Waiting Room

I won't try quoting your post. I know there are some big number V6s out there but I'm talking about modding the one that's in there. I don't see someone slapping bigger turbos on an Ecoboost block and running with any reliability. A new aftermarket block, sure but from the factory, no.

On the warranty reductions, that is a very recent development. This is a short version of a longer story I read last week showing that the OEMs are cutting their warranty coverages.
 
Telco said:
I won't try quoting your post. I know there are some big number V6s out there but I'm talking about modding the one that's in there. I don't see someone slapping bigger turbos on an Ecoboost block and running with any reliability. A new aftermarket block, sure but from the factory, no.
Click to expand...

blocks are very rarely the weak point in boosted applications (especially when boosted from the factory). hell look at ford Teksid blocks, they can typically handle 3 times the power that they were built for.

there are quite a few snail upgrade for the older 3.5 EB, I would imagine that the newer, stronger 3.5 wont be any different.

hell there are already more than a few heavily modified 4 cylinder EB motors out there making almost double the power as designed...

ford right now is finally showing that they can build some real motors, the new pony has no problem seeing anywhere between 50% and 75% more power added to the stock motor with no reliability problems. (ford even offers their own SC adding over 200 more HP to a 400 HP motor and fully warrantying it with out changing a thing on the inside)



also if you have almost half a mil to buy a new car, buying an aftermarket block aint going to be nothing slowing anybody down. at that point, aint nothing gonna stop you from making however much power you want to make!
 
Telco said:
I don't see someone slapping bigger turbos on an Ecoboost block and running with any reliability. A new aftermarket block, sure but from the factory, no.
Click to expand...

its already been done. the EcoBoost block easily held at or about 530 crank on mike's 2010 SHO. 443 awhp. 456 awtq. 20% loss gives 531/547 crank.
and he's not the only one with the ATP turbos...

now, the same car with some internals, and a stock block (although they did sleeve the cylinders for bigger pistons and add a brace), made 617/608 wheel. (roughly 740/730 crank)

and it hasn't blown up yet.
 
dead-horse.gif

dead-horse.gif
 
1LoudLS said:
600 hp was good for super cars from the last decade, now that category is filled with 1K HP monsters!
Click to expand...

My friend/reliable source says the torque is going to be where the GT engine shines. Still doesn't really help the numbers game for me though, as an armchair millionaire. They say they're going for "lap times, lap times, and lap times"

It'll be interesting. We'll just have to wait and see
 
Heh heh, I yield already! If these things last a few years without major recalls I might change my mind about them but until then I prefer to sit on the sidelines and let others be the guinea pigs. To those of you who know these guys with the double power V6s, let us know if they do blow up.
 
Telco said:
Heh heh, I yield already! If these things last a few years without major recalls I might change my mind about them but until then I prefer to sit on the sidelines and let others be the guinea pigs.
Click to expand...

define "a few years"... cause its been kicking ass for half a decade now...



Telco said:
To those of you who know these guys with the double power V6s, let us know if they do blow up.
Click to expand...

because push rod Chevy never blow up? come on man, sh!t changes man, you can either get on board and learn something new, or just sit on the sidelines forever being scared of new...


but yeah turbos are a totally new thing, they have been used in passenger cars for decades now, not really sure how much more proof you need that they can be just as reliable...
 
yeah, the few folks i know running bigger snails on the ecoboost, are on the
1st gen f150's that offered the eco. thats already been a few years.

..and FINALLY got the gangstah washed after all the freaking rain here in
texas. nice to see her clean again.

11393017_10207168390551073_9188807769250203712_n.jpg
 
1LoudLS said:
define "a few years"... cause its been kicking ass for half a decade now...


because push rod Chevy never blow up? come on man, sh!t changes man, you can either get on board and learn something new, or just sit on the sidelines forever being scared of new...


but yeah turbos are a totally new thing, they have been used in passenger cars for decades now, not really sure how much more proof you need that they can be just as reliable...
Click to expand...

Sorry, I know V6 turbos have been around for a while but as they are generally front wheel drive they are not to be considered. I just keep thinking full size Ford truck with turbo V6 trying to tow heavy loads up steep grades when I think Ecoboost, being as I'm really a truck guy. Mental block on my part, and they ARE new on the trucks.

I don't need to be reminded that pushrod Chevys don't blow up either. I'm reminded every time I go out in the garage as my old block is sitting out there. Now I'm sad.
 
damn mullet is a mad man!


that so blatantly american, I bet he probably sh!ts american flags
 
he has a pretty big reputation to uphold, i.e. the mullet, the shirt, the money
bags, and the half a mil dumped in a car :)

'muricah.

he blew that bitch up at the last tx2k, though... :) i guess cuz 'muricah, again lol
 
Telco said:
Sorry, I know V6 turbos have been around for a while but as they are generally front wheel drive they are not to be considered. I just keep thinking full size Ford truck with turbo V6 trying to tow heavy loads up steep grades when I think Ecoboost, being as I'm really a truck guy. Mental block on my part, and they ARE new on the trucks.

I don't need to be reminded that pushrod Chevys don't blow up either. I'm reminded every time I go out in the garage as my old block is sitting out there. Now I'm sad.
Click to expand...
The absolute Baddest turbo engine ever made was the BMW M12/13 used in the 1986 Benetton B186 Formula 1 cars. They had to drive those things with no traction control and with H pattern shifters. 1400 HP from 1499cc inline 4 with a single KKK turbo!
 
