Naturally Aspirated, Stroked, Supercharged, or Turbo?

[fitfan]

Originally Posted by Forcedfed

We are working on a few N/A projects at this time including:

2ZZ Cams
Header
Intake
Cat Back
Ecu Piggy Back

To get my interest... I would want more torq. at 3k-6k rpm - the car doesn't really "feel" like it wants more HP at 6-8k.

So thats my worry about intake and exh. That it will reduce low end torq.

[Terminus]

The 6k-8kRPM is already wonderful, so introducing more boost primarily abouve 4k RPM doens't seem like it would be ideal. I'd want the 0k-6k region primarily affected. THus, I am thinking small low-pressure supercharger is the route to go.

[cixelsyd]

Originally Posted by sleepless

Superchargers and turbos have the same heat soak issues.

The key is to keep the intake temps down. That means a properly sized intercooler(s), and possibly water injection, and good heatshielding.

...don't forget NITROUS! That'll help keep temps down for a few seconds, too! *grin*

-=cixel

[Mean TT]

Originally Posted by Terminus

The 6k-8kRPM is already wonderful, I'd want the 0k-6k region primarily affected.

Exactly what I want too. Someone will eventually offer something for us, I think that there are a few of us who have the same feeling about the litle motor.

[BrettP]

Thta's why our low pressure turbo package works so well. Full boost by 2600 rpm's and more torque at the wheels at 3000rpm's then the car makes at 6200 rpm's. Instant throttle response, no lag and huge mid range shove.

[Enigma]

I generally don't like stoker kits for high RPM engines. Just adding to the stroke of an engine doesn't do much for the power the engine makes unless you do a lot of head work. If you do that work, then you can get most of the same gains in power (not TQ) without the added displacment by revving the engine more.

What I wish someone would explain is why this engine that makes the same HP/L as my BMW has such a lumpy/peaky powerband. By comparison the BMW is almost flat from 2k to 8k... No sudden cam changes or other spikes to upset the car.

Turbo/SC. Answer, it depends... I generally hate turbo lag so normally I will prefer a SC approach, espically if its a positive displacement unit. Before someone says, "this turbo doesn't lag, just look at the dyno" understand that my complaint with turbos is the delay in getting power from when I ask for it.

[scottyb]

Originally Posted by Enigma

Turbo/SC. Answer, it depends... I generally hate turbo lag so normally I will prefer a SC approach, espically if its a positive displacement unit. Before someone says, "this turbo doesn't lag, just look at the dyno" understand that my complaint with turbos is the delay in getting power from when I ask for it.

I'm with you there. I want power when I press on the gas. I certainly don't want it kicking in on a turn all of the sudden causing my rear to slip out.

[Keith]

I would do it in stages over 4-5 years. So for now, I would go NA and then go the S/C route as my driving skills increased. For the S/C option, the suspension and brakes would be upgraded even though the stock bit are great. The whole package of the S/C option with upgraded suspension and brakes is much more expensive too - my wallet could be the limiting factor here.

[autosport]

Originally Posted by Enigma

I generally don't like stoker kits for high RPM engines. Just adding to the stroke of an engine doesn't do much for the power the engine makes unless you do a lot of head work. If you do that work, then you can get most of the same gains in power (not TQ) without the added displacment by revving the engine more.

There is nothing wrong with a stroked engine if designed right, the key is designing it properly so the rod ratio is still good so you can still rev the engine high without doing damage, and also, so that the engine wants to rev. By keeping a good Rod ratio, then the rod is not going to lean over so far.

revving the The little standard 2zz engine has it's issues too, a lot of the 2zz powered race cars over here keep dropping valves, hence why SMW replaced all the valves to after market items as an option with part of their stroker kit.

Forced induction kits only adding more weight even though you may have more power, but for serious racers, the stroker kit reduces weight as the new components are lighter then the factory items, to much power would only make the car slower around the track because in such a light car you start having tractioin issues.

[peck555]

I spoke to a mechanic who told me the main problem with getting more power was the breathing...which he said he is working on,all I know for now

[autosport]

The factory 2zz heads are pretty good from the factory, gains can be had from a good quality lotus motorsport header and a few other tricks... but the head is very good from the factory.

[Variable]

I want the supercharger from Lotus. If it provides the same 243hp that the Exige 240R gets(not unreasonable, only 53hp boost) and it's made by Lotus, I'm all over it. The 240R is FAST!!!

[adriver]

But it's my understanding that in its current configuration, the supercharger from Lotus won't fit in an Elise. Is that true?

[aletes]

Originally Posted by adriver

But it's my understanding that in its current configuration, the supercharger from Lotus won't fit in an Elise. Is that true?

The supercharger itself would fit, but the intercooler would have to be redesigned.

[adamant]

Nie to see I'm in the majority with those that would liek a supercharged solution

[autosport]

Why supercharge and add extra weight, when you can get the same power from a strocked engine and still have it looking factory and unmodified to the insurance company . After all... you'd have better power to weight ratio

[evomind]

because u wont get the same power from stroking the engine as u would from supercharging it....i dont know who started the idea around here that superchargers dont make power...they do, and lots of it and all over the rev range.
one problem with stroking the 2zz, is rpms.... when u stroke the motor, u increase displacement which will shorten the stroke and lower the rpms....lowering the rpms in this motor is no good. thats not what u want. way up high is where this motor makes all its power. u might only be on the high cam for 1500 rpms.
now, if u can stroke the motor AND INCREASE rpms to say 9k, u might be on to something. new valves and springs would be a must along with some porting etc to the head. not sure if this can be done. (stroked 2zz revving to 9k) if it can, thats the route i would go.....but????
any input?