TVS, E85, bolt ons (100% stock longblock) - 875rwhp

[rdsnk46]

Hmmmm, let that thing rip! It's made to run.....

 

[Turbo98GT]

Wow, so this engine is immune to the laws of physics apparently. Don't even bother posting if you have an oil pump failure or over-stressed rod let go. With an attitude like that you'll be laughed off of the forum.

I ain't afraid of blowing this engine up. If it lets go, it lets go, I'll share what happened and how. No one has made this power on STOCK cams with no nitrous. No one. Maybe it'll last longer than cammed cars revving theirs higher. Maybe my R&D is serving this community a service by testing things others haven't. Instead of telling me it WILL blow up, read what Bad Company wrote (he nailed it BTW) and sit back and see what happens.

 

[Turbo98GT]

Hmmmm, let that thing rip! It's made to run.....

Doing my best.

 

[Van@RevanRacing]

That no lift shift saves me on more than you think. I don't use the 2 step feature, and I run a safe 91 tune. I daily drive it when I'm home from business. I'll be at 30k miles this year modded, and I'm only home 4 months a year!

People on E85 window blocks and destroy oil pump gears all the time. Hey, I hope it lasts you a life time. But I see it all the time...crazy numbers on stock internal posts, then no word for months. Their next thread: "Starting my engine rebuild". Ask Kevin Keener. E85 Lund tuned. On an "easy" test pass at Texas Mile shattered oil pump gears. 2 months later...engine rebuild thread. That's just one example. Pretty sure he was no where near what your pushing.

Unless you keep it under 6k and drive it 1000 miles a year, it will go quick at 1000hp on stock internals. Common knowledge around here. Just be careful, all i'm saying. It's easy to get into the "cheapest way to highest hp" club. But it quickly turns pricey...

I was with Kevin when his engine expired. It happened at the Texas Mile but Kevin had a LOT OF FUN with that car doing stuff on E85 at Pikes Peak and many other events.

One could read your post to infer that he switched to E85 and it let go and that is simply not the case. He played with it and played hard before it expired.

Another similar case and point is Manuel who raced his car hard for a long time on E85. He's a former member here and his motor expired getting off the highway after an easy three hour drive with cruise control on. But he had a lot of fun prior to.

Must Do with E85................

1. Change your oil often and frequently 500 miles to 1,000 at the most IMO
2. Do not let E85 rest in the fuel cell for more than 10 days (E85 attracts moisture aggressively and degrades the octane level and Ethanol content)
3. Buy a test kit and test the E85 for ethanol content prior to pumping it into the car
4. Plug Maintenance
5. ABD (Always Be Datalogging)

 

[2011 gtcs]

I was with Kevin when his engine expired. It happened at the Texas Mile but Kevin had a LOT OF FUN with that car doing stuff on E85 at Pikes Peak and many other events.

One could read your post to infer that he switched to E85 and it let go and that is simply not the case. He played with it and played hard before it expired.

Another similar case and point is Manuel who raced his car hard for a long time on E85. He's a former member here and his motor expired getting off the highway after an easy three hour drive with cruise control on. But he had a lot of fun prior to.

Must Do with E85................

1. Change your oil often and frequently 500 miles to 1,000 at the most IMO
2. Do not let E85 rest in the fuel cell for more than 10 days (E85 attracts moisture aggressively and degrades the octane level and Ethanol content)
3. Buy a test kit and test the E85 for ethanol content prior to pumping it into the car
4. Plug Maintenance
5. ABD (Always Be Datalogging)

That is one thing I hate about the nGauge is I cant read my datalogs, only Lund can and I don't want to annoy him all the time with reading them for me, with SCT I could go over them yourself.

 

[Van@RevanRacing]

That is one thing I hate about the nGauge is I cant read my datalogs, only Lund can and I don't want to annoy him all the time with reading them for me, with SCT I could go over them yourself.

