PDA

View Full Version : 2.0 or 1.8, getting cold feet....



zandrew
11-06-2016, 01:52 PM
I bought a avant awhile back and got the motor pulled this week. Lucked out as it has a fx250 240mm clutchmasters clutch on it with a good bit of life left. My plans has been to go 2.0 Stroker but now that the motor is apart and the bores are virtually perfect (will check with dial bore guage tomorrow) I am thinking about sticking in the new aeb pistons and rpm rods be done. My goal is 350awhp with 6758 efr so I am wondering how much of a difference the 2.0 will make. I could sell the stroker pistons and crank nd get some other stuff I could use like fluidmper and another eurodyne license.

Thoughts from someone that knows the difference?

RENOxDECEPTION
11-06-2016, 02:02 PM
Sell me the stroker pistons.

Davdraco1
11-06-2016, 02:37 PM
You will be more then fine at 1.8 for 350whp. You'll be wasting money to go stroker.

MarcRogers
11-07-2016, 03:14 AM
Sell the stroker shit. Treat yourself to some goodies to make that 350. It would be different if u wanted to make around 500.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Davdraco1
11-07-2016, 06:04 AM
2k is a lot for a bump in displacement. Like Marc said, if you want big power then yes, but 350 is nothing for a 1.8.

zandrew
11-07-2016, 06:24 AM
2k? What cost 2k?

I want 350 awhp, that's closer to 450 at the flywheel.

Seerlah
11-07-2016, 06:53 AM
Couple years back, stroker kits were really meant for two purposes. Reduced lag time and more power to be made, with the former being the main reason. Then technology with turbochargers became more advanced...starting with the change from cast to billet compressor wheels. Now it is an upgrade quality shops can do as an upgrade, where prior it was only companies like Forced Performance that was doing it (at least to my knowledge, anyways). Came to the point, companies like Competiton Turbo (I also run a CT5152 Triplex) emerged, and I was introduced to this company by person who also custom tunes my car via Maestro (Audizine member and former in house tuner of company that shall remain nameless in this post). Some of this info you already know, and even more (than I ever will or want to know). This is of your field of expertise and it is sh*t like this of why Audizine rocks! Doubt people even know you have a DIY on how to rebuild ball bearing turbochargers floating around in the archives. Probably one of the very few that even exist on the internet...right on this forum board and I'm currently talking with the man who wrote it (many say it simple can't be done). Couple that with purchasing your own billet wheel and you have...oh, well!

In regards to the in house tuner, tuning options also became more advanced (not speaking in regards to OTS tunes). Before if you did not know how to manipulate the coding of the stock ECM, Lemmiwinks was about the best of the best when it came to being able to make adjustments to tunes personally. If not that...then some kind of engine standalone system was to be used...which can be quite the work to wire up and then have a competent tuner dial it it. And the price of this getting done was not very eye appealing to most. So, people put that money towards just increasing displacement to earn an extra 500rpm spool minimal and extra power in the long run.

Back onto technology advancing...now you have more tuning options. Nefmoto and Meastro Suite are the two that really come to mind as far as friendly user ability. People always will have their opinions about such and such. But that is just life. One may think Eurodyne Suite is complete and utter trash...while someone like me who runs it has no problem with it. Everybody has their reasons. Mine is it suits my needs (really is a want) just fine. Others have a disdain for it because it does not have parameters you can mess with like a standalone. Reality check...it isn't a standalone, you had to wire nothing for it (I know there are units out there that connect to the stock harness, but that is beside the point), all you had to do is download software to your laptop, pay money for your credits, hook cable to your OBDII port, and ready to go for $800 (that is the point, with added price point). Not everyone is out to make a track car. So now, tuning options available (what you run also) can try and compensate on the decreased lag time and extra power to be made (why I am very content with my setup and haven't really been pursuing more power as of late, but will get back to it soon. not sure if you will read this Dan [;)]).

Now...the onto of the EFR. This will be the stepping stone of turbocharger technology to come next possibly. And with that being said...I'll probably wait it out and see what happens next before ever upgrading from my current turbo. When the EFR was released, as you know, price was not nearly as expensive as it is now. Tried and proven in the real world...and prices took a back seat cab ride to the moon. If you don't understand the analogy, price inflation of roughly 50-75% in a matter of 3-5 years if I had to guesstimate. But the 6758 on stock displacement will not also spool faster than a turbocharger equivalent with 2L of displacement...the tuning involved end of the day can make you quite happy and content. I don't have an EFR, but same principle applies to me...sort of!

