How about High CR Stroker

[st.petebiodiesel]

Is this thread still happening? If so one thing the OP should consider is the cost of high octane fuel. Are you going to buy race gas or spend $20 every fill up on a bottle of Torco octane additive? 12:1 is too high for 93 octane. Especially on an old tech M20 with no knock sensors.
Everything you read online makes you think you want a high compression race engine, but in reality it’s just a giant hassle. Stick to like 10.5:1. You will gain more in power just by being able to run more timing advance than upping the compression alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe G]

CR 11.5-12:1
Crank 89.6
Rods 135
Pistons - custom
Ported 885 head
valves - stock size but Different valve shape
BBTB
86 mm bore
camshaft - Shcrick 288
Shcrick valve springs
Adhustable cum gear
TD oil pump
TD starter
6 kg. flywheel
SACHS Performance sport Clutch
IE fat rocker arms

What else do I need?

Paging Dr. Blunt...

I heard that his legendary Adjustable Cum Gear is great for keeping cum out of the eyeball region, but is also adjustable to allow for the occasional eye shot.

My money is on OP being is a "cum in my eye" kind of guy.

[TobyB]

Is this thread real?

Probably not.

But it's really amusing. I was hoping for a 'remount'.

Might still happen!

heh

t

[apostate]

American Coyotes...

[apostate]

Now that I think of it - that's why the AK-47 was created for - shooting american Coyotes.

[ThatOneEuroE30]

Aprostate is similar to genital warts. They always come back.

Lmfao and you were wrong. Looks like the itchy wart popped back up a couple hours ago

[apostate]

Fuck off, american coyote.
You are an ignorant pig.

[ThatOneEuroE30]

Fuck off, american coyote.
You are an ignorant pig.

Oink oink mother fucker

[apostate]

Ha ha, Coyote.

[ForcedFirebird]

Ignorant? Mr. Proastate,

Not even going to waste my time grabbing your quotes.

You called out for me and as usual I bite my tongue on public forums, but in all seriousness you asked a question and didn't get the answer you like.

My take on your engine proposal? Well, you want a stock intake to look "sleeper" yet you claim you build things "unfathomable" to people who have been wrenching longer than some members here have been alive (some of us have adult children even).

You bash "Americans" then claim to be all mighty on the "402m" when it was actually an American sport based on 1/4mi. If sanctioned drag racing was invented elsewhere, it would have probably been called a "400m" to keep things even and simple.

You boast about how detrimental it is to machine an m20 block, boast about knowledge of piston content etc, but then want to build the "ultimate m20" with a 1.5:1 rod:stroke ratio? (after you bashed domestic fuel content as "inferior"). What gives?

Well, this is my take on what you would like to build:

If you want a stock intake, you will want to capture trapped mass and make it a torque monster. This will rule out a 200+ cam duration. No sense in having a cam come into power just as the inlet manifold falls on it's face - that would be "unfathomable". Now that you will have to run a smaller camshaft, you will be encroaching too much trapped mass at 13:1 with anything less than 98ron/93oct (and without running it through the software, you might not even be able to use pump fuel).

BBTB?!?! Someone as intelligent as you should know that they do diddly squat. I have tested them on the dyno. Delta gain is negligible, tip in throttle response is slightly raised (why the "butt dyno" says they are good), and there is slight gain early under the curve, but $$:HP ratio stinks of doo doo compared to other modifications (you will spend 1/4-1/3rd the cost of ITB's on a BBTB).

Engine management you say will be Motronic. If you are after the "sleeper" look, use a PNP aftermarket ECU, gut the airbox (and keep the OEM horn if the AFM is gutted), and hide the MAP reference line. There's a few running around passing emissions in various states this way, so only the most sly racer would catch it, and only if they are an e30 nut like the rest of us yahoos.

What about cylinder head work? Or are you afraid to have a head ported as it would render it "unusable" for future builds - you know - just in case you wanted to go back to stock? IDK.

Something you should think about. We are not your enemy. We all gather on this site to help each other out, exchange ideas/parts etc. If you want members to treat you with respect, I suggest you do the same.

Well, anyways enough of my soapbox. Hanging on to the notion that you may become a productive member here, but that spark is dwindling since you have a sign on date of 2012 and didn't have much to say until recently where you just spew hate and angst from your keyboard. :(

[ForcedFirebird]

Is this thread still happening? If so one thing the OP should consider is the cost of high octane fuel. Are you going to buy race gas or spend $20 every fill up on a bottle of Torco octane additive? 12:1 is too high for 93 octane. Especially on an old tech M20 with no knock sensors.
Everything you read online makes you think you want a high compression race engine, but in reality it’s just a giant hassle. Stick to like 10.5:1. You will gain more in power just by being able to run more timing advance than upping the compression alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's a car sitting in front of me now with a stroked 11.5:1 3.1l m20 built by Robert (Peerless) and tweaked here. It's a daily with a decent tune and runs on pump 93 fuel no sweat (just don't mistakenly put in 89oct, it will rattle 90+ is ok). It has the dual pattern Schrick 272/284. Can't wait to bring it to the dyno. Just have to finish tweaking a road tune on an m20 60mm turbo and we will bring both cars to the rollers.

OTOH I used to think compression was a big deal, but you would be surprised at how well engines can handle it, provided a good tuner is involved. One of our v6 customers decided he wanted to use pistons from a large chamber iron head engine in his small chamber aluminum head engine. It resulted in a 13.4:1 SCR 3.45l v6. We designed a cam around his goals and he most certainly ran 93oct by lowering trapped mass in the cam design. Wish we would have gotten that thing on the rollers. Those engines already make far more TQ than HP in stock form...

[apostate]

Ignorant? Mr. Proastate,

Not even going to waste my time grabbing your quotes.

