| M. Hurst | 05-20-2005 01:24 PM |
Is this possible? (Rally)
�
�
All of the open / PGT / Gn Newer WRXs and EVO weigh 3,100lbs use a 32 or 34mm restrictor, have a very narrow power band, probably most have less than 275hp (some much less).
The current minimum weight for Open class under 2,750cc adjusted is 2,600lbs.
Is it possible to get 100hp/liter out of a normally aspirated Subaru engine?, or do the cylinder heads not flow well unless the air is forced through by a turbo? Will the bottom end spin 8,000rpm without coming apart?
I've never heard much about internal engine modifications (for obvious reasons, turbos make more sense without the restrictors) for NA motors, but it would not seem that difficult.
Are stroker kits available? I'm sure some port work, cams, 12:1 compression, individual butterfly or slide fuel injection and added stroke would make for dramatic gqains if it could survive high rpm use. Fabbing a custom intake manifold(s) would certainly be easy, and it would be easy to experiment with runner length.
A GC body with a wider powerband, NA( 2.7L ?)250hp, and 500lbs lighter than the current AWD cars, is it possible?
__________________
Mike Hurst
Technical Director
Rally-America
The current minimum weight for Open class under 2,750cc adjusted is 2,600lbs.
Is it possible to get 100hp/liter out of a normally aspirated Subaru engine?, or do the cylinder heads not flow well unless the air is forced through by a turbo? Will the bottom end spin 8,000rpm without coming apart?
I've never heard much about internal engine modifications (for obvious reasons, turbos make more sense without the restrictors) for NA motors, but it would not seem that difficult.
Are stroker kits available? I'm sure some port work, cams, 12:1 compression, individual butterfly or slide fuel injection and added stroke would make for dramatic gqains if it could survive high rpm use. Fabbing a custom intake manifold(s) would certainly be easy, and it would be easy to experiment with runner length.
A GC body with a wider powerband, NA( 2.7L ?)250hp, and 500lbs lighter than the current AWD cars, is it possible?
__________________
Mike Hurst
Technical Director
Rally-America
| JC_595 | 05-20-2005 02:39 PM |
mike- I just found this thread that may help
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1250397#post1250397[/url]
JC
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1250397#post1250397[/url]
JC
| Chromer | 05-20-2005 03:06 PM |
You'd probably have better luck with a massaged 3L H6 and taking the weight penalty, IIRC they make about 220-230 stock. Bump the compression more, port heads, lighten the valvetrain, raise the rev limit? Seems plausible...
You might want to talk to [url=http://www.irishmikes.com/Irish%20Mike%27s%20Racing.htm]Mike Flynn[/url], he ran a N/A Impreza in SpeedTC the last two years, though he was pretty limited on what he could do to it.
I recall Subaru Lachute building up a high HP N/A 2.5L for someone here at some point too. A search of the naturally aspirated board may yield results.
You might want to talk to [url=http://www.irishmikes.com/Irish%20Mike%27s%20Racing.htm]Mike Flynn[/url], he ran a N/A Impreza in SpeedTC the last two years, though he was pretty limited on what he could do to it.
I recall Subaru Lachute building up a high HP N/A 2.5L for someone here at some point too. A search of the naturally aspirated board may yield results.
| Fred | 05-20-2005 03:10 PM |
also see this:
[url]http://www.linaracing.com/cars.cfm[/url]
:eek:
Not mine, but I've driven it several times at rallycrosses and I'd say it's around 250hp.
[url]http://www.linaracing.com/cars.cfm[/url]
:eek:
Not mine, but I've driven it several times at rallycrosses and I'd say it's around 250hp.
| M. Hurst | 05-20-2005 03:13 PM |
The idea would be to stay under 2,750cc to take advantage of a weight break.
Looks like this was pretty well hashed out on other threads.
Looks like this was pretty well hashed out on other threads.
| Chromer | 05-20-2005 03:19 PM |
Found the Lachute thread:
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=353525&page=1&pp=50&highlight=lachute[/url]
Cliff notes: 11:1 compression, 8000rpm redline, estimated 240 crank HP.
[quote]strommung cat back 2.25"
random tech high flow cat
borla headers
cobb cai
UD pulley
Closed deck block
lightend/balanced/knife edged crankshaft
custom billet con rods from Oliver
custom 11:1 compression pistons from CP (coated for future nitrous use)
Bored out to 2.55+ litres (torque plate boring)
custom ported and poished cylinder heads
Cobb racer camshafts
ported/port matched intake manifold
Cobb springs
Cobb retainers
custom made stainless valves (3 angle valve job)
fully blurprinted
fully balanced
Tuned with Unichip
Redline set at 8,000rpm
9lb flywheel (14 lb flywheel right now, the 9lb came too late)
ACT clutch
STi engine mounts
STi tranny mounts
ARP Head studs...not bolts anymore.
Upgraded fuel pump
Fuel pressure riser[/quote]
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=353525&page=1&pp=50&highlight=lachute[/url]
Cliff notes: 11:1 compression, 8000rpm redline, estimated 240 crank HP.
[quote]strommung cat back 2.25"
random tech high flow cat
borla headers
cobb cai
UD pulley
Closed deck block
lightend/balanced/knife edged crankshaft
custom billet con rods from Oliver
custom 11:1 compression pistons from CP (coated for future nitrous use)
Bored out to 2.55+ litres (torque plate boring)
custom ported and poished cylinder heads
Cobb racer camshafts
ported/port matched intake manifold
Cobb springs
Cobb retainers
custom made stainless valves (3 angle valve job)
fully blurprinted
fully balanced
Tuned with Unichip
Redline set at 8,000rpm
9lb flywheel (14 lb flywheel right now, the 9lb came too late)
ACT clutch
STi engine mounts
STi tranny mounts
ARP Head studs...not bolts anymore.
Upgraded fuel pump
Fuel pressure riser[/quote]
| Matt Monson | 05-20-2005 05:45 PM |
Yes, you can hit 250/250 on the NA EJ25. I am at 225/220 on mine, and don't even have headwork yet. 11.4:1 CR and cams did it for me.
Longterm, I am going to 12.5:1 and having the heads redone. Along with engine management, that should hit the magic 100/l
Irish Mike has already done this with his road car for Touring Class racing. He has worked with TWE to put it together, and was using the same logic as you that an NA 2.5l could compete with the 2.0l turbo cars in production classes...
Longterm, I am going to 12.5:1 and having the heads redone. Along with engine management, that should hit the magic 100/l
Irish Mike has already done this with his road car for Touring Class racing. He has worked with TWE to put it together, and was using the same logic as you that an NA 2.5l could compete with the 2.0l turbo cars in production classes...
| Pghrally | 05-20-2005 08:10 PM |
[QUOTE=M. Hurst]All of the open / PGT / Gn Newer WRXs and EVO weigh 3,100lbs use a 32 or 34mm restrictor, have a very narrow power band, probably most have less than 275hp (some much less).
The current minimum weight for Open class under 2,750cc adjusted is 2,600lbs.
Is it possible to get 100hp/liter out of a normally aspirated Subaru engine?, or do the cylinder heads not flow well unless the air is forced through by a turbo? Will the bottom end spin 8,000rpm without coming apart?
I've never heard much about internal engine modifications (for obvious reasons, turbos make more sense without the restrictors) for NA motors, but it would not seem that difficult.
Are stroker kits available? I'm sure some port work, cams, 12:1 compression, individual butterfly or slide fuel injection and added stroke would make for dramatic gqains if it could survive high rpm use. Fabbing a custom intake manifold(s) would certainly be easy, and it would be easy to experiment with runner length.
A GC body with a wider powerband, NA( 2.7L ?)250hp, and 500lbs lighter than the current AWD cars, is it possible?
__________________
Mike Hurst
Technical Director
Rally-America[/QUOTE]
Mike- are you interested in building one, or knowing what to look for during a tech inspection?!
Just curious!
The current minimum weight for Open class under 2,750cc adjusted is 2,600lbs.
Is it possible to get 100hp/liter out of a normally aspirated Subaru engine?, or do the cylinder heads not flow well unless the air is forced through by a turbo? Will the bottom end spin 8,000rpm without coming apart?
I've never heard much about internal engine modifications (for obvious reasons, turbos make more sense without the restrictors) for NA motors, but it would not seem that difficult.
Are stroker kits available? I'm sure some port work, cams, 12:1 compression, individual butterfly or slide fuel injection and added stroke would make for dramatic gqains if it could survive high rpm use. Fabbing a custom intake manifold(s) would certainly be easy, and it would be easy to experiment with runner length.
A GC body with a wider powerband, NA( 2.7L ?)250hp, and 500lbs lighter than the current AWD cars, is it possible?
__________________
Mike Hurst
Technical Director
Rally-America[/QUOTE]
Mike- are you interested in building one, or knowing what to look for during a tech inspection?!