Don't even waste your time on the stroker for a 350WHP end goal. EFR6758, forged rods, AEB pistons, and custom tune will have your setup way better than mine. I suggest T25 6758 all the time...because it is too simple of a setup to not try and pursue. SPA even had a nice t25 manifold back in the days. Not sure if they still even make it or not.

And...found it: http://www.ebay.com/itm/SPA-Turbo-T25-Manifold-VW-VAG-Audi-B5-A4-1-8-20V-1-8T-engines-TMA01-/181961906440

GOODBYNAAIR
11-07-2016, 09:11 AM
This makes me want to dump my Gt28 elim and go EFR so bad !

zandrew
11-07-2016, 04:22 PM
One downfall to the efr turbos, they are not rebuildable. You can not get parts for them, the BB cart could most likely be rebuilt but the turbine can not be sourced and I doubt anyone would balance one for you.

It's a turn off for me but for most it's not. Garrett turbos have been great for me and they have the exchange program as well.

Seerlah
11-07-2016, 11:35 PM
Got to pay to play! Name of the game. I say get it and enjoy it till it goes. After that, choose from one of the 23 turbochargers you have laying around [:p]. At that point, the t25 may be something you throw out the window. But do something like put together a simple kit for the t25 kit for mani of your choice (ie gt28 series with t25t housing, pre-made lines and an intake. I can put together a kit right now for around $1,000), resell pre-built kit and make money back.

genecan
11-08-2016, 12:54 AM
I say GO stroker.

Yes, 1.8 can do it, but 2.0 will be definitely more fun, especially if a DD or pushing the car not only on a stright line. EFR spools earlier than a comparable GT and the responce is good, but the 2.0 will enhacde them evene further. Yes, it costs some more, but in a year from now you would not want to tear the engine again, and the question will be killing you - "What it would be like if..."

If you sell the stroker hardware you will end up losing money, fluidampr is not essential at all.

If you have the stroker parts it means you want to do it. It is a mistake to start hesitating now. Stick to your decisions - there will always be people recommending one or the other road.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 07:54 AM
^Very valid points.

Zandrew...all boils down to you. He is correct about response and such with the increased displacement, such as coming off the line. But a tune can match that...like how my car is. I beat minivans and all (people joke about this, but need to realize some of those "mini-vans" have V6 engines under the hood).

I'm a cheap guy...so I went the cheap route. But I also have a spare block and FSI crank in my possession. So, there is that route also. Enjoy now, enjoy more later. Ha! Stroker will be built on the side, while I still enjoy my 350whp butt dyno and will probably convert that to e85 for ease of power.

Believer
11-08-2016, 08:04 AM
I tend to agree with gene. Sure a 1.8 will do but man, a stroker will just be better! You'll hit your goals with either set up, but the extra torque across the rev range from that increased stroke is not reproducible and will be a gap with the 1.8L set up in terms of early power and spool.

I can't wait to stroke mine. I'm not chasing that 'true' 2L though. I will likely use 82mm pistons and an AEG crank.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 08:15 AM
I tend to agree with gene. Sure a 1.8 will do but man, a stroker will just be better! You'll hit your goals with either set up, but the extra torque across the rev range from that increased stroke is not reproducible and will be a gap with the 1.8L set up in terms of early power and spool.

I can't wait to stroke mine. I'm not chasing that 'true' 2L though. I will likely use 82mm pistons and an AEG crank.

This is where most people are not understanding. They say there is no replacement for displacement...yet technology proves otherwise. When people say it's all about the tuning, they are not lying. I find myself driving 1-4 gears all the time with zero boost. Why? The timing in my tune that was addressed both in and out of boost. Both high and low end. In a nutshell, the 1.8L NA aspect of the engine that has so much untapped power is something many will not know even exists there. Well I do...and it's how my tune is. And from what my tuner tells me, his is much more aggressive. And he runs and exactly what I am suggesting, for pure irony. EFR7658, AEB pistons, and forged rods. If he sees this thread, maybe he can post a log to see on data what I am trying to explain.

Believer
11-08-2016, 08:21 AM
This is where most people are not understanding. They say there is no replacement for displacement...yet technology proves otherwise. When people say it's all about the tuning, they are not lying. I find myself driving 1-4 gears all the time with zero boost. Why? the timing in my tune that was addressed both in and out of boost. Both high and low end. In a nutshell, the 1.8L NA aspect of the engine that has so much untapped power is something many will not know even exists there. Well I do...and it's how my tune is. And from what my tuner tells me, his is much more aggressive. And he runs and exactly what I am suggesting, for pure irony. EFR7658, AEB pistons, and forged rods. If he sees this thread, maybe he can post a log to see on data what I am trying to explain.