You called out for me and as usual I bite my tongue on public forums, but in all seriousness you asked a question and didn't get the answer you like.

My take on your engine proposal? Well, you want a stock intake to look "sleeper" yet you claim you build things "unfathomable" to people who have been wrenching longer than some members here have been alive (some of us have adult children even).

You bash "Americans" then claim to be all mighty on the "402m" when it was actually an American sport based on 1/4mi. If sanctioned drag racing was invented elsewhere, it would have probably been called a "400m" to keep things even and simple.

You boast about how detrimental it is to machine an m20 block, boast about knowledge of piston content etc, but then want to build the "ultimate m20" with a 1.5:1 rod:stroke ratio? (after you bashed domestic fuel content as "inferior"). What gives?

Well, this is my take on what you would like to build:

If you want a stock intake, you will want to capture trapped mass and make it a torque monster. This will rule out a 200+ cam duration. No sense in having a cam come into power just as the inlet manifold falls on it's face - that would be "unfathomable". Now that you will have to run a smaller camshaft, you will be encroaching too much trapped mass at 13:1 with anything less than 98ron/93oct (and without running it through the software, you might not even be able to use pump fuel).

BBTB?!?! Someone as intelligent as you should know that they do diddly squat. I have tested them on the dyno. Delta gain is negligible, tip in throttle response is slightly raised (why the "butt dyno" says they are good), and there is slight gain early under the curve, but $$:HP ratio stinks of doo doo compared to other modifications (you will spend 1/4-1/3rd the cost of ITB's on a BBTB).

Engine management you say will be Motronic. If you are after the "sleeper" look, use a PNP aftermarket ECU, gut the airbox (and keep the OEM horn if the AFM is gutted), and hide the MAP reference line. There's a few running around passing emissions in various states this way, so only the most sly racer would catch it, and only if they are an e30 nut like the rest of us yahoos.

What about cylinder head work? Or are you afraid to have a head ported as it would render it "unusable" for future builds - you know - just in case you wanted to go back to stock? IDK.

Something you should think about. We are not your enemy. We all gather on this site to help each other out, exchange ideas/parts etc. If you want members to treat you with respect, I suggest you do the same.

Well, anyways enough of my soapbox. Hanging on to the notion that you may become a productive member here, but that spark is dwindling since you have a sign on date of 2012 and didn't have much to say until recently where you just spew hate and angst from your keyboard. :(

Thanks.
It is a lot of information and I do appreciate it.
In any case, I will render back when I am ready with the engine.
ForcedFirebird -thank you. I do apologise if I insulted you in any way.
Thanks to Digger too.
Wish you guys all the best.
Regards.

[ForcedFirebird]

Thanks.
It is a lot of information and I do appreciate it.
In any case, I will render back when I am ready with the engine.
ForcedFirebird -thank you. I do apologise if I insulted you in any way.
Thanks to Digger too.
Wish you guys all the best.
Regards.

You too. Finally being a friendly!

Oh, and the "200 duration" was a typo. Should have typed "280 duration". Amazing thing happen when you balance the trapped mass vs compression. Most "over-cam" their cars and then wonder why the power doesn't come in until just before a forced shift due to RPM limits.

Pretty simple to visualize:

Long skinny runners like to have lots of trapped mass (low overlap/low duration/high lift). This was a popular design in the 80's when the world was coming off leaded fuels. Think of the TPI/TBI/Dual plane thinking of the era. Shoot my dad's 76 Stingray boasts on the center console "High Compression 8.5:1" lol. That lump makes 180hp brake HP, and I have a feeling that was generous of GM - but - the big American style of cubes put the torque where you can feel it. Cars of the day "felt' fast.

I will never forget the day I saw a new IROC-Z my neighbor bought. He popped the hood open, I peaked in (albeit ~12yr old) and instantly asked "where's the carb/TB?!?). It was the same year my mom traded in her Grand Prix G-Body for a Toyota Camry. Funny thing is, the stupid Toyo sedan gave that IROC a run for the money on a roll, but a single cam Toyo was no match for the dig of the IROC.

[apostate]

...

[st.petebiodiesel]

There's a car sitting in front of me now with a stroked 11.5:1 3.1l m20 built by Robert (Peerless) and tweaked here. It's a daily with a decent tune and runs on pump 93 fuel no sweat (just don't mistakenly put in 89oct, it will rattle 90+ is ok). It has the dual pattern Schrick 272/284. Can't wait to bring it to the dyno. Just have to finish tweaking a road tune on an m20 60mm turbo and we will bring both cars to the rollers.

OTOH I used to think compression was a big deal, but you would be surprised at how well engines can handle it, provided a good tuner is involved. One of our v6 customers decided he wanted to use pistons from a large chamber iron head engine in his small chamber aluminum head engine. It resulted in a 13.4:1 SCR 3.45l v6. We designed a cam around his goals and he most certainly ran 93oct by lowering trapped mass in the cam design. Wish we would have gotten that thing on the rollers. Those engines already make far more TQ than HP in stock form...

That sounds like a true German hot rod.
I made the mistake of building an M50 with too high of a static compression ratio, 12:1 (because at the time that’s what I thought I wanted).
Running on 93 I won’t even floor it, because it pings so badly. However if you do keep your foot down long enough the Knock sensors will intervene and pull timing. (Which feels like you just lost 25 whp)
I have to run a can of Torco every fill up, which claims would raise the octane to 98. This mixture eliminates the pinging completely, but costs $23 every fill up.
I was going to throw some cams with some decent overlap in to see if I can get away with pump gas, or just use a thicker head gasket. I think 11:1 would be ideal.
Anyways, I just wanted to share my experience with high compression engines. Hopefully others don’t make my mistake and go too high and have a engine they can’t beat on all the time with pump gas.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk