Bosting on a 95 mm crank
03-10-2005, 10:46 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bosting on a 95 mm crank
i have my motor already built, this is what i have.
B18A Block ( 95mm crank by eagle, 84 mm bore size JE 10.1 comp, H beam rods, Rs sleeves)
B18C1 GSR head (Skunk2 : Reatainers, springs, CTR, sprokets, Jg 1mm bigger valves, Port and polish and SKUNK MANIFOLD , BBK Throuthle 70mm, stock HG
B18C5 Tranny LSD, fidenza light flywheel, Exedy 6 pug Xtreme presure plate
Fuel: AEM Fuel Rail, RC injectors 750 cc, Aem Fuel Filter, Fuel pump,
Ignitino: MSD 6 digital,
turbo: T3/T4 .57 trim, tial wastegaet, 2.5 DP, Apex N1, Straight pipe, XS Dual Stage MPC, HONDATA, Nos Ncoller .
I just wanted to see if any out there has ever boosted with a 95 mm crank, thats all.. wanted to see what type of number they got? and how far have they reved there motor?
B18A Block ( 95mm crank by eagle, 84 mm bore size JE 10.1 comp, H beam rods, Rs sleeves)
B18C1 GSR head (Skunk2 : Reatainers, springs, CTR, sprokets, Jg 1mm bigger valves, Port and polish and SKUNK MANIFOLD , BBK Throuthle 70mm, stock HG
B18C5 Tranny LSD, fidenza light flywheel, Exedy 6 pug Xtreme presure plate
Fuel: AEM Fuel Rail, RC injectors 750 cc, Aem Fuel Filter, Fuel pump,
Ignitino: MSD 6 digital,
turbo: T3/T4 .57 trim, tial wastegaet, 2.5 DP, Apex N1, Straight pipe, XS Dual Stage MPC, HONDATA, Nos Ncoller .
I just wanted to see if any out there has ever boosted with a 95 mm crank, thats all.. wanted to see what type of number they got? and how far have they reved there motor?
03-10-2005, 02:12 PM
#2
I
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Westside til I die
Posts: 56,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't go very high on a 95mm stroke. Maybe 8k max, especially on boost. Be careful with vibration of the rotating assembly under boost with a stroke that large.
03-10-2005, 05:49 PM
#3
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Master Yodub
I wouldn't go very high on a 95mm stroke. Maybe 8k max, especially on boost. Be careful with vibration of the rotating assembly under boost with a stroke that large.
cool, i just bought a Fluidampr to minimise that problem
03-11-2005, 09:30 AM
#4
Apathy Kills
Originally Posted by reynosop
cool, i just bought a Fluidampr to minimise that problem
That said, this sounds like one hell of a motor :rick:
__________________
:: :ToDspin: - supermod - but who gives a shit?
:: HAN Integra FAQ: If, by some miracle, yours hasn't been stolen... check it out!
:: HAN Integra FAQ: If, by some miracle, yours hasn't been stolen... check it out!
03-11-2005, 10:50 AM
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TheOtherDave™
It'll help somewhat...but I'd be even more conservative about revs. 7K gives you a lot of powerband to work with. Besides, beyond 7500 or so, volumetric efficiency is gonna fall off because of time needed to fill such a large cylinder volume.
That said, this sounds like one hell of a motor :rick:
That said, this sounds like one hell of a motor :rick:
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1138798
03-11-2005, 07:48 PM
#7
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Master Yodub
He has a dart tall block though, which allows him to run longer rods and increase the rod to stroke ration, in turn allowing him to rev higher.
my piston are custome made at a higher wrist pin, and the rods are set at a stock LS ration 5.394, i also run the same risk
03-11-2005, 08:21 PM
#8
On permanent hiatus
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: A forum with actual tech
Posts: 9,716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by reynosop
would having a longer rod ration be more prone to braking down , do to it to traveling more on the cylender walls. ?
my piston are custom made at a higher wrist pin, and the rods are set at a stock LS ration 5.394, i also run the same risk
my piston are custom made at a higher wrist pin, and the rods are set at a stock LS ration 5.394, i also run the same risk
03-11-2005, 10:14 PM
#9
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Shmoo
A longer rod ratio is desireable because the piston stays at TDC longer, so the force of the combustion can be absorbed better by the piston and the longer stroke gives it more time to fill the cylinders and thus improve volumetric efficiency. The gradual acceleration from TDC and BDC with a longer stroke puts less stress on engine parts escpecially cylinder walls. Formula 1 cars have stroke to rod ratios well over 2:1 and they can rev like no other. 1.7:1 is considered ideal.
03-12-2005, 03:54 PM
#10
I
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Westside til I die
Posts: 56,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Combustion chamber volume has nothing to do with rod/stroke ratio, and I don't think you'd need to lower the compression anyways. High compression is fine with boost as long as you have the fuel/tuning to match.
As for the r/s ratio, the lower it is, the more stress you put on the cylinder walls and rotating assembly, the more friction you put on the piston/cyl. wall, and the easier it is for the motor to let go at high rpm.
As for the r/s ratio, the lower it is, the more stress you put on the cylinder walls and rotating assembly, the more friction you put on the piston/cyl. wall, and the easier it is for the motor to let go at high rpm.
