yeah lolll I already know I'm going to be breaking things like crazy. What would be a good way to make SURE that the engines good? A compression test maybe? I read somewhere before modding you should also change all your hoses and stuff.
Best Way To Build An 11 Second 7MGTE
- Thread starter gsmokez
- Start date
Hoses is always a good idea. They're probably cracked and worn out due to 20 years of exposure, better replace them now then on the side of the road one night.
A compression test will make sure you've got good cylinder pressure but a leakdown test can help you find where you're losing pressure. And as always, Headgasket.
A compression test will make sure you've got good cylinder pressure but a leakdown test can help you find where you're losing pressure. And as always, Headgasket.
Gmokez, a stock ct-26 will max out in the low 300rwhp range at about 15psi(Going with higher boost won't help much). It seems the safest and most cost effective way of achieving this is with the 550 injectors and lex afm along with a SAFC for fine tuning. Of course you will need the usual supporting mods like full exhaust and intercooler/harpipes. Hope that helps. There is still tons of info if you keep searching here and on SF.
buy a 1j, single turbo it and your there. :icon_bigg thats just my way looks like they got cha covered above
I like the 60-1 with upgraded intercooler, metal head gasket and studs. On the fuel at least 550's. It's easier to do with a stand alone. You will also need good tires as the et streets or drag radial. We have done with this set up at 17psi and pump gas 93 octane 11.3@121 with a 3.5" exhaust and a little weight off the car using a manual transmission. I like the manuals as you can see on my videos. As the car goes faster, it is more difficult to shift the car. It is not as easy as an automatic. But that's the challenge. And with a manual if shifted properly you will make more mph because you loose less hp to the wheels.
Isn't regular gas better than higher octane pump gas for racing? I dont know if this is true but I was told this by someone and just wanted to clarify
gsmokez;914742 said:
If you are running a stock N/A I can see where that might hold some water. When you increase the octane rating, the fuel is more resistant to ignition. This means you are less likely to have detonation from hot spots in the combustion chamber or a poor tune. Also, it the sensors detect detonation (knock), they will retard timing and you will lose power. If I was going to race my car there would be nothing short of 94 in my tank.
While were talking about basic mods in the 1/4 mile, I was wondering if you guys could estimate the results of my current setup.
Stock fuel
stock motor (HKS MHG) with 230,000 km and low compression in 4 cylinders. lol
no tune
stock turbo @ 10-12 psi (MBC that doesn't hold boost well)
DDP -> 3" high flow cat -> 3" catback
open element filter
2.5" hardpipes
lowered on H&R's with BAD camber in the rear
17" wheels w/ 255/40 BFG G-Force KD's
I just want to know what you all feel is the potential of my setup as the car was last year. I know that I am not good at drag racing and that my issues can mostly be traced back to making 1-3 passes per year. Also, my suspension had severe camber which compromised the contact patch on the launch. This resulted in either bogging (my fault), or spinning past the 60 foot mark.
To fix this problem I have added LIPP traction bars (old ones were bent) and poly bushings with the best alignment possible (most likely a little -ve still). Also, money permitting, I have plan to build a forged motor for the car to help restore the lost ponies under the hood.
You guys can all guess and I will reveal my horrible times from last fall.
Stock fuel
stock motor (HKS MHG) with 230,000 km and low compression in 4 cylinders. lol
no tune
stock turbo @ 10-12 psi (MBC that doesn't hold boost well)
DDP -> 3" high flow cat -> 3" catback
open element filter
2.5" hardpipes
lowered on H&R's with BAD camber in the rear
17" wheels w/ 255/40 BFG G-Force KD's
I just want to know what you all feel is the potential of my setup as the car was last year. I know that I am not good at drag racing and that my issues can mostly be traced back to making 1-3 passes per year. Also, my suspension had severe camber which compromised the contact patch on the launch. This resulted in either bogging (my fault), or spinning past the 60 foot mark.
To fix this problem I have added LIPP traction bars (old ones were bent) and poly bushings with the best alignment possible (most likely a little -ve still). Also, money permitting, I have plan to build a forged motor for the car to help restore the lost ponies under the hood.
You guys can all guess and I will reveal my horrible times from last fall.
haha loll are you serious bout 17? How would you repair the compression in the cylinders? Would installing forged pistons be good enough or would you have to replace the block?
A bit of clarification here:
Torque for the most part, has nothing to do with displacement. It's a function of the distance from the center of the rod pin to the center of the crank shaft, thus being the mechanical advantage that the piston has on the crank. This is where the terms undersquare, oversquare, and square come from.