You can only add so much timing to an engine that has 1.8L of displacement before it becomes knock limited. That 1.8L engine will only produce so much torque inherently. You stroke that motor and it is now inherently producing more torque. This is what is not reproducible because on top of that extra torque from the additional stroke, you can still add all that extra timing that was added to your 1.8L engine. It is a simple mechanical fact - the mechanical benefits that come along with that stroke are are not achievable through tuning. 1.8L + all the timing it can take will not produce as much power as 2.0L + all the timing it can take.

Edit: I do see your point though, just to be sure you know I understand what you are saying. Timing is amazing no doubt and i'm sure many tunes do not have the timing tables tweaked to the best they could be.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 08:23 AM
I get that. But do you think a tuner gives two bird craps about that? No, they will tune for off boost "drive-ability" and power in boost.

The replacement for displacement is the tune, in case you missed that.

Believer
11-08-2016, 08:29 AM
I get that. But do you think a tuner gives two bird craps about that? No, they will tune for off boost "drive-ability" and power in boost.

The replacement for displacement is the tune, in case you missed that.

No, I didn't miss that.

I'm not really getting what you're saying though by 'do I think a tuner gives two bird craps about that?' About what exactly?

Given two identical scenarios, one is a 1.8L one is a 2.0L how can you say the tune is the replacement for the displacement, when both engines will be tuned? Both will achieve the benefits of that tune similarly. To me what you're saying reads as 'don't worry about that stroker, you can make the same power as long as you're tuned right' which just is not true.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 08:39 AM
Stock mapping on the low end. With the more displacement, some tuners won't even care and let the ECM adjust. Some add more fuel for the added intake air. As for adding more ignition timing...that is what I'm getting at. They give two bird craps.

I understand you are talking about power under the curve when in boost. Of course more is to be made with more displacement. Not only that, but forged internals are much more forgiving. I get that, yet you don't understand what I am talking about with the low end power. When it comes to the 1.8T, very few on this board have in their tune what I am referring to. Like...1:20 if even that. I am thinking more like 4-5 people in total.

Simple question: Can you beat a mini-van off the line without boost?

Believer
11-08-2016, 08:51 AM
I am not just talking about power under the curve when in boost, I never said that. I am talking about power across the entire rev range at all load levels. A stroker will effect power positively on and off boost and receive the same benefits of off boost timing map changes the same as a stock displacement motor.

The hypothetical tuners or tunes you are referring to are not very good if the ignition maps have not been edited for increased angle off boost, but that is a completely different topic than the fact that a motor with increased displacement will produce more power across all scenarios than a stock displacement motor, all things equal.

I haven't raced a mini-van, so i really can't comment on that and don't really see how it's relevant. I know that Dave at Motoza's ignition angle off boost is very aggressive and my car accelerates wonderfully off boost with ignition angles into the mid to high twenties.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 09:08 AM
I understand the torque will be more. But still things like increase in spool would still be in the tune.

The relevance of the min-van off the line is a very long going Audizine 1.8T joke. Because...nobody is racing mini-vans. It means at a stop light and a mini-van is at the front along with you, see if out of boost if that van will pull away or you. Most will tell you the mini-van walks them each and every time. This is the tuning I was talking about.

genecan
11-08-2016, 09:13 AM
Seerlah, I think Believer is right. If I had to simplify: 1.8 and 2.0 if they got the same "good" tune, the 2.0L will be far ahead in any direction. Hence "No replacement for displacement" is still valid. It is may not be valid if you compare 1.8T and lets say 2.6 NA.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 09:18 AM
It's all in the tune...and that is the replacement for displacement! Tired of trying to explain this. You guys get it, but don't. Hardware can be the same, but everything after that will never be starting from the engine. So your guys point and case right here...that I am not denying one bit. What I am denying is tuner Bob tunes the same as tuner Joe. So...Bob and Joe are the ones who determines the final outcome of your vehicle's performance.

Bob is better than Joe. Bob is tuning the 1.8 and Joe is tuning the 2L. In the end, I would rather have Bob tune my 1.8 than Joe tune my 2L. Or...have Bob tune the 2L. But will that even happen?!?!?!?! Will Bob tune my 1.8 to run better than the 2L Joe tuned? May be arrogant to answer with no proof, but I will say yes. that is what I am trying to get at, you guys understand, and still I am not understanding why having the stroker for 350whp is necessary. If 400whp+ I would be with you guys all the way. But we are talking 350whp goal with an EFR6758.

genecan
11-08-2016, 09:21 AM
It's all in the tune...and that is the replacement for displacement! Tired of trying to explain this.

I do not see how this is in conflict with what I wrote above.

Believer
11-08-2016, 09:24 AM
It's all in the tune...and that is the replacement for displacement! Tired of trying to explain this.

I get it. An untuned or poorly tuned 2.0L won't be as powerful as a properly tuned 1.8L. I would hope that someone going through the trouble and expense of building a 2L motor would be able to have the discernment and awareness to choose a competent tuner for their setup, whoever this person is.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 09:26 AM
Added stuff above. You guys are quick [;)]

The work and money that goes into doing a stroker vs added rods for such a minimal gain for his final goal is what people may be overlooking. He isn't looking for best 1/4 times on that setup at all. He is looking for a nice, fun, and reliable 350whp B5 A4 street dd setup. Stroker isn't necessary for this at all, because a tune can compensate easily. That is my point!

genecan
11-08-2016, 09:32 AM
Beliver and genecan compare apples to apples, Seerlah compares apples to oranges...

Once again 1.8 and 2.0 with the same "good" tune = 1.8 far behind.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 09:40 AM
My apples are green and yours are red. It's a B5 with the same block in it. Get your mind right, like not talking in 3rd person form!

I have seen my friend's stock displacement GTX3071R walk stage 3 S4s (stock cams but upgraded springs at this time...with stock valves). Think another with exact same setup and good tune can do that. I compare apples to oranges on the tunes because they simply will not be the same tune (fact). Custom tunes are that for a reason. Swap custom tunes and expect engines to start blowing. But the tuner...that is a different story. For example, friend paid over $1,000 for that custom tune. Think he is just going to let someone have it even if they asked? Oh, this is done on the ME5 that many say those powers can not even be made. Maestro Suite to boot!

Believer
11-08-2016, 09:42 AM
It's all in the tune...and that is the replacement for displacement! Tired of trying to explain this. You guys get it, but don't. Hardware can be the same, but everything after that will never be starting from the engine. So your guys point and case right here...that I am not denying one bit. What I am denying is tuner Bob tunes the same as tuner Joe. So...Bob and Joe are the ones who determines the final outcome of your vehicle's performance.

Bob is better than Joe. Bob is tuning the 1.8 and Joe is tuning the 2L. In the end, I would rather have Bob tune my 1.8 than Joe tune my 2L. Or...have Bob tune the 2L. But will that even happen?!?!?!?! Will Bob tune my 1.8 to run better than the 2L Joe tuned? May be arrogant to answer with no proof, but I will say yes. that is what I am trying to get at, you guys understand, and still I am not understanding why having the stroker for 350whp is necessary. If 400whp+ I would be with you guys all the way. But we are talking 350whp goal with an EFR6758.

No argument on your scenario of a poor tuner on the 2L vs a good tuner on the 1.8L.

Having the stroker for 350whp is not necessary in that sense of the word. In this context necessary is relative to the overall goals of the owner. It will however achieve that 350 whp 'easier', with *more available torque for both off and on boost driving*, than it's equivalently tuned 1.8L counterpart. It will spool the turbo faster when that is desired and will accelerate off boost faster when that is desired.

Both motors, given a 350 whp capable turbo, will achieve 350whp, however one will do so with a fatter torque curve than the other will and will also have greater available torque, sooner, in those off boost situations. The only reason I can see not stroking the motor is if money is a factor.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 09:47 AM
Just having an EFR makes it easier. I don't even think he has an EFR in that size. I am suggesting the 6758 over running a GT3071R (this he does have) with upped displacement. Hope now you see my view a little clearer. If not for the EFR being used...I would be with you guys 100% all the way. And another point and case...a replacement for displacement.

Believer
11-08-2016, 09:56 AM
Added stuff above. You guys are quick [;)]

The work and money that goes into doing a stroker vs added rods for such a minimal gain for his final goal is what people may be overlooking. He isn't looking for best 1/4 times on that setup at all. He is looking for a nice, fun, and reliable 350whp B5 A4 street dd setup. Stroker isn't necessary for this at all, because a tune can compensate easily. That is my point!

And my point is that the tune will not compensate for that. You are still limited to what 1.8L worth of displacement with all the timing it can take will produce, do you disagree?

You're creating this scenario of a poor tuner not doing as good of a job with the 2L to support your assertion that a 1.8L with a good tune will compensate for the additional power the stroker will inherently make when tuned poorly. Of course in your stacked scenario with untouched off-boost timing tables the good tune on the 1.8L is going to compensate. So what? The logic is cyclical. Dave at Motoza will tune my 2L the same as he tuned my 1.8L and it will make more power.

Believer
11-08-2016, 10:12 AM
Just having an EFR makes it easier. I don't even think he has an EFR in that size. I am suggesting the 6758 over running a GT3071R (this he does have) with upped displacement. Hope now you see my view a little clearer. If not for the EFR being used...I would be with you guys 100% all the way. And another point and case...a replacement for displacement.