1LoudLS said:
so the real question is, whos GT is faster, Jason's or Mark's? lol
Click to expand...

heidaker's gt all day long. simply due to the motec being able to manage traction by boost, through
each gear.

mullets car has antilag, and um.. thats about it. you gotta pedal the hell outta that car to keep it planted.
...and its not QUITE as nasty of a build as the mile gt.
 
Robot said:
The absolute Baddest turbo engine ever made was the BMW M12/13 used in the 1986 Benetton B186 Formula 1 cars. They had to drive those things with no traction control and with H pattern shifters. 1400 HP from 1499cc inline 4 with a single KKK turbo!
Click to expand...

How many years do they run it between rebuilds? None? Not good for the street then. Racing engines do not count when discussing streetability, because they put hundreds of thousands of dollars into an engine that might run one season, or even just one race, between rebuilds. I understand what you're saying though, the engines can handle a lot of power when forced but my main concern with them is longevity as a daily driver from the OEM when used as advertised. And before anyone goes on about turbos running for years, what's going on today is a little different in that the OEMs are trying to make the engine as small as possible and still meet the HP/TQ requirements and Ford's new turbo trucks is what I'm concerned about.
 
Telco said:
How many years do they run it between rebuilds? None? Not good for the street then. Racing engines do not count when discussing streetability, because they put hundreds of thousands of dollars into an engine that might run one season, or even just one race, between rebuilds.
Click to expand...
Actually, they could crank the boost down on those engines and they would probably run forever. All of those engines used blocks that had at least 100,000 km on them anyway. In racing trim they were giving about 850 HP which is still way more than anything on the street now in the hp/ltr category. I got to hear and see these engines first hand at the US Grand Prix in Detroit 1987. The sound from those little engines was absolutely NASTY! I'd rank it right up there near top fuel dragsters.
 
Telco said:
what's going on today is a little different in that the OEMs are trying to make the engine as small as possible and still meet the HP/TQ requirements
Click to expand...

not really any different at all...

Back in the late 70's and early 80's the OEMs were building much smaller engines than everything else that was out there and making up for the displacement with turbochargers... gas started to get expensive, so OEMs started making much smaller motors that made just as much (if not more) power from a motor half the size. kinda like how the 2.3 turbo coupe Thunderbird was the higher performance version over the larger and less powerful 302 Windsor... or the SVO... or the Grand National... or hundreds of other models...

honestly other than a few improvements like VGT snails, not really much has changed about turbos over the years. and yeah of course with computers we have improved in designing engines over the last 40 years, as now we can test hundreds of engine designs with out ever building a single one to see what works and what doesn't

at no part of whats going on today is any different than what was going on back then... we just got a lot more efficient at doing it.



I will say that while I would prefer the 6.2 Boss V8, but the new EB motor wont have any problems keeping up, especially with a 10 speed transmission. stock for stock in daily driver mode, the EB out preforms the 6.2 in almost every measurable way other than just the complexity of the new EB... from a drivers perspective, it actually has a lot more usable torque than the older larger option. for drive-ability, its all about the "area under the curve" the torque comes on very early, builds fast, and just keeps going.
 
^
I agree with you about the 80s turbos. I thought that was going to be the end of big engines and then I guess computers got sophisticated enough to control emissions and fuel economy at the same time. So, I guess that gave the big boys another shot. Who would've thought we'd have a 427 pushing 30mpg?

Now they bring turbos back and everyone acts like its a new thing. Actually, turbos never went away, they were just not as prevalent in the market. They are becoming more prevalent in today's market because it's the cheaper option. Look at AMG and how they've changed in the last decade or two. It used to be all about that big V12 or V8 that was torn down and given the ultra expensive NASCAR engine building treatment and even better. Now, they just throw turbos on it and reprogram the engine management system. I know it's a bit more complicated than that. My point is turbos are cheap relatively speaking. For all of the race fans that remember the turbo wars of IMSA GT racing and the engines would go Boom! They had to change engines left and right. Watching it now you see mostly blown turbo, blown turbo, blown turbo. The turbo is the soft spot nowadays. The sensors won't allow the engine to run long enough for anything else to go wrong.
 
I don't know if I would go as far to call turbos a cheap option by any means...


NA is almost always going to be the cheapest... then superchargers and then lastly turbo systems being the most expensive of any other option for if nothing else, just the shear complexity of the system have having the most parts.
 
1LoudLS said:
I don't know if I would go as far to call turbos a cheap option by any means...


NA is almost always going to be the cheapest... then superchargers and then lastly turbo systems being the most expensive of any other option for if nothing else, just the shear complexity of the system have having the most parts.
Click to expand...
What I was meaning by that was the new engines of today are so high tech and expensive anyway. The turbo and their associated subsystems don't amount to the same cost percentage wise as they did in the past. I'm sure that's partly due to decreased cost of technology components. I spent 18 large on a haltech system back in the 80s and I can get the equivalent setup today for 20% of that. The power plants as a whole are more expensive but the parts that are likely to fail are much cheaper to replace than they used to be. Hard engine parts are less likely to fail these days because of the sophisticated engine monitoring systems. So, if you lose a turbo, just replace the thing. I realize that may not work for those of us who are harder on our cars but for the average Joe it might.
 
Did anyone catch any of the 24 Hours of Le Mans this weekend? What's up with Nissan and that Nismo POS? They have some nerve trying to compete with a Fail Wheel Drive car. That wasn't even a car. That was like one of those creepy looking antique wheelchairs with the big wheels in the front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 262 (members: 1, guests: 261)
Back
Top