1JZ is oversquare (bore>stroke)
2JZ is square (bore=stroke)
7M is undersquare (bore<stroke)
This is why the 7M is known for torque, because it has a big mechanical advantage on the crank (connecting rod pins far from the center of the crank). The 1JZ gets mocked for its torque because it has a smaller crank (connecting rods closer to the center of the crank). The 1JZ and 2JZ (IIRC) have the same dia pistons, but the crank on the 1JZ produces a much shorter stroke... making a 2JZ block basically a stroked 1JZ. One is not neccesarily better than the other, they're just different.
I know nothing about a 4g, but I'm going to guess it's either square or undersquare (if it's prone to crankwalking). A deisel engine is a severely undersquare engine... giant crank, small bores.
As for getting a number on torque, you'd require the bore and stroke, #of cylinders, air/fuel ratio and either a value of fuel or value for air or any combination, and the efficiency.
As for comparing anything to a 7M, one has to consider if the 7M is a pile of shit or well built. As with anything, you can't compare a 630hp honda that has $50000 into it, to a beat up mkIII with a 7M that's on its last legs. Speed is a relative term, how fast something is is typically proportionate to the ammount of money put into it, barring skill and quality of work.
I would tell anyone to never expect much from a 7M that doesn't have atleast 2000 well spent dollars inside it... cuz stock for stock, my dad's 2001 honda accord would spank my old tired 7M turbo... luckily it's not stock
Torque for the most part, has nothing to do with displacement. It's a function of the distance from the center of the rod pin to the center of the crank shaft, thus being the mechanical advantage that the piston has on the crank. This is where the terms undersquare, oversquare, and square come from.
1JZ is oversquare (bore>stroke)
2JZ is square (bore=stroke)
7M is undersquare (bore<stroke)
This is why the 7M is known for torque, because it has a big mechanical advantage on the crank (connecting rod pins far from the center of the crank). The 1JZ gets mocked for its torque because it has a smaller crank (connecting rods closer to the center of the crank). The 1JZ and 2JZ (IIRC) have the same dia pistons, but the crank on the 1JZ produces a much shorter stroke... making a 2JZ block basically a stroked 1JZ. One is not neccesarily better than the other, they're just different.
I know nothing about a 4g, but I'm going to guess it's either square or undersquare (if it's prone to crankwalking). A deisel engine is a severely undersquare engine... giant crank, small bores.
As for getting a number on torque, you'd require the bore and stroke, #of cylinders, air/fuel ratio and either a value of fuel or value for air or any combination, and the efficiency.
As for comparing anything to a 7M, one has to consider if the 7M is a pile of shit or well built. As with anything, you can't compare a 630hp honda that has $50000 into it, to a beat up mkIII with a 7M that's on its last legs. Speed is a relative term, how fast something is is typically proportionate to the ammount of money put into it, barring skill and quality of work.
I would tell anyone to never expect much from a 7M that doesn't have atleast 2000 well spent dollars inside it... cuz stock for stock, my dad's 2001 honda accord would spank my old tired 7M turbo... luckily it's not stock
Depends where he is losing compression. Most likely the headgasket, or rings. Could also be from the valves, or worst scenario the cylinder walls. This could all probably be fixed in a rebuild.
MassSupra89;914859 said:
I'm almost positive its the rings. 1 and 6 are just below 160 and the rest range form 120-130. It's not horrible but its not within the acceptable allowance. The motor has never been rebuilt. I merely milled the block and head and added an HKS MHG and some ARP studs. The car has run flawlessly ever since. The car doesn't feel like it is significantly down on power which leads me to believe that this problem may have been around for a while.
Oh, and 17 seconds is a little high. I ran a 14.6 @ 99 mph. My 60' was never better than a 2.3. I thought this was shitty and figured I should be between high 13 and 14 flat.
The way you explained it, it sounded like your car was barely able to pull away from a redlight. Haha 14.6 isn't bad considering the problems, fix those, and definetly work on that 60' and you'll see a huge gain.
My guess was slightly based on the only time I took my car to the track. I wheelhopped on the launch, started misfiring from my bad plugs around 4500rpm, shifted to second, same thing, shifted to third and it misfired immediatly. So I let off and coasted through the lights running a high 17 from what I remember haha.
My guess was slightly based on the only time I took my car to the track. I wheelhopped on the launch, started misfiring from my bad plugs around 4500rpm, shifted to second, same thing, shifted to third and it misfired immediatly. So I let off and coasted through the lights running a high 17 from what I remember haha.
MassSupra89;914960 said:
Ya, I tend to focus on the negative aspects of the car. Makes it easier to justify spending money on it.:thumbup:
I hope I can convince some of my friends to make the trip to a strip a few times this season. The shitty thing is that the closest one is a few hours away and that's a long tow home if something breaks.