Slant Six Forum
https://slantsix.org/forum/

How much gain would I get? estimate
https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=40943		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Mister Twister [ Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:40 am ]
Post subject:  How much gain would I get? estimate
Best 1/4 mile time is 16.27 with a stock bore 225. :)

My question is, if I take that motor out and install my long rod motor with full floating 2.2 pistons. How much gain if any, in ET would I expect from this change :?:
Author:  Dart270 [ Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:24 am ]
Post subject: 
With all the same head, induction, exhaust, compression, etc, my wild guess would be 0.2 sec gain.

Lou
Author:  Mister Twister [ Thu Jul 08, 2010 12:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
With all the same head, induction, exhaust, compression, etc, my wild guess would be 0.2 sec gain.

Lou
Thanks for your input on this Lou. It should be real close to stock compression, cut 60 off a stock head on this motor. An uncut head will be put on the long rod motor. For some reason my 2.2s are still -70 in the hole, :) with gasket I think we should still be safe for the turbo.
Author:  slantzilla [ Thu Jul 08, 2010 4:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
All else being the same I bet you won't see any difference. What you gain with the long rods you lose from intake filling from the short rod accelerating the piston away from TDC faster.
Author:  Mister Twister [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:16 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
All else being the same I bet you won't see any difference. What you gain with the long rods you lose from intake filling from the short rod accelerating the piston away from TDC faster.
Air/fuel supply change for the long rod, don't quite understand what your saying :?:
Author:  Dart270 [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:05 am ]
Post subject: 
I was thinking you would be using the K1/Wiseco, which should have lower friction ring packs. That would be the main difference.

Lou
Author:  Mister Twister [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:10 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
I was thinking you would be using the K1/Wiseco, which should have lower friction ring packs. That would be the main difference.

Lou
What benefit would that give me vs 2.2 piston ring pack?
Author:  Dart270 [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:01 am ]
Post subject: 
I am only guessing that the 2.2 pistons have a higher friction ring pack. No data, only a guess.

Lou
Author:  slantzilla [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 2:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Quote:
All else being the same I bet you won't see any difference. What you gain with the long rods you lose from intake filling from the short rod accelerating the piston away from TDC faster.
Air/fuel supply change for the long rod, don't quite understand what your saying :?:
The shorter rod accelerates the piston away from TDC faster than the long rod. That promotes faster cylinder filling.

The long rod "parks" the piston longer, so cylinder filling is slightly slower. You do have a slight gain from reduced friction from the rod angle, so it is basically a wash.

The 2.2 does have a narrower ring than the stock 225 pistons, but I bet you would be hard pressed to see any difference on a dyno.
Author:  Mister Twister [ Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:51 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
I was thinking you would be using the K1/Wiseco, which should have lower friction ring packs. That would be the main difference.

Lou
I should have looked at the pistons next to each other before we put the motor together. Now we know the rings have less friction/ not as wide. I think lower ring set on the piston would be less likely to get damaged JMO, better over all? Thanks for pointing that out Lou.
Author:  Mister Twister [ Sun Jul 11, 2010 6:26 am ]
Post subject: 
Thanks slantzilla now I understand. :) It also leads me to another question. :? With the cylinder filling slower not pulling fuel in as fast. Could this cause maybe, leaning out the system a little :?:
Also if the cylinder fills slower but has less area to fill, does it have the same volume of fuel per volume of area to fill :?:

The last question, if the cylinder in the long rod lets say, has more volume of fuel per area to fill, is the explosion grater? :twisted:
Author:  slantzilla [ Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
Rod length will not change cylinder area. It will still be the same size as a short rod motor, it will just have a somewhat different filling time. Will it be lean? No. Your A/F will still be the same, just the fill rate will be slower.
Author:  Mister Twister [ Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:48 pm ]
Post subject: 
Thats cool, 8) it will fill the cylinder slower than the shorter rods, do to length of the piston drop. The long rod parking the piston up in the cylinder, would not drop as much so my filling slows down. :? Is one better than the other :?: If the A/F stays the same, why would one or the other be better :?:
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC-08:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/