Tim
While I'm not suggesting that you won't ultimately get more HP with an intercooler, and of course you're entitled to your opinion, I wouldn't discount a turbo w/o an intercooler until you've driven one. With the exception of adding an intercooler you would be hard pressed to duplicate the performance with any amount of money, and a hot air turbo is very "streetable" with the minimum amount of turbo lag. So, there's no need for a high stall converter for that low-end grunt. It's also much simpler to implement, and a good first step even if you eventually plan on an intercooler. I ran 8 pounds of boost all summer without any problems. No money wasted either because you'll still use everything that you already have. Adding the intercooler is just a matter of re-configuring things. Sounds like that's what Ray did and what I might eventually do, but I don't regret going "hot air" in the mean time. If I had waited to work out the layout of the intercooler I might still be waiting. So, if you have your heart set on an intercooler by all means go for it, but I just want to let everyone know that there is still a lot of fun to be had without one.
Bob D

I agree with that 100%. In fact, in my particular scenario the transition to intercooling was very simple. Take the time to check out the pics without and then with intercooler.... you'll see for yourself that the plumbing nightmare that most dread was quite easy. I flipped the intake runners pre throttle bodies to face the firewall and welded an additional length to go to the intercooler and my pre-intercooler tubing was simply re-attatched to the new location.

I ran this car with no intercooler for the past 6 weeks with no real trouble always keeping in the back of my mind it's limitations. It was fun to drive and a good deal of power was at foot ! With the lack of restriction via intercooler turbo lag was non-existant. It might be good time to mention that with the intercooler you see shown that I have fitted, I can notice absolutely no changes in the turbo operation or any signs of lag at all.

Ray.

I ran my turbo 170 slant, at 10 lbs boost, for 5 yrs with no intercooler.

_________________
Charrlie_S
65 Valiant 100 2dr post 170 turbo
66 Valiant Signet 170 nitrous
64 Valiant Signet
64 Valiant 4dr 170
64 Valiant 4dr 225

rayman, top work, what you have done is pure class!!

thumbs up from me.

you've given me enuf inspiration to put a turbo slant in my s series valiant.
(its got a 273 in it i was going to twin turbo, once i finished off my 700hp sohc ford i6 build)

but i love the inline sixes, and looking them pics..
well imma gonna do it.

thanks man.

cheers.joe.

_________________
six cylinders inline cant be beat!!!

WOW, thanks for the kind words. I am pleased you guys abroad appreciate the work involved in such a transformation. The fact that it has inspired some of you makes me feel good. Thank you.

Ray.

Hi all,

I just did a search on something and found this old thread that I started some time ago... and took the opportunity to post some updates.

Firstly, the car is no longer my wifes ! YIPEE ! ... She was kind enough to forward it to me as my plans for more power did not interest her... I am now importing and building her a Dodge Lancer ( That will have a Hemi 6 with pro-charger fitted ! )

Anyway, more on the Slant. After my last communications here on this website I changed a few things. My First change after the intercooler was a turbocharger mod. I removed the Rx7S5 and fitted an Air Research T04 compressor housing and V-trim compressor wheel. With that fitted, I then invested in a locally produced ( TurboSmart E-boost ) boost controller. That was the best money i ever spent, more boost, less boost creep and consistant boost...it's awesome. With that setup it made a max of 265rwhp @ 17lbs boost. I then wound the boost up a bit now and then over the vourse of the next 6 months... finally running with 22 lbs ( no power figures for this boost though, sorry ) .... all this on Low Comp CAST pistons !

The inevitable happened and I wasn't really suprised or dissapointed, the ringland on number 6 said "enough" .... the rest is history ! I had soooooo much fun with this setup, it was stupid how much fun for so little money really in the scheme of things. It also won me some accolades in the local Burnout comps ... ( I am a burnout junkie...big-time! )

The car has been off the road for 3 months now, while I created my new monster.... Stage one of this creation has passed, stage two is almost complete.

Stage One : Below are some pics of the first setup, it differs really from what i intend to use ( atleast on the outside ).... I had this crazy thought that I would try and run a long-rod, big-bore boosted Slant.... I chose a 90.5mm VW Flat four forging to work with... after the bore it was sonic tested and came up pretty clean. I had two primary concerns on this setup but in the name of R&D I powered on. My concerns were as follows :

1) I planned to run 198 rods, and although I know they are a tough forging, their 7.0 length worried me a little for my intended purchases

2) Even though the bore came up clean, I was worried about bore-flex under boost. If this was a normally aspirated engine I would not have been as concerned.

Anyway, the engine lasted two days.... it was amazing to drive though. This was my first long-rod Slant build and to say that the free-revving ability was obvious is an understatement... it was absolutely gorgeous. It was in the middle of a chassis dyno tune when number 6 split wide open. It was in the middle of a power run and made 290rwhp at 12lbs boost and 1/4 throttle !

More info on the specs of that engine and pics can be found here http://www.moparmarketforum.com/phpBB/v ... sc&start=0

Stage 2 : Now that is in the past, I have learned that I should listen to my inner self. I have started fresh with another block. New bottom end is as follows:

Wiseco Forged Pistons - Dodge 2.4 pistons ( 3.445 bore )
Custom CNC Billet conrods - 7.120'
Block O-ringed - Copper Head gasket and receiver grooved cylinder head.
Shot peened crank
PP&R Slant 6 gear-drive - ( Yeah, you heard me right.... I will have our first production geardrive on my engine ...woohoo )
Custom grind camshaft.

Pics of the rods/pistons can be found here :
http://www.moparmarketforum.com/phpBB/d ... php?id=423

http://www.moparmarketforum.com/phpBB/d ... php?id=427

Thanks for your time here and appreciate any interest in what we are doing down here in Oz.

--Ray--

Damn! I cant se ethe pictures.

Great setup Rayman

_________________
Juan Ignacio Caino

Please use e-mail button istead of PM'ing. I do log in sometimes but I'll be answering quicker thru e-mail.

Hi Ray,

What failed? Was it the rod, piston, or something else? Just curious, as I have some 198 rods of my own, and am planning a turbo project.

Thanks,
Greg

The above images should work fine now

Hi, perhaps I should have explained that in more detail, sorry. No, the rods were fine.... in fact they were a treat. I replaced them out of caution as their length will obviously make them a weak link in this combo. My problem was self inflicted carrying a 160 thou overbore and boost do not mix.... was getting greedy. But it was fun while it lasted ! I had a bore split on the Dyno.... like I said I had two concerns about that setup ...bore flex and rod length ...both are now addressed. More info soon. The rods may have been ok, I know they are a tough forging but I plan to run up to 25 lb boost in this engine and for me to ask those long legs to stay in bed was messing with my head. I still have the rods for another build some day, they would make an awesome long-rod,big-bore normally aspirated combo one day.
Ray

I would like to ask why you think rod length would be a big issue in strength?

Not looking to start anything since I read your endeavor with very much interest, but you have stated multiple times you thought the rods might be a weak link, and my understanding is long rods reduce stress significantly, especially on the cylinder walls and pistons.

Most boosted application failures, especially of pistons, head gaskets, and/or bores are do to detonation, since cylinder pressure for a given HP is cylinder pressure, independent of natural aspirated or not...

Rod failures are most common on deceleration from high rpm, since most rods have compression strength by design to handle almost any reasonable HP, it is the big end that distorts when the cylinder pressure compressing the rod turns to a vacuum on top of the piston pulling the rod apart at extreme speed that creates sudden rod failure. This is not related to rod bearing failure which is a different story, and will cause the rod to break or distort from abnormal stress do to friction issues.

Anyway, just want to learn something if I can, so I don't waste money on 198" rods I have been searching for, or clear up mis-understanding if there is one so as not to create hysteria about long rods in the slant community.

