/38

Id rethink the bottom end on the engine you want to build..I think lhe last set of pauters we bought was $1400

your engine build going to cost thousands more.. and if a rod lets go youve lost your total investment

[messix]

rod length brings up alot of issues, longer rod to strock ratio will decrease the side forces that scuff the piston to the cylinder, this does reduce friction. it also incresses the tdc dwell time , this can cause problems of to much combustion pressure make for higher head temps and also detonation prone. Jake chime in her any time.
shorter rod to piston ratio is the anti to these, but also will have a stronger induction pulse due to the faster piston speed and accelerations. also same goes for the exhust. this can make up for a non-ideal intake port [size of port or valve or both] how ever the exhust could be hurt by not having time to flow all the gasses out.

just a big balancing act on a tight rope

that why not everone builds race engines and the good ones have engineering degrees

[Brett W]

The SDS can't be setup to run in sequential injection, doesn't datalog to a laptop, can't interface with a laptop, and ghettos its way through several functions.

For example how can you tune an engine if you can't overlay read outs from a REAL wideband O2 sensor, map, tps, rpm, ect, iat, duty cycle? It would take all day to scan through a little screens worth of data. Where I can layup all of the fuel tables and ignition tables in 2D or 3D graph and quickly compare all data points without scrolling through single numbers. I can analyze trends quickly and make adjustments. Saving my customers money and time.

The SDS has no limp mode, no safety overides, can't effectively control Variable valve control and variable intake manifold operations, can't handle any pulse width modulated signals for devices utilizing such signals, no adaptive capabilities, no system diagnostic feature, etc.

For vehicle owners looking to upgrade to a simple fuel injection system and leave it alone, it may be OK, but I certainly wouldn't push it for any of my customers.

Is Autronic, Motec, Megaquirt, Hondata, AEM, etc the answer for everyone? No but they are better than the Simple Digital Systems. Your right, I have never, nor do I intend to waste my time and money with a system that will not do exactly what I need it to do.

[brant]

I'm not as knowledgeable as I'd like to be.
but what Tim is saying makes A lot of sense.
if your going to have 15K+ into your motor, its at least thinking over!

brant

[Brett W]

Sorry for the thread hi-jack. Tim and Brant are right.. RPM= Ruined People's Motors. If you are going to expect your engine to perform like a race bred engine you will have to take the proper precautions. You don't want to skimp on something as important connecting rods when you have 15K on the line.

[michel richard]

Gentlemen,

The reason for going to 2.0 rods is that ARP does not make rod bolts specifically for the 2.2 rod. I'm not going to the 2.0 rod to save money: I already have 2.2 rods in my current engine.

I spoke to Henry Schmidt. He has a solution that uses 2.2 rods, rod bolts that ARP designed as steel replacement parts for 935 Titanium bolts, along with 928 rod nuts. The problem with that solution is that it's fairly difficult for me to source all those parts at a reasonnable price. Henry agrees that the 2.0 rod solution is a workable one.

On the other hand, the people at EBS say that plenty of 2.5 short stroke engines have been built using 2.0 rods and ARP bolts and that they work fine.

So, for a full race engine, I'm sure that using aftermarket rods is a better solution, but I think that for a hot street / some track engine, the 2.0 rod /ARP bolt solution will work. I'll go with those and let you all know how it works out.

[carr914]

Michel, I'm in awe of the progress you have made with this car. I'm glad for you that you acted quicker than me when you bought it. Your engine specs are very close to what I have in my conversion. I think your goals of 8,000 are optimistic. I know my engine will do it, but the dyno proved that peak hp was in the 6,800 to 7,300 range depending on jetting, fuel octane changes, and exhaust system. While it might sound great (it does, I think I have the sweetest sounding car), I think trying to achieve higher rpms on a consistant basis will not gain anything performance-wise. It will still perform and sound awesome at lower top rpm than what you are shooting for. In the end, go for what you want, as you will be the ultimate judge of your project. I always look forward to your progress.

T.C.

