the 84 and 85 had the same comp ratio as the 7mge bumped it to 160 and some thgin turq don't really remmber
Bigaaron's "5M crank in a 7M" build thread!
- Thread starter bigaaron
- Start date
D
drumminforev
Guest
oh my goodness guys, major confusion here.
ok.... some 5MGE background real quick
1982 145hp 150ft/lbs (8.8:1 pistons)
1983 150hp 159ft/lbs (8.8:1 pistons)
1984
automatic cars kept the 83 engine, (8.8:1 pistons)
manuals got 160hp 163 ft/lb version (9.2:1 pistons)
1985-86 161hp 169 ft/lb (9.2:1 pistons)
The 6MGE is "basically" a 7MGE with the 5MGE 12v head, however, the 6MGE uses the 8.8:1 style pistons....
now if you use the 9.2:1 domed pistons in the 6MGE, it would effectively raise compression to 9.8:1 or so, which would roughly be a 10hp gain I would imagine.
I hope that clarifies things a bit
ok.... some 5MGE background real quick
1982 145hp 150ft/lbs (8.8:1 pistons)
1983 150hp 159ft/lbs (8.8:1 pistons)
1984
automatic cars kept the 83 engine, (8.8:1 pistons)
manuals got 160hp 163 ft/lb version (9.2:1 pistons)
1985-86 161hp 169 ft/lb (9.2:1 pistons)
The 6MGE is "basically" a 7MGE with the 5MGE 12v head, however, the 6MGE uses the 8.8:1 style pistons....
now if you use the 9.2:1 domed pistons in the 6MGE, it would effectively raise compression to 9.8:1 or so, which would roughly be a 10hp gain I would imagine.
I hope that clarifies things a bit
Thanks Tanya for clearing that up. I was only referring to the 5m, and how the lower horsepower output was more to do with the lower compression and flow of the stock 5m head then the 0.2L less displacement.
so the total HP would be at around 210 or so, and the torque would shoot up as well to about 220? not a bad upgrade for the price of a cylender head. how would that react with the 7ms ecu? would it work?
bigaaron said:
dear Lord, dont bring up the 5M head vs 7M head flow debate, hahaha!
That has been going on for many years now, heated arguments on both sides and it's really rather redundant I'd guess.
The 5M is quite a capable engine regardless of it's old and out of date design, but I do agree the head chokes a lot of its capability, which can be nearly remedied by porting the hell out of it and throwing in some oversize valves and bumpsticks.
The 6MGE has been rated at anywhere between 170 and 190hp... Ive yet to see a real accurate HP output as very little is known about the engine, even upon researching Japanese webites... if the engine is 190hp, by using the 9.2:1 pistons you'd be getting her up to 200hp, and that would "kinda" mean the 7M head is worth roughly a 10hp difference.... but thats just my uneducated theory
haha, enough of that, I'll GTFO your thread Aaron
Well just like most heated arguements on the forums there is only an arguement because no one has shown proof to back up their side of the debate. I am going to do a flow test on a 5m and 7m head and then there will be nothing to argue about. :icon_wink
D
drumminforev
Guest
Ok, it has been decided for sure now, and I just dropped off the crank at Castillo's!
It is going to be 85mm bore x 85mm stroke, with a custom I-beam forged rod set, and 7M forged pistons.
The 5m crank is getting the snout modified to be exactly like a 7M crank, also it will be ground, micropolished and nitrided.
So it is basically going to be a 2.9L oldschool 1.4J or something.
It is going to be 85mm bore x 85mm stroke, with a custom I-beam forged rod set, and 7M forged pistons.
The 5m crank is getting the snout modified to be exactly like a 7M crank, also it will be ground, micropolished and nitrided.
So it is basically going to be a 2.9L oldschool 1.4J or something.
D
drumminforev
Guest
I dont understand the point of using the 5m crank since its only gonna be 100cc smaller and be exactly like a 7m crank?
its a shorter stroke, it can rev faster, and lowered compression = more boost w/o detonation.drumminforev said:
D