Difference in horsepower production and cylinder pressure...
Thread Starter
7 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,758
Likes: 9
From: Port Tobacco, MD
Difference in horsepower production and cylinder pressure... Here is my question. What difference does the power adder play in how much cylinder pressure your engine makes? Here's what I am trying to figure out...
Setup 1:
High Compression Big inch motor makes 900rwhp
Lots of cubes: 450+ CID + high compression
Setup 2:
Low Compression 340-360 inch motor that makes 900 rwhp
- turbo motor boost comes on progressive like any normal setup.
Setup 3:
Medium Compression 340-360 inch motor that makes 900rwhp
- Nitrous motor with a progressive controller to control cylinder pressure spikes, each stage is phased in over 1 second to mimic how a turbo comes on line.
Which setup would be more durable assuming the tune was dead nuts on and you bang on it all the time???
Phil
Setup 1:
High Compression Big inch motor makes 900rwhp
Lots of cubes: 450+ CID + high compression
Setup 2:
Low Compression 340-360 inch motor that makes 900 rwhp
- turbo motor boost comes on progressive like any normal setup.
Setup 3:
Medium Compression 340-360 inch motor that makes 900rwhp
- Nitrous motor with a progressive controller to control cylinder pressure spikes, each stage is phased in over 1 second to mimic how a turbo comes on line.
Which setup would be more durable assuming the tune was dead nuts on and you bang on it all the time???
Phil
I would assume that the big inch motor would be the most durable due to the fact that it will see the lowest cylinder pressures. The power adders should signifigantlly increase the pressures in the cylinder, thus wearing on the rings or gaskets, thus making your chances for premature failure more iminent. Not sure if that was the answer you are looking for, but that's the way I would see it durability wise. I guess we could also do a comparison between your car and mine. My 454 CI/265 ET headed motor vs. your 346 No2 motor. First one to blow up looses. Literally.
IMO big inch parts are much stronger, but you generally have to spin them faster to reach that kind of power level. The extra mass can become a liability, and lightweight parts can cost a fortune.
The power adders allow you to reach that power level at lower engine speeds, so it then comes down to a matter of heat management which one would survive longer.
Turbo engines are generally trickier to control the tune, and harder to manage the heat, but in practice tend to be fairly reliable. According to the books, they are easier on parts than any other power production method.
Nitrous engines are much easier to tune and manage the heat, but in practice people tend to find the mechanical limits of the engine quicker... maybe due to the massive torque production.
The power adders allow you to reach that power level at lower engine speeds, so it then comes down to a matter of heat management which one would survive longer.
Turbo engines are generally trickier to control the tune, and harder to manage the heat, but in practice tend to be fairly reliable. According to the books, they are easier on parts than any other power production method.
Nitrous engines are much easier to tune and manage the heat, but in practice people tend to find the mechanical limits of the engine quicker... maybe due to the massive torque production.
Thread Starter
7 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,758
Likes: 9
From: Port Tobacco, MD
My thought is if you have one of the new nitrous systems that allows you to bring the nitrous on depending on the RPM it will make it more like a turbo or supercharged application.
Phil
Phil
Originally Posted by Phil99vette
My thought is if you have one of the new nitrous systems that allows you to bring the nitrous on depending on the RPM it will make it more like a turbo or supercharged application.
Phil
Phil
The turbo engine would be the most durable . The other engines would definitely need rpms to attain those power levels . The big inch n/a engine is exceeding 2hp per cubic inch , considering any ls1 that size has been stroked you'll have some high piston speeds , same for the small nitrous motor but it has spray to account for what you can't make n/a . With race fuel the turbo motor will have a realtively easy time making the numbers and if built properly can lead a fairly long life . All of these engines would require special attention just to be a reality let alone "durable" .
Originally Posted by v8pwr
The turbo engine would be the most durable . The other engines would definitely need rpms to attain those power levels . The big inch n/a engine is exceeding 2hp per cubic inch , considering any ls1 that size has been stroked you'll have some high piston speeds , same for the small nitrous motor but it has spray to account for what you can't make n/a . With race fuel the turbo motor will have a realtively easy time making the numbers and if built properly can lead a fairly long life . All of these engines would require special attention just to be a reality let alone "durable" .
Trending Topics
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, North Mexico
MEP = Pressure on piston
VE = Torque
Torque at a given RMP is power.
As you can sea, pressure doesn't mean power. you can have two engines with the same pressure and one can make 5x more power depending on displacment and rpm.
Constant power, displacement and rpm engines will have roughly the same IMEP values (indicated mean effective pressure. BMEP, what it puts out. So I - L (losses like friction or pumping losses or a blower) = B
VE = Torque
Torque at a given RMP is power.