[michel richard]

T.

Thank you for your kind words.

Peak hp around 7,000 with the capacity for 8,000 rpm would be fine with me. My objective is to have an engine that can do 8,000 once in a while, for short periods, even if hp drops a little at that point.

Which rods to you have in your engine ? What do you have for headers ?

Michel

[michel richard]

T,

And what hp figures did you get ?

M

[michel richard]

T,

You mention jetting, which seems to mean that you have carbs, which ones ? And what port sizes ?

M

[d914]

2 liter rods
2.7 heads
ports where larger
specialty crank
46's
european race header
crankfire single plug
compression was about 10:1

190hp at the rear wheels
138 torque

peaked around 6500,ran all the to the 7500 cut off no problem...details would have to be looked up!!

[Mark Henry]

QUOTE (Brett W @ Dec 22 2005, 01:23 AM)

The SDS can't be setup to run in sequential injection, doesn't datalog to a laptop, can't interface with a laptop, and ghettos its way through several functions. For example how can you tune an engine if you can't overlay read outs from a REAL wideband O2 sensor, map, tps, rpm, ect, iat, duty cycle?  It would take all day to scan through a little screens worth of data.  Where I can layup all of the fuel tables and ignition tables in 2D or 3D graph and quickly compare all data points without scrolling through single numbers.  I can analyze trends quickly and make adjustments.  Saving my customers money and time. The SDS has no limp mode, no safety overides, can't effectively control Variable valve control and variable intake manifold operations, can't handle any pulse width modulated signals for devices utilizing such signals, no adaptive capabilities, no system diagnostic feature, etc. For vehicle owners looking to upgrade to a simple fuel injection system and leave it alone, it may be OK, but I certainly wouldn't push it for any of my customers. Is Autronic, Motec, Megaquirt, Hondata, AEM, etc the answer for everyone?  No but they are better than the Simple Digital Systems.  Your right,  I have never, nor do I intend to waste my time and money with a system that will not do exactly what I need it to do.

Almost everything you said falls into the "who cares" department

QUOTE

sequential injection,

Very few cars run sequential injection, very little is gained by this. You forgot it’s also batch fired…again very little to be gained.

QUOTE

Doesn’t data log to a laptop,

This is the one I hear all the time....who cares besides techno geeks.
Sure it might come in handy on a high-end racecar, BUT a streetcar??? Come on. Just run the damn engine!

QUOTE

Doesn’t data log to a laptop

,
again see above.

PLUS your behind the times as SDS got sick of hearing these lame reasons, gave in and you can now download for data logging.

QUOTE

and ghettos its way through several functions

.

That’s a broad paintbrush with no substance...please explain the things it ghettos its way through.

QUOTE

For example how can you tune an engine if you can't overlay read outs from a REAL wideband O2 sensor, map, tps, rpm, ect, iat, duty cycle?

In about 10min with no dyno....I counter-point that how can the average person tune with all this clutter (and dyno time).

The average person is so over whelmed with information overload that they shy away from PEFI systems. Look at Michel here on this thread, I've told him that the SDS will start right up, within minutes I'll have the A/F dialled in (not that I'll have to tweak it much from the pre-loaded base line), BUT still he wants to break it in with carbs.

QUOTE

It would take all day to scan through a little screens worth of data.

Again the systems you use are not user friendly. Fast scrolling did take a day or so to learn all the tricks, but once you get the hang of it it's very easy.

In a race app I could make a major engine change and be dialled in good enough by about the 3rd corner. Can you say that?

QUOTE

Where I can layup all of the fuel tables and ignition tables in 2D or 3D graph and quickly compare all data points without scrolling through single numbers.  I can analyze trends quickly and make adjustments

.

Again more clutter that boggles the end users mind....not to mention as I said SDS now has data logging.

QUOTE

Saving my customers money and time.

I'm sorry but this is the biggest laugh! How do you save them Money! With dyno time? With a system they don't have a clue how to tune?
Please, it makes you money every time they have an issue because they can't figure out (or a just plain too scared to) how to fix it themselves.