Dude! It saves the data logs as a .csv file. Just import the file over and use SCT Livelink and review the data logs. Easy Peasy!

 

[2011 gtcs]

Dude! It saves the data logs as a .csv file. Just import the file over and use SCT Livelink and review the data logs. Easy Peasy!

Oh nice, i honestly didn't know that.

 

[Snoopy49]

Van,
Can the.csv file be read by Excel and if it can, would it useable or just a bunch of unlabeled values?

 

[Softballer77]

I was with Kevin when his engine expired. It happened at the Texas Mile but Kevin had a LOT OF FUN with that car doing stuff on E85 at Pikes Peak and many other events.One could read your post to infer that he switched to E85 and it let go and that is simply not the case. He played with it and played hard before it expired.Another similar case and point is Manuel who raced his car hard for a long time on E85. He's a former member here and his motor expired getting off the highway after an easy three hour drive with cruise control on. But he had a lot of fun prior to.Must Do with E85................1. Change your oil often and frequently 500 miles to 1,000 at the most IMO2. Do not let E85 rest in the fuel cell for more than 10 days (E85 attracts moisture aggressively and degrades the octane level and Ethanol content)3. Buy a test kit and test the E85 for ethanol content prior to pumping it into the car4. Plug Maintenance5. ABD (Always Be Datalogging)

No no no. I never meant it as E85 was what did his motor in. I think it's a great fuel to use power wise. My main point was that I don't know of anyone that will say 1000hp on the stock rods in our cars will not put it into a time bomb state. Point being "You can ruin a rod no matter what fuel you run if you overpower them".

As far as Kevin, his personal convo with me was that he wasn't even on a live hit at the Mile when the oil pump gears let go (since you were with him I'm sure you can attest to), and stressed how it was an easy run, then he got a warning light after the run, immediately shutting down. I wouldn't doubt at all he drove it like it was built to do at other times. I hope he does personally. He is rebuilding his motor because a rod let go and it windowed his block because of catastrophic failure. It could have been from a number of factors, however it is more than likely due to over powering the stock internals. In quoting Kevin "830hp to the wheels was too much". It could have let go just the same on a number of fuels.

If anyone here other than the OP disagrees that 875 on stock rods is playing with fire, well...let it fly. Van, in your opinion what is the common threshold horsepower/torque these stock rods will take? 875rwhp +? I hear many, but I have never heard anything over 850rwhp. At least over time. I personally don't know of anyone who can say 1000 crank hp on stock rods is smart. (except the OP evidently)

I'm all for paving the way and allowing the evolution of technology increase our potentials. But the main problem I have with this post is the times I have seen monstrous horsepower levels achieved on our motors on stock internals only gives false hope to those wanting all the power they can get while saving money not building the motor. They do what they see, and after time...the motor goes and they are further in the $ hole than before. (which btw is GREAT for vendors...)

We ALL know the rods are the weak point in our motors. I don't care what fuel you run, how much boost, etc. etc. If you push too much at them, they will let go. On top of all the other posts ive read over the last few years saying "watch what you push at these stock rods", my personal tuner Bob Kurgan said to never push more than 850rwhp or the rods will be the first to go. I'll keep mine under 800rwhp and enjoy it as long as I can...

 

[Turbo98GT]

You are still in here commenting...? LOL
No one cares about your input and your four paragraph empty replies and dumb signature block. Enjoy your "safe" 799.9rwhp lol as it is just as "safe" as my 875rwhp

 

[Van@RevanRacing]

No no no. I never meant it as E85 was what did his motor in. I think it's a great fuel to use power wise. My main point was that I don't know of anyone that will say 1000hp on the stock rods in our cars will not put it into a time bomb state. Point being "You can ruin a rod no matter what fuel you run if you overpower them".