Just curious!
| M. Hurst | 05-20-2005 09:48 PM |
[QUOTE=Pghrally]Mike- are you interested in building one, or knowing what to look for during a tech inspection?!
Just curious![/QUOTE]
Going to all the rallies and watching everyone else have fun is driving me nuts.
I hate restrictors as much as the next guy, but I don't think we can get away from them. It's alway seemed strange to me to turbocharge an engine to increase it's power, then add a restrictor which brings power levels down to a point possible without the turbo!
Randy Zimmer has shown me the light...I'm walking towards the light! :eek:
Because of conflicts, I might have to run "Brand X" rallies.
Just curious![/QUOTE]
Going to all the rallies and watching everyone else have fun is driving me nuts.
I hate restrictors as much as the next guy, but I don't think we can get away from them. It's alway seemed strange to me to turbocharge an engine to increase it's power, then add a restrictor which brings power levels down to a point possible without the turbo!
Randy Zimmer has shown me the light...I'm walking towards the light! :eek:
Because of conflicts, I might have to run "Brand X" rallies.
| outback2.5HO | 05-21-2005 05:07 PM |
[QUOTE=M. Hurst]
Randy Zimmer has shown me the light...I'm walking towards the light! :eek:[/QUOTE]
:lol:
He's shown many "the light".. You can definately build a 2.5 to the 250hp mark and it would be quite competitive. It will just cost $$$. Plan on spending at least $5k for that sort of hp. TWE does make some of the best N/A power parts out there, as well as COBB. Cams, pistons, stroker kit, and the valve train parts will be close to 3k without the longblock. It's still a 2.5, don't forget about the head gasket "issue".. ;)
Have fun at STPR!
Randy Zimmer has shown me the light...I'm walking towards the light! :eek:[/QUOTE]
:lol:
He's shown many "the light".. You can definately build a 2.5 to the 250hp mark and it would be quite competitive. It will just cost $$$. Plan on spending at least $5k for that sort of hp. TWE does make some of the best N/A power parts out there, as well as COBB. Cams, pistons, stroker kit, and the valve train parts will be close to 3k without the longblock. It's still a 2.5, don't forget about the head gasket "issue".. ;)
Have fun at STPR!
| greg donovan | 05-22-2005 03:12 PM |
mike this is what i was going round and round w/JVL on SS a while back.
putting a ej25 block and ej22 heads together w/some nice pistons and cams and a bit head work and a piggyback ecu w/some water injection would build one hell of a n/a subaru motor.
another thing i have considered was a 93-95 FWD brighton coupe impreza w/a well massaged japanese spec ej20 N/A to run in G2/F.
putting a ej25 block and ej22 heads together w/some nice pistons and cams and a bit head work and a piggyback ecu w/some water injection would build one hell of a n/a subaru motor.
another thing i have considered was a 93-95 FWD brighton coupe impreza w/a well massaged japanese spec ej20 N/A to run in G2/F.
| RB5 Clone | 05-22-2005 08:04 PM |
"Randy Zimmer has shown me the light...I'm walking towards the light! " "
Hot-rod a 2.5 and you will have a blast on stage. don't try to bore or stroke the motor, subaru already did that for you. spend cubic $ to make 250+ hp. Better yet, spend $800 for a junkyard 2.5, $1000 for a Link ECU, few more hundred $ for good exhaust, then develop and tune it well. this gives you basically stock WRX power/torque, maybe more.
Then make sure to put what power you got to the ground. 4.44 R&P in a used RS tranny, find a used Outback Limited or Forester S auto diff (4.44 ratio, plus a sturdy factory-engineered factory limited slip), and you are ready to go faster on stage than your momma ever wanted to know about.
cheaper, less maintenance than a turbo car. fast? your codriver better know how to deliver notes in a hurry, cause you gonna need em.
Dave G
burned up three point six 2.5s so far, still learning
Hot-rod a 2.5 and you will have a blast on stage. don't try to bore or stroke the motor, subaru already did that for you. spend cubic $ to make 250+ hp. Better yet, spend $800 for a junkyard 2.5, $1000 for a Link ECU, few more hundred $ for good exhaust, then develop and tune it well. this gives you basically stock WRX power/torque, maybe more.