Already, I keep reading in posts of someone saying 198" rods are not strong, but I have no evidence from these posts to back up this claim. They don't appear to be of different manufacture or material, so only length is of concern. In the V8 circles I usually travel, long rods are sought after commodities for stress reduction on long stroke engines to reduce the severity of the rod angle to cylinder wall interface.

Gearhead

_________________
64 GTO...10.80's@122 on street radials
Destroked 455, Qjet, stock ign, 2400 stall

64 Valiant
Old 225, 4spd, 2.92-8.75, 2bbl, headers
dual 2.25"

Thanks for your response. You're absolutely right, everything you said is just and true. But NOTHING that you said gave me any piece of mind that this is a failsafe combination. It is this very forum that gave me the "complex" that my newly acquired standard 198 rods may indeed not be up to the task... one particular post comes to mind referring to it not being uncommon for 198 rods to bend in performance applications ( Sorry I cannot recall the exact thread in question )

Ultimately, I have more piece of mind now knowing that I have prepared appropriately to accomodate the power I forecast this engine should make. Yes, the increase rod ratio relieves the rod of much stress in this long-stroke engine but it wasn't built to resist a 400rwhp build either...not in anyones language. I trust my reply is suitable and in no way am I saying that standard 198 rods are un-reliable or inadequate, jeez .... your US Slant 6 racing fraternity tells me otherwise anyway. Let me put it this way... I certainly feel better now that I have spent the dollars on a rod purpose built for this setup ....and at the end of the day, I'll sleep better for it. Money well spent I say !

--Ray--

Hi Ray:

Thanks for the reply...certainly, running better rods is never a bad thing!!!

I installed H-beam 6.7" rods in my last Pontiac engine not because I make over 450rwhp, although I do...but because I wanted to be able to twist the 4.13 stroke to 6500 or more with peace of mind. So I completely understand.

I also spent the money on a roller cam the same size and plot as my flat tappet cam, not because I wanted a roller or because I think something is wrong with flat tappet cams...but because I had just experienced 13 lobe failures in 5 minutes on break-in...and there was no way I was going thru that stress again until I put some time between me and that experience!

Many people are constantly saying that cast pontiac rods are junk...yet I have never failed one after twenty years of racing and driving hard always in the twelves or better.

No...good engine prep, appropriate parts, great tune-up, and good driving habits...make the biggest difference of all. I know many people who can't keep an engine together...yet they spend lots of money. But I wouldn't let them touch the gas peddle in my car.

So I think 198" rods are just fine for 6000 rpm and under with light pistons and pins, good tune up, and don't deccel from extreme rpm. And probably for more rpm in a drag situation where you press the clutch or go nuetral after the finish.

Thanks

Gearhead

_________________
64 GTO...10.80's@122 on street radials
Destroked 455, Qjet, stock ign, 2400 stall

64 Valiant
Old 225, 4spd, 2.92-8.75, 2bbl, headers
dual 2.25"

So if rapid deceleration is a no-no in a long rod engine...this would lead to a tossed rod in a road racing engine? How about auto-X? An aquaintence of mine threw a rod in his Slant during a road race event, he said it was due to an inherent oiling problem that Slanty's have at high sustained RPM. He has since switched to a V-8.

_________________
Rob

'62 Plymouth Savoy Wagon
'64 Chrysler 300
'47 Farmall H
Merlins are cool
Radials rule
Jets drool

It is not a long rod problem, it is a problem inherent with the design of any connecting rod. The stress on the big end of the rod(the part held together by two bolts) is always going to be the weak link. It is a little worse for longer rods do to weight considerations only, thereafter it is with the design of the particular rod and its application.

This is why it is important to reduce weight in high rpm applications...such as custom pistons, light weight ring packages, and light wrist pins...because the stress on the rod goes up as a cube function of rpm.

If the rod problems were due to oiling issues common to slant six, then it would be obvious in the bearings. If the rod failed due to rpm stress, then the bearings should look fine and the rest of everything junk...

I would think that any oiling problems the slant six has(after carefully looking at the block myself)are due to oil pan and pickup design, and culpability on the part of people running their equipment past what it was designed for without modification.

The block itself seems to be inherently good with respect to oiling system design, and I might also add with stress and strength as well...which would explain its reputation...

I have found that I need to run my oil level at least 1 qt above the full line to keep from starving for oil on tight turns , or especially under braking...this in an unmodified slant during regular street driving. I drilled the oil pressure gauge so that the orifice(sp?) was larger and the gauge would respond extremely quick. Most gauges have very small holes so as to keep the needle moving slowly.

All my freinds with slant experience say that the only blown up slants they see...have been starved for oil, and usually lose rod 5 or 6 and poke a hole thru the block by the starter. My wrecking yard visuals have confirmed this as the major failing of slant blocks.

I held in my hand the piston out of Dale Jr's Winston Car from Kansas last October...and I'm here to tell you that my $900 custom JE pistons in my GTO looked like lead weight in comparison...and believe me...my pistons are light. A trw forging, or stock cast piston, is a very heavy piece, with thick rings, and is the major limit to rpm in any engine, then alone a slant...add to this the stock rod bolts, some road racing activity, a few hundred thousand miles cyclical stress(another thread)...and I will assume a good tuneup for your freinds sake...and a rod problem is not far fetch if banging gears to decelerate from 5500 rpm or so was a common occurance.

I believe it is not difficult to build a slant that can handle these kinds of rpms, but would you want to down shift at 5000 in 4th to see 6500 in 3rd...I don't think so...

I have no way of knowing why your friends engine broke,,,but the root causes can only be found thru forensics, not guess work or assumption.

Sorry if that sounds pointed...I just got home and need sleep again, so just trying to get my point accross quickly. Again, the major problem for any engine is not the rod length, but the fact that rods are designed by manufacture to be strong during compression stress. When you decelerate, the small thin cap held by two stock bolts has to try to keep its shape while the piston tries to stay at the top of the bore...at some rpm for each application, this becomes difficult, and then becomes a problem shortly thereafter...

Ray is on the right track if overkill for most of us. He has stated he wants to feel warm and fuzzy inside while he has his fun...hence his choice of pistons, rings, and rods...most of us would have quite reliable autocross or drag cars without the trouble...but that doesn't mean stock either.

My plan is metric pistons, 198" rods, good rod bolts, the light rings that are part of the metric piston package, mods to the cylinder head for power, efficiency, combustion improvement, and detonation resistance, carefull tuning, and never decelerate to an rpm more than 500 below my shift point on upshift...with my upshift being conservative for the strength package, rather than pushing the limit and hoping for the best...

Its always worked for me in the past...


Gearhead

_________________
64 GTO...10.80's@122 on street radials
Destroked 455, Qjet, stock ign, 2400 stall

64 Valiant
Old 225, 4spd, 2.92-8.75, 2bbl, headers
dual 2.25"

Thanks Gearhead, as usual you guys continue to blow me away with your collective knowlege.

when that Slant blew it punched a hole in the block right near the starter...just like you surmised. I beleive the rod end is what failed (it happend quite awhile ago).

Some Mopar guys I know that roadrace and auto-X all have V-8's. a few of us nut jobs though have Slantys and are trying to figure out how to make 'em live on the track. One guy sells a fully baffled roadrace pan for a small block. I've offered a block, pan and my '68 Fastback as a test mule for a Slant version. They have also recommended an accumilator plumbed in near the oil filter (I'll have to go back in the list archives to find exactly where it plugs in) to help out.

my car is still in a bazillion peices....but when I start putting it back together I'd like to do it right the first time (or as close as I can get).

I'd rather spend money on the engine and drive line and worry about paint later! so I'm soaking up knowlege here....hope ya don't mind!

_________________
Rob

'62 Plymouth Savoy Wagon
'64 Chrysler 300
'47 Farmall H
Merlins are cool
Radials rule
Jets drool