QUOTE

The SDS has no limp mode

Doesn't need it. Besides water damage and a couple of the old style coil packs the only failures they've had have been user error.
For me 4yrs (2 engines, sold one) and I've never broke down.

QUOTE

can't effectively control Variable valve control and variable intake manifold operations,

Please again...what engine are we talking about?? I agree that if your running a V-tec or vario-ram this isn't the system for you, BUT in our apps this a TOTALLY USELESS feature.

QUOTE

can't handle any pulse width modulated signals for devices utilizing such signals, no adaptive capabilities,

Many systems can't handle every single system out there...you should always check to see if your components are compatible. As far as Tach's and MDS it's plug and play, no moduails to buy.

QUOTE

no system diagnostic feature, etc.

Almost every time SDS gets a return there's nothing wrong with the system. If there is something wrong it's a fried board because the user swapped the +/-.

I'm not saying SDS is the best system, as I don't think there is a "best" system. The biggest beef I have is the the SDS requires a bunch of in-line fuses that are not included, to me they should already be on the harness. Minor I know, but they just should be on it already.

I'm just pointing out some of your preconceptions are wrong and stating that a system sucks without ever having your hands on the system is just hear-say with no basis in fact.

[TimT]

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/popcorn[1].gif)

[Mark Henry]

TimT

Shut-up...Shut-up, Shut-up, Shut-up!
I'm on a rant! (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/boldblue.gif)

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/wink.gif) (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/laugh.gif)

[TimT]

Im just sitting on the sidelines eating some popcorn (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/happy11.gif)

[Mark Henry]

That's OK...your system is also batch fired...he'll be knocking it next (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/wink.gif)

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/happy11.gif)

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/popcorn[1].gif)

[Trekkor]

Let me drop this little "bomb" (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/cool.gif)

When I had an understanding of "how to" sync my triple Webers, it was less than an hour. Haven't touched the settings since last January.

Sure, jet cleaning, air cleaner washes...

I was just telling somebody a couple of days ago how simple it is. You could turn in all the idles and air corrections on my carbs and I would have it back to where it is now in 15 minutes, I promise you that.

If and when I ever take the car to a dyno, *maybe* there are gains to be made.

Carbs are not evil. Sure they rough start when cold, but I hope none you go romp on your motors when they're cold. (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/wink.gif)

7300 rpm revving 2.0 SIX on carbs...Out.


KT

[TimT]

Actually the Haltech E11v2 can be set up for full sequential injection, and direct fire ignition. We installed this system on a turbocharged Supercup engine we built. The Bosch Motronic brain was removed and the E11 installed. The installation is really sweet. The original harness for the engine was used, and with the exception of the different color ECU the install looks like it cam from the factory.

The E6X is the unit we sell most of, and yes it is batch fire. On the /6 engine we wire pairs of cylinders together so its really semi-sequential, or semi-batch. ie a pair of injectors is firing when a pair of pistons approach TDC.

Batch fire is fine. making the wiring harnesses is easier, etc..

The 935 clone we built is running E6X batch fired/wasted spark/staged injection, that engine has some get up and go (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/w00t.gif)

[Brett W]

QUOTE

Very few cars run sequential injection, very little is gained by this. You forgot it’s also batch fired…again very little to be gained.

Every single production car in existence since the mid 90s uses sequential injection, Why because it is the right way to do it. Plus it is cleaner as far as emissions go. When you are tuning a car in location that demands vehicle inspections you have to be able to run it clean. Yes you can do it with batch fired, sometimes.

QUOTE

This is the one I hear all the time....who cares besides techno geeks. Sure it might come in handy on a high-end racecar, BUT a streetcar??? Come on. Just run the damn engine!

I care. I will not risk a 10K-30K$ motor with an EFI system that I can't control every aspect of its operation. Why do you think the factories work so hard on fine tuning the systems in production cars? Because they can't have the liabilty of a car failing an emmisions test, crapping out on the freeway in the middle of rush hour, or puking an engine. I want the same quality of drivability for a customers car as they would have from the factory. That means fine control of fuel and ignition parameters, air temp and water temp corrects, O2 reference, etc. Yes Simple can do some of this.