Then make sure to put what power you got to the ground. 4.44 R&P in a used RS tranny, find a used Outback Limited or Forester S auto diff (4.44 ratio, plus a sturdy factory-engineered factory limited slip), and you are ready to go faster on stage than your momma ever wanted to know about.
cheaper, less maintenance than a turbo car. fast? your codriver better know how to deliver notes in a hurry, cause you gonna need em.
Dave G
burned up three point six 2.5s so far, still learning
| M. Hurst | 05-22-2005 08:29 PM |
[QUOTE=RB5 Clone] fast? your codriver better know how to deliver notes in a hurry, cause you gonna need em.
[/QUOTE]
Uh... I don't think that'll be a problem. ;)
[URL=http://www.rallyracingnews.com/cgi-bin/aglimpse/36/usr/local/etc/httpd/htdocs/racenews?query=Mike+Hurst&lines=1&maxfiles=1000]http://www.rallyracingnews.com/cgi-bin/aglimpse/36/usr/local/etc/httpd/htdocs/racenews?query=Mike+Hurst&lines=1&maxfiles=1000[/URL]
[/QUOTE]
Uh... I don't think that'll be a problem. ;)
[URL=http://www.rallyracingnews.com/cgi-bin/aglimpse/36/usr/local/etc/httpd/htdocs/racenews?query=Mike+Hurst&lines=1&maxfiles=1000]http://www.rallyracingnews.com/cgi-bin/aglimpse/36/usr/local/etc/httpd/htdocs/racenews?query=Mike+Hurst&lines=1&maxfiles=1000[/URL]
| zzyzx | 05-22-2005 09:01 PM |
Mike - Go to the source: TechWorks Engineering. Talk to Tom Penner.
[url]http://techworkseng.com[/url]
- Steve
[url]http://techworkseng.com[/url]
- Steve
| Patrick L | 05-22-2005 09:04 PM |
[QUOTE=Chromer]
You might want to talk to [url=http://www.irishmikes.com/Irish%20Mike%27s%20Racing.htm]Mike Flynn[/url], he ran a N/A Impreza in SpeedTC the last two years, though he was pretty limited on what he could do to it.[/QUOTE]
They were really not limited that much with the engine.
13.0:1 CR
100.5mm bore
8500 Rev limit
P&P the heads
port match intake manifold up too 25mm
Intake manifold: They have a specific part# but I would imagine you could get an allowance as there are 3 different intake mainfolds for the RS. first gen Intake, aluminum 98-02, 2nd same design but plastic 03-04, aluminum new design 05.
70mm Max Throttle Body.
The is only a tid bit off the 2004 VTS for the 2.5RS in Speed TC.
You might want to talk to [url=http://www.irishmikes.com/Irish%20Mike%27s%20Racing.htm]Mike Flynn[/url], he ran a N/A Impreza in SpeedTC the last two years, though he was pretty limited on what he could do to it.[/QUOTE]
They were really not limited that much with the engine.
13.0:1 CR
100.5mm bore
8500 Rev limit
P&P the heads
port match intake manifold up too 25mm
Intake manifold: They have a specific part# but I would imagine you could get an allowance as there are 3 different intake mainfolds for the RS. first gen Intake, aluminum 98-02, 2nd same design but plastic 03-04, aluminum new design 05.
70mm Max Throttle Body.
The is only a tid bit off the 2004 VTS for the 2.5RS in Speed TC.
| randy zimmer | 05-23-2005 05:01 PM |
Want an opinion?
�
�
Long as I'm mentioned a couple times, I may as well chime in...
I've thought about increasing the power but I can't bring myself to do it.
When I bought the 3.0 - 6, I had a sponsoring dealer that wanted better results and as I was gearing up to do the switch, I was collecting every transmission I could find.
When that deal dried up, the budget wasn't there to pay for the failures so I did the next best thing and started driving better.
----
Engine is bone stock in every way.
Car is light. (as allowed)
Tires are used.
Gas is regular.
Ratio is back to 4.1 after two R&P failures.
----
My opinion is that the transmission is too marginal to go for 250 peaky HP.
Wide torque of the 6 should have easier on it but Anders broke one already with the H6 in just a few stages and Rally-Xs.
6-speeds are expensive and a 50# weight penalty but would be cheaper and easier in the long run if you needed to hop up the engine.
US rally is more endurance than speed at this point in time anyway.
rz
I've thought about increasing the power but I can't bring myself to do it.
When I bought the 3.0 - 6, I had a sponsoring dealer that wanted better results and as I was gearing up to do the switch, I was collecting every transmission I could find.