As far as Kevin, his personal convo with me was that he wasn't even on a live hit at the Mile when the oil pump gears let go (since you were with him I'm sure you can attest to), and stressed how it was an easy run, then he got a warning light after the run, immediately shutting down. I wouldn't doubt at all he drove it like it was built to do at other times. I hope he does personally. He is rebuilding his motor because a rod let go and it windowed his block because of catastrophic failure. It could have been from a number of factors, however it is more than likely due to over powering the stock internals. In quoting Kevin "830hp to the wheels was too much". It could have let go just the same on a number of fuels.

If anyone here other than the OP disagrees that 875 on stock rods is playing with fire, well...let it fly. Van, in your opinion what is the common threshold horsepower/torque these stock rods will take? 875rwhp +? I hear many, but I have never heard anything over 850rwhp. At least over time. I personally don't know of anyone who can say 1000 crank hp on stock rods is smart. (except the OP evidently)

I'm all for paving the way and allowing the evolution of technology increase our potentials. But the main problem I have with this post is the times I have seen monstrous horsepower levels achieved on our motors on stock internals only gives false hope to those wanting all the power they can get while saving money not building the motor. They do what they see, and after time...the motor goes and they are further in the $ hole than before. (which btw is GREAT for vendors...)

We ALL know the rods are the weak point in our motors. I don't care what fuel you run, how much boost, etc. etc. If you push too much at them, they will let go. On top of all the other posts ive read over the last few years saying "watch what you push at these stock rods", my personal tuner Bob Kurgan said to never push more than 850rwhp or the rods will be the first to go. I'll keep mine under 800rwhp and enjoy it as long as I can...

All good. I would rather see my customers not end up like Kevin. I had a customer with a bone stock engine etc. and his engine let go. 850 to 875 is the absolute limit IMO. Jon Lund hit almost 900 RWHP on his stock 2014 GT500 and it is still alive and well and running today.

Above all I agree that the rods are the weak link on these cars and it's all how hard you treat it and spin it.

 

[Turbo98GT]

I was with Kevin when his engine expired. It happened at the Texas Mile but Kevin had a LOT OF FUN with that car doing stuff on E85 at Pikes Peak and many other events.

One could read your post to infer that he switched to E85 and it let go and that is simply not the case. He played with it and played hard before it expired.

Another similar case and point is Manuel who raced his car hard for a long time on E85. He's a former member here and his motor expired getting off the highway after an easy three hour drive with cruise control on. But he had a lot of fun prior to.

Must Do with E85................

1. Change your oil often and frequently 500 miles to 1,000 at the most IMO
2. Do not let E85 rest in the fuel cell for more than 10 days (E85 attracts moisture aggressively and degrades the octane level and Ethanol content)
3. Buy a test kit and test the E85 for ethanol content prior to pumping it into the car
4. Plug Maintenance
5. ABD (Always Be Datalogging)

He assumes and infers a lot. Knowing that the ONLY difference in my 800rwhp setup and 850+rwhp is headers, ported blower, better fuel, xba/tb, and ice tank. Same tune. Because making the engine more efficient is going to make it go booooom. Lol Maybe if I made 799.9 hp, I'd get his permission to race it carefree LOL

 

[Softballer77]

You are still in here commenting...? LOL
No one cares about your input and your four paragraph empty replies and dumb signature block. Enjoy your "safe" 799.9rwhp lol as it is just as "safe" as my 875rwhp

So dumb you read it all. But speak for yourself instead of "everybody". But, if we are to the tune of "your dumb signature block" as you put it, well 5 year old level I just won't go.

At least mine won't say "rebuilt" in the same column...and i'll comment on open forums as I please. Especially the ones with 1000hp on stock internals!

 

[Softballer77]

All good. I would rather see my customers not end up like Kevin. I had a customer with a bone stock engine etc. and his engine let go. 850 to 875 is the absolute limit IMO. Jon Lund hit almost 900 RWHP on his stock 2014 GT500 and it is still alive and well and running today.

Above all I agree that the rods are the weak link on these cars and it's all how hard you treat it and spin it.

Right on Van. Agreed.