QUOTE

That’s a broad paintbrush with no substance...please explain the things it ghettos its way through.

For example, it does not offer different maps for a variable cam timing engine. It does a simple switch with no way to control the parameters of the switch or what happens beyond the switch point. Same goes for the Variable intake setup on the Acura engine, the Porsche engines, or BMW engines. You couldn't control the variable intake setup on an SHO engine or traction control system on a Lexus engine. They assume you will just richen up the Fuel tables for anything beyond where that switch is activated. With one of teh systems I am working with you can control the parameters looked at before the switch comes on and the tables referenced by the ECU after the switchover. I can reference MPH, Engine Temp and TPS to alter these points.

QUOTE

In about 10min with no dyno....I counter-point that how can the average person tune with all this clutter (and dyno time). The average person is so over whelmed with information overload that they shy away from PEFI systems. Look at Michel here on this thread, I've told him that the SDS will start right up, within minutes I'll have the A/F dialled in (not that I'll have to tweak it much from the pre-loaded base line), BUT still he wants to break it in with carbs.

The average person doesn't have the understanding of FI operation to tune an engine anyways. Put the average joe on the engine dyno and then the experienced tuner on dyno and see who comes out better. Then send the two out to tune part throttle and watch who comes back with a smooth driving car. Won't be the average Joe.

QUOTE

Again the systems you use are not user friendly. Fast scrolling did take a day or so to learn all the tricks, but once you get the hang of it it's very easy. In a race app I could make a major engine change and be dialled in good enough by about the 3rd corner. Can you say that?

They are user friendly. Most users have no problems using the system. It is not for the average joe, they shouldn't be tuning an engine anyways. Good enough will get you a mid pack finish. I prefer to show up at the track with a fully dyno tuned engine and make a few subtle changes as the weather and track conditions require.

Carbs are fine, they have worked for many years succesfully. They are easy to install and relatively easy to tune. For Michael's situation he will sacrifice some drivabilty for power up high because of the carbs. I don't relish the days of clogged idle jets and having to change my jetting with season changes.

QUOTE

I'm sorry but this is the biggest laugh! How do you save them Money! With dyno time? With a system they don't have a clue how to tune? Please, it makes you money every time they have an issue because they can't figure out (or a just plain too scared to) how to fix it themselves.

Why should the user have to tune it? If the tuner did the job right to start with there should be no user tuning that needs to be done. How many times do you take your factory stock Chevy or Ford back to the dealership to have them retune the FI system? How many of your customers do you want tweaking that 150hp per litre engine? Why would they need to if you did your job?

QUOTE

Doesn't need it. Besides water damage and a couple of the old style coil packs the only failures they've had have been user error. For me 4yrs (2 engines, sold one) and I've never broke down.

Again I guess it is not important because YOU have never had a system fail. Ask EVO owners how it feels to have their AEM system blink out and leave them walking. Bet they wish they had a limp home mode. Can you tune the SDS to handle to handle an overheating condition? What happens if that GM three bar sensor fails? You are left walking with no option, short of calling AAA.

I tune Honda and Acura Engines, Type Fours, VW fours, Turbo VW fours, Some V8s and other engines. With some of the combinations that comes across my counter, I want the maximum control. I can't tell a guy who just sunk 10K into turbo four cylinder that SDS may or may not keep his engine alive. I know Hondata, Motec, Autronic, etc can. I am pretty sure the Haltech system can handle that stuff as well.

For many guys converting from carbs to FI for their older cars it probably is a good way to go, but I won't recommend it to anyone. Just because you have had decent luck with the system doesn't mean it is the best system for everyone. The best system is the one that gets the job done, safely.


In the past I did the basic research into SDS and when I saw that it did not do what I wanted, then went on. There was no reason to do further research.