When that deal dried up, the budget wasn't there to pay for the failures so I did the next best thing and started driving better.
----
Engine is bone stock in every way.
Car is light. (as allowed)
Tires are used.
Gas is regular.
Ratio is back to 4.1 after two R&P failures.
----
My opinion is that the transmission is too marginal to go for 250 peaky HP.
Wide torque of the 6 should have easier on it but Anders broke one already with the H6 in just a few stages and Rally-Xs.
6-speeds are expensive and a 50# weight penalty but would be cheaper and easier in the long run if you needed to hop up the engine.
US rally is more endurance than speed at this point in time anyway.
rz
| dentsport | 05-23-2005 07:20 PM |
Just curious, How does a well mapped group N motor have a narrow powerband? On a 32mm restrictor and even a mild ALS map you have power from 2500 to 5500-6000. Torque is in the high 300's. A clubman group A lancer motor can make 320 bhp on ~100 octane. To build and develop a EJ25 NA motor capable of making useable power for rally would cost more than buying a 34mm late group A spec prodrive motor.
| RB5 Clone | 05-23-2005 10:59 PM |
[QUOTE=dentsport] To build and develop a EJ25 NA motor capable of making useable power for rally would cost more than buying a 34mm late group A spec prodrive motor.[/QUOTE]
Absolutely don't agree that "useable power for rally" costs prodrive bucks. Maybe it's the term "usable" -- if usable means 300+ torque, than no, low-$ NA probably won't do. If usable means "fast enough to stick your car very very far into the woods if you screw up" and usable also means "will still beat lots of turbo teams," than a breathed-on junkyard 2.5 with good gearing/diffs and DMS 50s in a decently built Impreza shell will do just fine. Oh yeh, and as RZ sez, it kind of helps to drive well, too.
Dave G
Owner/driver/codriver of a quite usable 2.5 RS that has spanked many RexEvoQuattroTalons in its day
Absolutely don't agree that "useable power for rally" costs prodrive bucks. Maybe it's the term "usable" -- if usable means 300+ torque, than no, low-$ NA probably won't do. If usable means "fast enough to stick your car very very far into the woods if you screw up" and usable also means "will still beat lots of turbo teams," than a breathed-on junkyard 2.5 with good gearing/diffs and DMS 50s in a decently built Impreza shell will do just fine. Oh yeh, and as RZ sez, it kind of helps to drive well, too.
Dave G
Owner/driver/codriver of a quite usable 2.5 RS that has spanked many RexEvoQuattroTalons in its day
| dentsport | 05-23-2005 11:15 PM |
I'm not saying a NA 2.5 isn't enough power for a decent rallycar. Just to build a 2.5 motor that would be competitive with a N4 motor's (let alone a built 34mm motor) useable power would be expensive and pointless.
| Matt Monson | 05-24-2005 07:20 PM |
[QUOTE=dentsport]I'm not saying a NA 2.5 isn't enough power for a decent rallycar. Just to build a 2.5 motor that would be competitive with a N4 motor's (let alone a built 34mm motor) useable power would be expensive and pointless.[/QUOTE]
I have to respectfully disagree, especially your comments about it running anywhere near in cost to a Prodrive motor. You do not have to pay big dollar to make good power from the EJ25. It is a pretty simple formula to hit 250chp with a matching torque band, even using a combination of new & used parts. It can be done cheaper if you shop mostly for used. For example my EJ257 cost me $400. Anyways:
NEW EJ257 STI block: $1850
JE high CR Pistons: $ 600
EJ254 SOHC heads: $ 400
Delta cams for heads: $ 130
PnP for heads: $ 1500
Springs & Ti retainers:$ 400
Ported TB: $ 250
Total: $5150
And many of these things can be done way cheaper than listed if you do your own machine work. This is the expensive variation of the build. Mine is costing more like $3000...