This is true, EFRs are pretty magical snails! I would also prefer the 6758 over the gt30. I do see your view, you are passionate about having a proper tune, which I could not agree with you more on. I think we can also both agree on the 6758 achieving his goals of 350whp on 1.8L of displacement. But who doesn't want more torque everywhere while still achieving stated goals? Hey at the end of the day, we're all boosting, which is what really matters!

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 10:25 AM
Is Motoza tuning his car? No. Is my tuner tuning his car? No. Not doubting your tuner nor his credibility at all. I know he is a competent tuner. Never was that mentioned that he wasn't (that was an incorrect thought process, as I am speaking in general). But the fact still remains.

I praise his tunes all the time, with latest being MetalMan's on E85. And all 3 of us (you, genecan, and I) have been agreeing with each others for the last couple posts, and pretty sure all 3 of us acknowledged that. Just views on certain particulars differed. And your post above finally shows you understand what I was getting at.

You simply will not be having the same person tuning every B5 out there. And if Motoza tunes Zandrew's car, what you are saying is 100% the truth. Not denying it one bit at all. But...is that who will be tuning his car? That is what I am getting at. We are DIY guys, so I doubt it. Know how much I paid for my tune? Posted it many times, but so cheap it was basically free.

I really don't like arguing on the internet. But with you guys it was not an argument. Not even a debate. It was coming to an understanding. I understood you guys points a long time ago...and never refuted it. But it seems you now get what I was trying to imply. With that said...I can now go take a shower and start to run my errands.

B5 A4 section has not had a good thread in a while. I enjoyed it!!!

Believer
11-08-2016, 10:38 AM
My point with using Motoza as a tuner example was to highlight that the same person who is hypothetically tuning the 1.8L car will probably be tuning the 2.0L car.

It doesn't really matter if the tuner is different. Each tuner has the exact same tables available to them and the same engine variables to make tuning decisions off of. A competent tuner is a competent tuner no matter how you twist it. The point is, go with a good tuner who can extract what is achievable from the motor. I thought this was a pretty common thought process.

If you were agreeing with what I was saying, that is news to me as each successive post you appeared to continue pushing that that the tune will 'compensate' for increased stroke/displacement and that a stroker isn't 'necessary'. While I can appreciate (and agree with) your opinion that a stroker is not necessary to achieve said horsepower goals, the benefits of a stroker still stand and are completely agnostic to what his horsepower goals are. It's all about the benjamins...

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 10:54 AM
You are speaking hypothetical while I am speaking real world, as is going to, might, would, will, etc, happen. Apples and apples only applies on color and flavor here. But with displacement increase, now apple sizes. I said many times in my previous posts that I agree with you guys...on a logical if and only if mathematical view. But...that to think that all things area created equal, will go through the same things, and will be treated the same is illogical...even with same tables presented to them. Not all things are created equal, even the effort placed into a tune by the same tuner.

genecan
11-08-2016, 11:12 AM
Actually you are talking hypothetically. In real life you choose you are choosing somebody to do the tune based on whatever criteria. You go there and you can present your car with or without stroker. Thus you get two different dynographs NOT favoring 1.8T and a choice you make now.

Real life story.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 11:17 AM
Been in the real world a while. Hypothetical is in congruence with hypothesis, with same meaning. An educated guess with a base, that you guys have been demonstrating. But...where is the variable? I see the control.

I just gave you the variable in my posts. Things simply are not going to be created equal, meaning end results will always differ. Even on the base of your hypothetical reasoning. Something as simple as cylinder compression plays a factor. Apples to apples on your thought process, me and believer would be having the same tuner if I ran the same setup as him. But...I wouldn't.

genecan
11-08-2016, 11:23 AM
Really?!?

I stop here I see I can not convince you with reason.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 11:30 AM
Point and case, if what you guys are saying is true on premise we are talking about (that all things created equal, while I am saying they are not...even when they are in your view. even twin human beings...two totally opposites at times). To go along with what you are saying, then all those with a 2L GT3076R with same tuner and same exact setup have the same power under the curve, same hp, same tq, same trap speeds (same driver), same tires, same clutch, same...everything. And I am saying...they simply won't. And that is with the same tuner and all things "supposedly" equal. Reason being...they are not!!! But to the view of many they are. End results speak volumes of truth.

Believer
11-08-2016, 11:55 AM
You are speaking hypothetical while I am speaking real world, as is going to, might, would, will, etc, happen. Apples and apples only applies on color and flavor here. But with displacement increase, now apple sizes. I said many times in my previous posts that I agree with you guys...on a logical if and only if mathematical view. But...that to think that all things area created equal, will go through the same things, and will be treated the same is illogical...even with same tables presented to them. Not all things are created equal, even the effort placed into a tune by the same tuner.

Color and flavor? Apples to apples means we're talking about a scenario where the same tuner is handling both applications, where the hardware has not changed within the application short of a larger bore, longer stroke and stroker pistons, where the vehicle and all things supporting has not changed. I take my 1.8L motor and stroke it, and use the same tuner i have been using to tune it. That is what we are talking about.

And so your new argument is that even the same TUNER wouldn't tune the same way as he always has? That is logical to you? There is nothing logical about suggesting a tuner all the sudden abandons his practices and methods because he's tuning a stroked motor. The only world where that makes sense is where scenario stacking is necessary to support an argument.

Nothing you are talking about is real world. Real world is that a stroked motor makes more power than it's stock displacement counter part. Real world is that tuner X will use the same methods, tools, processes, engine variables and tables, in general, to produce a final tune, assuming this tuner is even somewhat competent and credible. Real world is what Gene stated - you bring the same car tuned as a 1.8t with EFR 6758 and dyno it, then stroke and bore that same car then dyno it and the stroked motor will make more power every single time, assuming the same tuner and competent engine work.

Believer
11-08-2016, 11:56 AM
Point and case, if what you guys are saying is true on premise we are talking about (that all things created equal, while I am saying they are not...even when they are in your view. even twin human beings...two totally opposites at times). To go along with what you are saying, then all those with a 2L GT3076R with same tuner and same exact setup have the same power under the curve, same hp, same tq, same trap speeds (same driver), same tires, same clutch, same...everything. And I am saying...they simply won't. And that is with the same tuner and all things "supposedly" equal. Reason being...they are not!!! But to the view of many they are. End results speak volumes of truth.

This isn't what we are saying. At all.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 12:30 PM
Ok, so the zinger. 1.8T t25 EFR or the above, with cost to gain involved. That is what we are talking about, correct? Or this dream build for 350whp magically pays for itself. Hence, why I say stock displacement is just fine. I would take stock displacement over stroker with the above. Why? Unless I am incorrect on Zandrew having an EFR in this size (he has one, among the 20+ turbos I was joking about...only because I don't know the exact number), cost to gain is not worth it in the long run. If you guys are convinced stroker...imagine it was your money. If chasing more than 350whp, I would have said stroker from the very beginning. But not for 350whp...at all.

Of course stroker is better...AND I NEVER REFUTED THAT ONCE!!! But unless you guys know his situation personally, stop screaming stroker is the better route. Like nobody asked themselves why this thread even exists in the first place. He may be thinking realistically like I am. With my build...I just did it. And still have a spare block to stroke out with crank in hand already...while still pushing 350whp right now!!!

I talked to Zandrew on the phone personally and all, when everybody slandered him in the past. Noticed I never look down upon people...even when others do. I throw jokes every now and then, but they are just jokes. No malice intended.

Bottom line...I have my opinion and everybody else will have theirs. And I totally understand that you guys are saying the extra torque and change of the entire drive of the car will be greatly improved. And once again but this time in bold...I get that. But what you guys are expecting and what will really happen in the end may be two totally different things. And the end result can very much be so marginal, cost to gain is not worth it. But if chasing more power, def worth it. But...it's not my money and these are all opinions. I am just saying what I would do, and not what I would "want" to do. Real Life!

He has parts, but what about a torque plate? What about proper hone tool for cross hatches? I know he is a machinist, but how many others do? And what is he a machinist of (I really don't know)? So how much extra will all this cost him?

My point has been proven, and if I have not understood yours yet please elaborate more!

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 12:32 PM
Last page ended in hypocrisy. I'm done!

You believe while I acknowledge and learn from that. Real world end results speaks volumes. Why do you think people go through so many damn revisions? And with that question alone...I digress.

Believer
11-08-2016, 01:45 PM
If his goal is to get it done as cheaply as possible, then by all means don't stroke it. But he's got the pistons. He's got the crank. Seems as if a portion of the expense of a stroker he's already absorbed. To Gene's point he would be losing money selling that stuff. I would think that if stroking it were off the table for him he wouldn't be asking for reasons to convince him one way or the other.

I'm also not sure what you mean when you state 'what you guys are expecting and what will really happen in the end may be two totally different things'. No one here supporting a stroker option expects there will be LS power at the end of that journey. I'm also not sure what the measurable benefit would be as I don't currently have data to support that.

Why is a 350whp goal the break point of a stroker being worth it or not? Whether you're aiming for 250hp or 1000hp what a stroker brings to the table is consistent for both goals and everything in between.

