Gen 4 Funco upgrade or new car

Here is the thing if you go and torture yourself all summer long get this swapped out to the big bad fire breathing V8 you want and come October and you put it in the sand and it doesn't have the weight bias you thought it would, your screwed.

Turn up the hair dryer on this one for next year and re-evaluate next October. If your looking for a project to torture yourself with buy a boat.

 
DZRTRUN said:
Right now is a really good time to sell and not a good time to buy. You will get top $ for that car but you will pay top $ for a gen 6. Our turbo Honda gen 4 at 10 psi was faster than our 525 ls3. We ran E85 and had the ability to turn the Honda up to 20. They handled the same in my opinion. We put a stroker blower motor in our V8 gen 4 and it completely ruined the handling. The motor broke and I swapped in a turnkey 525 Ls3 and it was gas and go which was nice. 
Click to expand...
Uh oh. Did somebody say a blocky v8 didnt handle well? I feel a debate coming lol. 🤣
 

yes I understand the older funcos are setup different.  Just fun to hear/read the different camps. Honda/subi/v8 blah blah. Carry on. Cool post. 

 
Find a car with an Albins in it and do whatever you want motor wise.    

 
lincster said:
Not 100% correct.

Depends on the ratio.  

Weddle offers a 4.63 ratio that has much more pinon engagement (deeper) which gives more strength and longevity.

You can't run this same R&P in the 2D.

Both the S4 and 2D have a 10" R&P, but there are differences.

Would S4D handle more power?  Sure.  It has a bigger R&P.
Click to expand...
You’re correct.
As you said, it depends on the ratio. 
I actually went to that new style a couple of years ago when I broke my 4.86 R&P. Sam at Rancho recommended it and thought the 4.63 ratio for my car would be fine because it was lighter than most cars and a mid engine. 
A heavier rear engine car may not like that ratio. 

 
I talked to Kennedy this morning. My clutch is a stage two good up to 550 lb of torque. I'm guessing if I crank this thing up I will be up near that. Also talk to turbos direct where I bought my turbo and he said no problem for my turbo to handle and go up in boost. Just a matter of getting the timing set as well to make the whole thing work better. I remember we tuned this pretty conservative so I think it could be cranked up quite a ways. I do like the freewheeling power of the turbo motor.

 
AlpineFunco said:
Turn it up as much as you think it can take and go from there. I seem to remember you deciding you wanted a Subaru powered car. How long did that last, 1/2 a trip?? :classic_laugh: . If the Nissan blows up at full boost then Look at boosted LS motors. At least that's the direction I'd head.
Click to expand...
I actually had bought that green subi power Gen 4. If I remember correctly the owner's name was Paul Huddleston. Drove it once at the dunes and decided to keep my car. Got it out of my system.

 
FOG said:
You’re correct.
As you said, it depends on the ratio. 
I actually went to that new style a couple of years ago when I broke my 4.86 R&P. Sam at Rancho recommended it and thought the 4.63 ratio for my car would be fine because it was lighter than most cars and a mid engine. 
A heavier rear engine car may not like that ratio. 
Click to expand...
Punisher runs the 4.63 and his car is a little over 3000 lbs.  Car moves awesome!!!!

 
  • Like
Reactions: FOG
Talked to Ben at Jim Wolf today. Great people that have helped out and been a wealth of knowledge over the years. They also helped in setting up turning off and on the VVT system with the Holley computer. On our dyno HP and torque with and without were significant. Was worried about the late style head gaskets and torque to yield bolts but he says I am good to 800hp. As long as there is no detonation.  So........... Time to crank it up. Maybe 20 psi with some timing? Might be interesting.  :igor:  Not sure what we can get away with at 50/50 flex fuel. 

 
We have a Mustang dyno in the shop. Stingy compared to Dynojet numbers and some other dynos. I figure if we can make 432 RWHP on our dyno that would be 600 at the Crank. Figuring 28% drivetrain loss which I thought I remember hearing as the number. My car made 350 RWHP last time we did it. 485 Crank. Of course the tune and drivability through the rpm range is what really matters.

DynoRoom.jpg

dyno.jpg

 
onanysunday said:
We have a Mustang dyno in the shop. Stingy compared to Dynojet numbers and some other dynos. I figure if we can make 432 RWHP on our dyno that would be 600 at the Crank. Figuring 28% drivetrain loss which I thought I remember hearing as the number. My car made 350 RWHP last time we did it. 485 Crank. Of course the tune and drivability through the rpm range is what really matters.

View attachment 28779

View attachment 28780
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t drivetrain loss be a constant for a given car? I would think it takes a fixed amount of power to move it?

Of course the real measurement would be torque, but still a constant amount required to move the drivetrain. 

 
FOG said:
Wouldn’t drivetrain loss be a constant for a given car? I would think it takes a fixed amount of power to move it?

Of course the real measurement would be torque, but still a constant amount required to move the drivetrain. 
Click to expand...
I remember hearing 28% loss for a 2d and 930s. It honestly didn't feel much different after the big trans. I also have my car geared down and will only hit about 95 in high gear pushing 7000 rpm. Not sure if that makes a difference in percentages. 

 
onanysunday said:
I remember hearing 28% loss for a 2d and 930s. It honestly didn't feel much different after the big trans. I also have my car geared down and will only hit about 95 in high gear pushing 7000 rpm. Not sure if that makes a difference in percentages. 
Click to expand...
I guess a percentage doesn’t make sense to me. 
If you had a 100 hp motor and lost 28% through the drivetrain that would be 28 horsepower lost. 
Now replace that motor with a 1,000 hp motor and you’re going to loose 280 hp through the same drivetrain?

 
FOG said:
I guess a percentage doesn’t make sense to me. 
If you had a 100 hp motor and lost 28% through the drivetrain that would be 28 horsepower lost. 
Now replace that motor with a 1,000 hp motor and you’re going to loose 280 hp through the same drivetrain?
Click to expand...
Yes sir!

 
FOG said:
I guess a percentage doesn’t make sense to me. 
If you had a 100 hp motor and lost 28% through the drivetrain that would be 28 horsepower lost. 
Now replace that motor with a 1,000 hp motor and you’re going to loose 280 hp through the same drivetrain?
Click to expand...
Got it. Makes sense. As long as it sets me back in the seat and my hair is on fire I am happy. Booooost!!!

 
  • Like
Reactions: FOG
The name of the game with a dyno and power numbers is speed.  How fast does it go from A to B.  How fast do you accelerate the drum. 

You could twist the input shaft on the trans with your hand and turn the whole drive train.  Does your hand have 150hp? No.  You were just turning it slowly.  Drive train "losses" go up with power because you will be accelerating the drum faster from one given speed to the other versus a lower HP car.  Consumes more power to accelerate it all faster.

 
A little late to the party but I was in the same boat as you. Turn up my Honda or go LS. After figuring out what I wanted, in the end im not worried about the overall HP, I want the torque of the LS that I just can’t get with a turbo V6. 
 

I have already bought the LS and began the swap. 

F4DC698F-99C9-4B34-8101-849D5C931083.jpeg

 
FOG said:
I guess a percentage doesn’t make sense to me. 
If you had a 100 hp motor and lost 28% through the drivetrain that would be 28 horsepower lost. 
Now replace that motor with a 1,000 hp motor and you’re going to loose 280 hp through the same drivetrain?
Click to expand...
i hear you but some food for thought.  If you had a 1000hp motor on the same 2D tranny and only throttled it to make 100 engine hp do you think the loss and heat would be the same through the drivetrain as the 100 hp motor?  yes of course. then you turn the motor up to 200hp "under full load" and you say no more heat is being generated by the now "200hp motor"  you mean the tranny gear oil would stay the same temperature?, you mean the gear faces in that tranny will have the same friction at 100 or 200hp under load?  you mean the cv balls arent screaming "you have double the load on my balls"? and you dont think 10 TIMES the HP doesnt do 10 times the load, the shearing effect of the gear faces, each revolution of a cv joint plunging in and out at a high rate of speed and load?  Hmmm

BTW youre not loosing any HP... the motor still makes 1000 hp on an engine dyno.  Perhaps it would be better if you say that when i use my 1000 hp motor on that tranny, axles, wheel bearings, etc ,  it is converting 280 hp into friction and heat......how much more....you make the call

 
Last edited by a moderator:
John@Outfront said:
i hear you but some food for thought.  If you had a 1000hp motor on the same 2D tranny and only throttled it to make 100 engine hp do you think the loss and heat would be the same through the drivetrain as the 100 hp motor?  yes of course. then you turn the motor up to 200hp "under full load" and you say no more heat is being generated by the now "200hp motor"  you mean the tranny gear oil would stay the same temperature?, you mean the gear faces in that tranny will have the same friction at 100 or 200hp under load?  you mean the cv balls arent screaming "you have double the load on my balls"? and you dont think 10 TIMES the HP doesnt do 10 times the load, the shearing effect of the gear faces, each revolution of a cv joint plunging in and out at a high rate of speed and load?  Hmmm

BTW youre not loosing any HP... the motor still makes 1000 hp on an engine dyno.  Perhaps it would be better if you say that when i use my 1000 hp motor on that tranny it is converting 280 hp into friction and heat......how much more....you make the call
Click to expand...
Some good info there John 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top