I have to respectfully disagree, especially your comments about it running anywhere near in cost to a Prodrive motor. You do not have to pay big dollar to make good power from the EJ25. It is a pretty simple formula to hit 250chp with a matching torque band, even using a combination of new & used parts. It can be done cheaper if you shop mostly for used. For example my EJ257 cost me $400. Anyways:
NEW EJ257 STI block: $1850
JE high CR Pistons: $ 600
EJ254 SOHC heads: $ 400
Delta cams for heads: $ 130
PnP for heads: $ 1500
Springs & Ti retainers:$ 400
Ported TB: $ 250
Total: $5150
And many of these things can be done way cheaper than listed if you do your own machine work. This is the expensive variation of the build. Mine is costing more like $3000...
| dentsport | 05-25-2005 08:34 AM |
I'm not disagreeing with anything you just mentioned about your motor. A group N motor will make 270+ hp and 350+ ft/lbs of torque with a more usable powerband than your motor.
| Matt Monson | 05-25-2005 11:40 AM |
[QUOTE=dentsport]I'm not disagreeing with anything you just mentioned about your motor. A group N motor will make 270+ hp and 350+ ft/lbs of torque with a more usable powerband than your motor.[/QUOTE]
How are you defining usable power band? The above motor will be pulling 230+ft/lb of torque from 4000-7000rpm. You could get a HP number more like 275, if you used a cam that made it more peaky, but if you don't overcam it, you aren't going to go too narrow...
How are you defining usable power band? The above motor will be pulling 230+ft/lb of torque from 4000-7000rpm. You could get a HP number more like 275, if you used a cam that made it more peaky, but if you don't overcam it, you aren't going to go too narrow...
| M3GTR | 05-25-2005 11:47 AM |
[QUOTE=Matt Monson]How are you defining usable power band? The above motor will be pulling 230+ft/lb of torque from 4000-7000rpm. You could get a HP number more like 275, if you used a cam that made it more peaky, but if you don't overcam it, you aren't going to go too narrow...[/QUOTE]
It would be a good motor. I'm not arguing that. A proper group N motor will make 325+ ft/lbs from 2500-5500. I'm not bashing your motor at all, just from a cost/service standpoint a stock EJ20t STi with management will make much more usable power.
It would be a good motor. I'm not arguing that. A proper group N motor will make 325+ ft/lbs from 2500-5500. I'm not bashing your motor at all, just from a cost/service standpoint a stock EJ20t STi with management will make much more usable power.
| Jon Bogert | 05-25-2005 12:57 PM |
But you'll be gearing the NA motor to take advantage of the powerband.
Do the power-to-the-ground calcs for each gear of your short ratio box and I bet you come very close to the Grp N numbers. Factor in the reduced weight and you could have some serious fun!
Do the power-to-the-ground calcs for each gear of your short ratio box and I bet you come very close to the Grp N numbers. Factor in the reduced weight and you could have some serious fun!
| rallynutdon | 05-25-2005 01:08 PM |
[QUOTE=randy zimmer]Ratio is back to 4.1 after two R&P failures.
----
rz[/QUOTE]
Please expound some more now that you convinced me to go 4.4 and I've already started purchasing parts :confused:
----
rz[/QUOTE]
Please expound some more now that you convinced me to go 4.4 and I've already started purchasing parts :confused:
| zzyzx | 05-25-2005 01:47 PM |
[QUOTE=Matt Monson]How are you defining usable power band? The above motor will be pulling 230+ft/lb of torque from 4000-7000rpm. You could get a HP number more like 275, if you used a cam that made it more peaky, but if you don't overcam it, you aren't going to go too narrow...[/QUOTE]
That's overly optimistic (to put in nicely). 230 TQ @ 7000 RPM is 306 HP. You're not going to get that from the NA build you described.
That's overly optimistic (to put in nicely). 230 TQ @ 7000 RPM is 306 HP. You're not going to get that from the NA build you described.
| RB5 Clone | 05-25-2005 02:47 PM |
4.44 R&P failures???
�
�
[QUOTE=rallynutdon]Please expound some more now that you convinced me to go 4.4 and I've already started purchasing parts :confused:[/QUOTE]
Were the failures due to installation work, poor scooby gearbox design, too much power from the 2.5, or what?
Just sourced RS box, clutch bits, auto diff, etc. for the upgrad..mildly freaked now (not bad, tho) ;)
Dave G
Were the failures due to installation work, poor scooby gearbox design, too much power from the 2.5, or what?
Just sourced RS box, clutch bits, auto diff, etc. for the upgrad..mildly freaked now (not bad, tho) ;)
Dave G
| Jon Bogert | 05-25-2005 04:43 PM |
Mike--one other thing: What do you think will happen if you actually do build a better mousetrap? You can look forward to running it for the rest of the season at most before they change the rules and raise the minimum weight or saddle you with a restrictor.
The guy with the better idea is never lauded and cheered in racing. All the guys he beat just get together with the organizers and agree to make him illegal.
The guy with the better idea is never lauded and cheered in racing. All the guys he beat just get together with the organizers and agree to make him illegal.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét