27-10-2010, 08:21 AM | #21 |
Driving it like I nicked it
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,099
Casino cash: $13060 |
Think there is something wrong with those figures too...
160mph = 257kmh Veyron 0-250kmh time: 13.3 So either increasing compression make it really, really fast, or it is a 0-160kmh time (0-100mph) in which case it seems a bit slow?
__________________
Nathan |
27-10-2010, 08:26 AM | #22 | |
S2 - Picking it up
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Greece - Athens
Posts: 50
Casino cash: $1718 |
Quote:
well if you are not really happy with what you got, and have the extra cash then buy a gt3... don't try to push the S54 more n/a... i haven't seen a stroker that actually made some good results and i am on several boards reading... and i am all about n/a as you can see in my sig... after spending lots and lots of time on this topic i am not going to try an persuade another person into doing it... if you want more power from the S54 then charge it...simple as that... But when you have a csl... other than that options are vac, kelleners, kk-automobile but i really can't say its working or not.... best of luck Nick
__________________
Natural Aspirated... 12,7 compression ratio,CSL intake,288/280 cams,head work much much much more.... |
|
27-10-2010, 08:27 AM | #23 |
S2 - Picking it up
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Greece - Athens
Posts: 50
Casino cash: $1718 |
you went with higher compression and cams and it was still low?
__________________
Natural Aspirated... 12,7 compression ratio,CSL intake,288/280 cams,head work much much much more.... |
27-10-2010, 08:37 AM | #24 | |
S2 - Picking it up
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Greece - Athens
Posts: 50
Casino cash: $1718 |
Quote:
0-100km/h ( 62mph ) 4,2...seems too much but with decent tarmac can be done.. 0-160km/h ( 98mph ) 10,8 that is the correct number....and kind of slow if you have 4,2 0-100km/h... 10,8 to 250km/h is certainly not for an n/a S54 engine car....... no way this is happening....
__________________
Natural Aspirated... 12,7 compression ratio,CSL intake,288/280 cams,head work much much much more.... |
|
27-10-2010, 09:00 AM | #25 |
Driving it like I nicked it
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,099
Casino cash: $13060 |
I know of a couple of 3.4 strokers that make good numbers (420-430), but ultimately don't seem to be much, if any, more than proper 3.2s. Just seems 2 ways of going about the same job, higher RPM screamer or more grunty but lower revving?
__________________
Nathan |
27-10-2010, 09:48 AM | #26 | |
CSL Register Uber-poster!
|
Quote:
__________________
Cha'mone Mother F**ker! |
|
27-10-2010, 10:15 AM | #27 |
S5 - Full Throttle
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 469
Casino cash: $3876 |
Whilst there are a few stroked 3.2 cars racing generally the view is that the gains they offer are not significant on track to justify it. Power is gained but you drop torque which also makes the conversion less dramatic on a road car. Cams make a difference but if you want over 400bhp you need to run an aftermarket ecu and on a road car that creates its own issues.
|
27-10-2010, 10:55 AM | #28 |
S5, Sport Off, DSC M-track
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 740
Casino cash: $14401 |
Hi,
The very paramiters of what a 'Racing Car' needs to do should tell those interested that increasing stroke on the S54 is taking the engine in the wrong direction. While a stroked S54 might be nice on some unrestricted Autobhan or Route 66 freeway, its not going to deliver its promise on a Race Track. For a Road car then maybe, but as a means to increase power on a S54 Track / Race car, spend the money as 'Nick' has already suggested,on chassis dynamics, weight saving, etc and see proper gains for your money. Regards, The Gorilla. |
27-10-2010, 11:00 AM | #29 |
Driving it like I nicked it
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,099
Casino cash: $13060 |
I'd have guessed that a 3.4 producing 420bhp might be a little less stressed than a 3.2 producing the same though? Less revs may well mean better reliability which could be seen as a good attribute in a race car.
I may be completely wrong though!
__________________
Nathan |
27-10-2010, 11:30 AM | #30 |
S5, Sport Off, DSC M-track
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 740
Casino cash: $14401 |
Hi,
Nathan- As with any Race Car or Race series its not down the straights where Races are won and lost, its around the twisty bits. Reliability aside, most would agree that the best car in F1 at the moment is the Red Bull, with a Renault engine. Is this the fastest car down the straight or through the speed trap, no, does the Renault engine make the biggest amount of power no, does the renault engine Rev, yes, will the Renault engine over rev past 18,000 rpm yes, is the Renault Engine power band well matched to the gearbox ratios, yes. So back to the S54, for Track or Race your much better off with an engine that will rev to 8500 / 8750, where the power band and rev drop can be better matched to gearbox ratios, which stroking the S54 does not do. Stroking reduces revs, wrong direction, and also moves the engine power band/ rev drop backwards meaning your going to always be wanting to shift down not up to keep the engine well on the cams. If I was racing today, I would be using a S54 3.0LTR, yes they do exist, but they are shorter stroke, longer rod engines. Shorter stroke Engine would rev much quicker, and the longer rods would increase the engine torque. That is why I said that 'Stroking' the S54 is taking it in the wrong direction for Racing. Regards, The Gorilla. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|