BTW i'll be with you probably this weekend on picking that clutch and various other items. Just been waiting on other news to fall.

 

[Turbo98GT]

What dont you get...? I'm not afraid if this let's go. Forum experts lol

 

[2011 gtcs]

All good. I would rather see my customers not end up like Kevin. I had a customer with a bone stock engine etc. and his engine let go. 850 to 875 is the absolute limit IMO. Jon Lund hit almost 900 RWHP on his stock 2014 GT500 and it is still alive and well and running today.

Above all I agree that the rods are the weak link on these cars and it's all how hard you treat it and spin it.

Its good to know that other 13/14 GT500s have made killer power on stock internals. I know Lund has tuned some nasty stock engine GT500s and they are still running good to this day. I'm not sure what he exactly does in his tunes, but it works. I'm actually starting to question how much extra stress the 3.6 KB puts on everything over the TVS. Van what do you think is better for making (safer) power, the KB or the TVS, my guess is the TVS.

 

[Van@RevanRacing]

Right on Van. Agreed.

BTW i'll be with you probably this weekend on picking that clutch and various other items. Just been waiting on other news to fall.

Sounds good! :coolman:

Its good to know that other 13/14 GT500s have made killer power on stock internals. I know Lund has tuned some nasty stock engine GT500s and they are still running good to this day. I'm not sure what he exactly does in his tunes, but it works. I'm actually starting to question how much extra stress the 3.6 KB puts on everything over the TVS. Van what do you think is better for making (safer) power, the KB or the TVS, my guess is the TVS.

I'm a KB fan as most everybody knows. The 3.6 is larger and more efficient with less engine parasitic drag. I'd love to see what Turbo98GT would lay down with a 3.6 combo on the car.

The Stock Long Block record at the Texas Mile with a 3.6 is 198.5 MPH in a 13/14 GT500. He was running E85 and if he'd have had different gearing and NSR Cams he'd have broken 200 MPH. I believe that Turbo98GT has the combination to break 200 MPH on the stock long block pretty easily.

 

[2011 gtcs]

Sounds good! :coolman:



I'm a KB fan as most everybody knows. The 3.6 is larger and more efficient with less engine parasitic drag. I'd love to see what Turbo98GT would lay down with a 3.6 combo on the car.

The Stock Long Block record at the Texas Mile with a 3.6 is 198.5 MPH in a 13/14 GT500. He was running E85 and if he'd have had different gearing and NSR Cams he'd have broken 200 MPH. I believe that Turbo98GT has the combination to break 200 MPH on the stock long block pretty easily.

Now i'm not trying to split hairs, But when you say the 3.6 has less parasitic draw are you saying that its actually easier for the engine at high RPMs to turn it? Just having both supercharger in my possession at the same time, the TVS felt easier to turn than the 3.6 by hand.

 

[Van@RevanRacing]

Now i'm not trying to split hairs, But when you say the 3.6 has less parasitic draw are you saying that its actually easier for the engine at high RPMs to turn it? Just having both supercharger in my possession at the same time, the TVS felt easier to turn than the 3.6 by hand.

The 3.6 and the TVS at the same boost pressure the 3.6 will make more power because of increased adiabatic efficiency of the 3.6 with the larger rotors and 4 x 6 rotor pack in addition to the way the twin screw works versus the TVS. As an example I had a customer with a TVS at 19 PSI and he switched to a KB 3.6 at 19 PSI. He picked up four tenths in the quarter mile.

 

[2011 gtcs]

The 3.6 and the TVS at the same boost pressure the 3.6 will make more power because of increased adiabatic efficiency of the 3.6 with the larger rotors and 4 x 6 rotor pack in addition to the way the twin screw works versus the TVS. As an example I had a customer with a TVS at 19 PSI and he switched to a KB 3.6 at 19 PSI. He picked up four tenths in the quarter mile.

That's good to hear, I just wasn't sure if the KB put added stress on the bottom end over the TVS.