As you can sea, pressure doesn't mean power. you can have two engines with the same pressure and one can make 5x more power depending on displacment and rpm.
Constant power, displacement and rpm engines will have roughly the same IMEP values (indicated mean effective pressure. BMEP, what it puts out. So I - L (losses like friction or pumping losses or a blower) = B
Last edited by treyZ28; Nov 22, 2005 at 09:45 AM.
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
From: Blairsville, GA
Good point, Ben. I've always contended that torque is what tears apart an engine, trans, read end, you name it. Not horsepower. Understood that stupid high rpm will cause an engine to fly apart... that aside, if you run into things like broken rods, failed main bolts/studs, or broken cranks, chances are, the torque output broke it, not the hp.
As far as banging on it all the time, why not a turbocharged big-inch motor? It would be able to make the big power of the NA big motor without having to go stupid crazy on things like wild cam, triple valve springs, and other things that would shorten the life expectancy of the engine. Simply put, given a specific power goal, a big turbo motor could use a milder cam, meaning milder springs, which means less wear on the timing chain, pushrods, valve stems, valve seats, etc. and make the same power as a big-inch NA race engine, and do so more reliably.
As far as banging on it all the time, why not a turbocharged big-inch motor? It would be able to make the big power of the NA big motor without having to go stupid crazy on things like wild cam, triple valve springs, and other things that would shorten the life expectancy of the engine. Simply put, given a specific power goal, a big turbo motor could use a milder cam, meaning milder springs, which means less wear on the timing chain, pushrods, valve stems, valve seats, etc. and make the same power as a big-inch NA race engine, and do so more reliably.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, North Mexico
lets not forget other failure moders introduced with a turbocharger. You have oil and coolant that need to go in and out of the this snail shell shaped thing revving to 100,000+ rpm, more tubing, tighter packaging, things under positive and negative pressure, something that will be much harder to tune and a lot of other varriables.
depending on your goal, boost may not be the answer.
depending on your goal, boost may not be the answer.
TECH Junkie
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,726
Likes: 0
From: Fort Collins, CO
Originally Posted by Ric
Good point, Ben. I've always contended that torque is what tears apart an engine, trans, read end, you name it. Not horsepower. Understood that stupid high rpm will cause an engine to fly apart... that aside, if you run into things like broken rods, failed main bolts/studs, or broken cranks, chances are, the torque output broke it, not the hp.
The high rpm that the NA motor will need to achieve 900 hp is also very hard on the supporting driveline parts...transmissions, driveshafts, rear ends, clutches, converters, etc.
I've seen 200-4R transmissions live behind an 800 hp Grand National (turning a max of 5500 rpm) and die behind a 450 hp LS1 (turning 6800 rpm). RPM is harder on other things besides just the motor. Keep this in mind when you're talking durability.
I've seen 200-4R transmissions live behind an 800 hp Grand National (turning a max of 5500 rpm) and die behind a 450 hp LS1 (turning 6800 rpm). RPM is harder on other things besides just the motor. Keep this in mind when you're talking durability.
__________________
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2022 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 S&B CAI, Corsa catback.
2023 Corvette 3LT Z51 soon to be modified.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2022 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 S&B CAI, Corsa catback.
2023 Corvette 3LT Z51 soon to be modified.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
On The Tree
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
cylinder preassure is fine,but where at?I think better power comes from how long you maintain cylinder preassure throughout the power stroke--how do you achieve this?I dont know.I have 80000 miles on a 550rwhp car the takes a beating like a *****.If I ever get a 900rwhp setup to beat the **** out of daily we'll see.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, North Mexico
Very true. Bored? Make a graph.
Piston velocity vs rpm
Piston G's vs Rpm
Investigate fatigue in metals. Then check out the forces on a 327 con-rod at 9,000 rpm.
Pressure on a piston usually isn't too bad so long as its well distributed (ie, not detonation). Hydrolocked rarely crack pistons. Why? Hydrostatic pressure is very equal in its distribution. Check out metal strength and then measure a piston. you'll be suprised how bad *** metals are
go figure, numbers work out and physics wins
Piston velocity vs rpm
Piston G's vs Rpm
Investigate fatigue in metals. Then check out the forces on a 327 con-rod at 9,000 rpm.
Pressure on a piston usually isn't too bad so long as its well distributed (ie, not detonation). Hydrolocked rarely crack pistons. Why? Hydrostatic pressure is very equal in its distribution. Check out metal strength and then measure a piston. you'll be suprised how bad *** metals are
go figure, numbers work out and physics wins