What you've proven is that for you, the cost of a stroker is not worth it with respect to an arbitrary power goal. Again, what a stroker delivers, in terms of benefit, is completely agnostic to power goals. The benefit it delivers is the same, no matter what turbo you slap on there. The benefit with a FT F21 will be the same as with a BW EFR as with a GT30. Dare i even say the benefit would be the same on a stock turbo?! /gasp

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 02:10 PM
You guys really don't know how Zandrew operates. Him selling those parts would actually make make him money. He probably got the pistons for like $200 brand new still in box. If all that work for 300-500RPM spool and an extra 10whp/15wtq is worth the hassle (random numbers, but close to what it will be), then I see your point. I just don't see those gains worth the effort when the same can be done in the tune. That is what I am getting at. And...just went against my word. Pardon!

MetalMan
11-08-2016, 02:28 PM
I just don't see those gains worth the effort when the same can be done in the tune.

I've been following this argument, and this bold part seems to be the deal-breaker between seerlah and others.
If you have a "wimpy" 2L tune and compare it to an "aggressive" 1.8L tune, they may have the same performance characteristics. But if you tune the 2L to be "aggressive" then the bold statement is no longer true.

Believer is assuming the same tuner tunes both 1.8L and 2L, and uses the same tuning methodology for both tunes (with regards to down-low/part-throttle timing). There's no way the 1.8L will perform "the same" as the 2L in this scenario.

And the next point of contention: whether or not this is even worthwhile to zandrew. Totally separate topic, and the point of this thread. seerlah doesn't think it's worthwhile for only 350awhp, others do think it's worthwhile since zandrew already has the parts and they feel justified that the gains are worth the conversion.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 02:46 PM
^Thank you for comprehending the thread. I never disagreed with them but they seem to have never gotten my point as if there wasn't one. And I do agree (unspoken), I took it off track with the cost part. Not quite sure if he has the money to toss around for such a small gain...because I know I sure don't, but he isn't me. And using my shoes for analysis on that part was purely incorrect, incomparable being the reasoning. Thread derail that strayed off course. Now back on it.

genecan
11-08-2016, 03:16 PM
Seerlah, you need to stop posting numbers, you are making PURE assumptions and people get confused. Your numbers regarding stroking ARE random and NO they are not even close to what would happen if you stroke.

You are missing basic concepts in internal combustion engineering. An engine can be only as powerful as it is able to move air. The so called 2.0L stroker engine is very close to being 13% bigger than the non stroked 1.8T. The amount of air that goes through the engine is very strongly bound to the power produced. This means that at any given RPM the stroked engine will be able to produce 13% more power. Lets say the non-stroked engine reaches 350 awhp at 7000 rpm, at the same rpm the stroked engine will be capable to produce 396 awhp or if the stroked engine produces 350 awhp at 7000 rpm the non-stroked engine will have to rev to 7910 rpm.

You see any difference from your point of view in numbers?

Tuning is the hype nowadays, but it is actually nothing more than just controlling the hardware that you already have. Keep in mind that software does not produce hp, it just utilizes the resources you have in a given set up. We say that a good tune is the one that extract more hp compared to other tune with the same hardware. What we skip in such statement is that it does so by pushing the same set up closer to its failure limit. Having this in mind a stroked set up is also safer as for a given hp goal it requires less boost and less rpm.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 03:36 PM
Then why does one V8 make a measly 250bhp while another can make 400bhp. I know why...the f*cking tuning!!![headbang]

The power is created on the advanced timing of the downward stroke!!! In the tune!!! I'm no tuner...but I at least know that much. Then things like CR plays a factor in how much advanced ignition timing can be applied to that downward stroke...to make more power.

genecan
11-08-2016, 03:41 PM
Then why does one V8 make a measly 250bhp while another can make 400bhp. I know why...the f*cking tuning!!![headbang]

These are two very good starting points for you:
https://www.amazon.com/Internal-Combustion-Engine-Fundamentals-Heywood/dp/1259002071/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1478648369&sr=8-1&keywords=internal+combustion+engine
https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Engine-Tuning-Bell/dp/0854299785/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1478648321&sr=8-1&keywords=modern+engine+tuning

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 03:44 PM
^See what I added. I have an extrude honed IM sitting right in front of my face that has roughly 17%cfm increase per runner tested at 34psi. I'm not even going to open those links. And that will be added to my already 350whp butt dyno car...on stock displacement...on a pump gas tune...and I stopped here on revision 5 (25psi and started at 20psi. most those revisions was for a smoother idle...which we accomplished) because I have a completely stock head. Don't want to drop a valve. My decision when he wanted to go for more power. He agreed with my decision and reasoning why I wanted to stop. I got scared...not him. If I had upgraded valves I would probably be pushing 28-30psi on pump gas right now. Think other tuners would do that?!?!

Everybody had their opinion, I have mine, gave mine, you have yours, gave yours, and Zandrew just sitting back probably having a ball at our expense. hahaha

kjames1270
11-08-2016, 03:53 PM
^See what I added. I have an extrude honed IM sitting right in front of my face that has roughly 17%cfm increase per runner tested at 34psi. I'm not even going to open those links. And that will be added to my already 350whp butt dyno car...on stock displacement...on a pump gas tune...and I stopped here on revision 5 (25psi and started at 20psi. most those revisions was for a smoother idle...which we accomplished) because I have a completely stock head. Don't want to drop a valve. My decision when he wanted to go for more power. He agreed with my decision and reasoning why I wanted to stop. I got scared...not him. If I had upgraded valves I would probably be pushing 28-30psi on pump gas right now. Think other tuners would do that?!?!

Everybody had their opinion, I have mine, gave mine, you have ours, gave yours, and Zandrew just sitting back probably having a ball at our expense. hahaha
A lot of good points on here, from everyone. Just wanted to ask you where exactly did put the check valve to prevent fuel returning to the pump? I'm having the same issue 3-4 cranks before start except its the OEM rated pump.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 04:32 PM
^I responded to your PM 4:15PM. Check your PM box [cool]

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 05:05 PM
Seerlah, you need to stop posting numbers, you are making PURE assumptions and people get confused. Your numbers regarding stroking ARE random and NO they are not even close to what would happen if you stroke.

You are missing basic concepts in internal combustion engineering. An engine can be only as powerful as it is able to move air. The so called 2.0L stroker engine is very close to being 13% bigger than the non stroked 1.8T. The amount of air that goes through the engine is very strongly bound to the power produced. This means that at any given RPM the stroked engine will be able to produce 13% more power. Lets say the non-stroked engine reaches 350 awhp at 7000 rpm, at the same rpm the stroked engine will be capable to produce 396 awhp or if the stroked engine produces 350 awhp at 7000 rpm the non-stroked engine will have to rev to 7910 rpm.

You see any difference from your point of view in numbers?

Tuning is the hype nowadays, but it is actually nothing more than just controlling the hardware that you already have. Keep in mind that software does not produce hp, it just utilizes the resources you have in a given set up. We say that a good tune is the one that extract more hp compared to other tune with the same hardware. What we skip in such statement is that it does so by pushing the same set up closer to its failure limit. Having this in mind a stroked set up is also safer as for a given hp goal it requires less boost and less rpm.

This is incorrect on so many levels. I can fly to the moon on a NASA spaceship...doesn't mean it is going to happen. Like for beginners, the 6758 is rated at like 45lbs/min and I don't even know where the 1.8 or 2.0 would fall into pressure ratio efficiency range. To say he will get shy of 400whp is just silly. Sorry to tell you! Only way that is happening is with dare I say...proper fueling with wait for it...wait for it...Tuning!

Your numbers are so off in the real world it's not even funny...yet mine are just asinine. LMFAO!!! Correction, it is funny. lol

But now we are talking about an EFR. My numbers are based off GT real world testings (guesstimating). But this new turbo tech of the gamma wheel...not too sure. With the EFR...you may very be correct. Hence...my replacement for displacement case.

genecan
11-08-2016, 05:45 PM
I spent few minutes hesitating if I have to respond at all - not really worthed. Every single claim in your last post is wrong.

1. Example in my previous post was not for Zandrew's build, but general estimations and yes, they are correct, but you can not understand this. Do you need help for this?
2. If you want to discuss particular application i.e. EFR 6758 - better do your homework right. The turbo is not rated 45 lb/min, but 53 lb/min. BW revised it TWO years ago. You did not know? You can't find the source? Do you need a hand for this?
3. 400WHP (actually a little more) had beed done on 2.0L stroker and PUMP gas, TWO years ago, wait even earlier. You do not know about that? Do you need a hand finding this?

Stop behaving like a child and come to the real world... but wait you can not... because you are a child. Sorry to tell you the truth! And further - you really need to start reading if you plan to get at least a piece of quality knowledge, not some forum info.

And do not bother to answer this current post, because I will not do it further. I am done with you.

Seerlah
11-08-2016, 05:53 PM
Been in the real world working last two years to be concerned with this. But thanks for being the grown one and calling someone a child. Shows maturity of a man! Both my cars have sat for over a year until of late, because I was too busy in the real world. If you only knew! Fuck cars...and fuck you!!!