170 to 200hp hp goal

[1turbofocus]

If you have to stay NA and this is going to be a 93 octane engine and you have a fair budget then the 2.5 is the way to go and you will see some very nice TQ #

If you dont have a good budget and still have to stay 93 octane then find a 2.3 and build that it cost about the same as building a 2.0 but you will gain some good TQ

If you have the budget to go boost then a turbo would be the way to go and for the gol of 200 the stock engine tuned properly wil last a long long time

Tom

[Outlaw5.0]

Originally Posted by gimmemoreboost

Holy shit. Lol

I wasn't talking about airflow and how its effected through engine modifications. I was responding to outlaw's post addressing solely head flow, not cams, valves, p/p, etc.

I'd probably get banned if I were to say what I actually want to. So I'll leave it at this.

You two boneheads can claim to "know" whatever it is you think you know, and me and turbosvt will know what we know. Build an n/a focus. Be my guest. 2.3, 2.0, 2.5 I don't care. Lol I'm still gonna make more power with a turbo. End of story. Have fun with your 200whp and I'll have fun with my 350-500whp. Lol

Look who is calling others bone heads!. Say what you want to say, I'm a big boy...................I want to hear what you have to say.

So turbo will make more hp than N/A, man you got me there, I would of never guessed that!.

Funny thing is a turbocharged 2.3 will make more power compared to a turbocharged 2.0, atleast for this bonehead anyway.

[Outlaw5.0]

Originally Posted by turbosvtfocus04

We can sit here and argue about stroking or not stroking a n/a 4 cylinder all we want but it's like winning the special Olympics, even tho you won, you are still slow.

And if you want torque, you have to remember that focus's are fwd so that means instead tire spin.

Funny thing is you need torque and rpm to have horsepower. Sort of like saying I lost torque but gained hp, no the torque just moved up in the rpm band and made more hp. Turbochargers make a ton of torque everywhere and can result in tons of wheelspin, but everyone loves them.

[SkyPilot]

Originally Posted by gimmemoreboost

Holy shit. Lol

I wasn't talking about airflow and how its effected through engine modifications. I was responding to outlaw's post addressing solely head flow, not cams, valves, p/p, etc.

I'd probably get banned if I were to say what I actually want to. So I'll leave it at this.

You two boneheads can claim to "know" whatever it is you think you know, and me and turbosvt will know what we know. Build an n/a focus. Be my guest. 2.3, 2.0, 2.5 I don't care. Lol I'm still gonna make more power with a turbo. End of story. Have fun with your 200whp and I'll have fun with my 350-500whp. Lol

Originally Posted by Outlaw5.0

Look who is calling others bone heads!. Say what you want to say, I'm a big boy...................I want to hear what you have to say.

So turbo will make more hp than N/A, man you got me there, I would of never guessed that!.

Funny thing is a turbocharged 2.3 will make more power compared to a turbocharged 2.0, atleast for this bonehead anyway.

Gentlemen, please keep the conversation civil and on topic. A good debate about these kinds of things is excellent and always welcomed.

Keep it civil there is no need for the name calling.

[turbosvtfocus04]

Originally Posted by Outlaw5.0

Funny thing is you need torque and rpm to have horsepower. Sort of like saying I lost torque but gained hp, no the torque just moved up in the rpm band and made more hp. Turbochargers make a ton of torque everywhere and can result in tons of wheelspin, but everyone loves them.

Smaller turbos will result in more torque, bigger turbos not as much. We will take a dodge srt4 for an example, makes 310whp 454wtq. But as soon as you go bigger turbo and add cams torque isn't as high, 420whp 380wtq. Rpms got pushed up bc of the slightly bigger cams which is a result in torque loss, you can also lose low end torque by switching intake manifolds as well.

And as for you to say 2.3 turbo could make more power, till you hit a certain amount of hp or big enough turbo then the 2.0 will make more due to it being able to rev higher and also bigger strong since the piston pin isn't moved up on the piston. And yes I have seen this happen when stroking a motor where the piston pin was too high on a motor with a turbo.

[gimmemoreboost]

Lol I saw you post no information that was not already pretty obvious...gee more airflow higher rpms, NO WAY!!

And as for the 2.3 vs 2.0, turbosvt beat me to it.

As I said before, to each there own. If you think your 2.3 is godlike, then we'll compare timeslips when I'm done boosting my 2.0 and I'll show you who's is godlike.

[Outlaw5.0]

Yep smaller motors are better and faster, have at it. LOL

Airflow means nothing with turbochargers.LOL

Peak torque is what rules, hp means nothing.LOL

Ever hear of average power?.

Turbochargers are sized to the c.i.d, rpm range, and power level. Of course smaller turbos spool up quicker. Size the turbocharger for the application plain and simple.

[Fernando_221]

Originally Posted by Jmaczx4st

If Im not mistaken you can get the 2.5 head off a Fusion some minor mods and it should bolt up. I think Tom was toying with it haven't been on in awhile so not sure if it was completed.

All I know is that I have a 2.3 with Cossie CAI, Borla exhaust with HFC, and a 91 oct tune and there isn't a 2.0 anywhere near me that stands a chance.

I'm playing with a 2.5 from Fusion, planning to swap it in january/feb.
The 2.5 head has an extra oil passage that the 2.0 block don't have. This oil passage feeds the VCT device and the first journal of the intake cam (close to VCT).

The 2.0 block don't have this oil passage, so we have to find a way to feed this oil passage for 2.5 head, you can't ignore it because it feeds the first journal of intake cam.
I'm planning to swap the 2.5 block, so I think I'll not spend time trying the 2.5 head with 2.0 block.

[1turbofocus]

If you take a 2.0 engine and use all the same parts , turbo , tuner the larger 2.3 / 2.5 engine will always make more TQ

To say airflow means nothing with a turbo is a little silly , air flow means everything , yes turbos are under boost but the more airflow you get to the pistons the more TQ you make the better the airflow the better the TQ

I do agree people get to cought up in HP where they should be talking TQ , TQ is where the money is and show me the money LOL

If I was doing some form of racing I would think of using a 2.0 vs a 2.3 / 2.5 for the rpm factor but in 95 maybe 98% of the time 7000 will do the job nicely and even the 2.5 can turn 7000 in most cases if you cant get it done at 7000 ....another 1500 rpm to 8500 isnt going to help much if any

In all the years and the 1000`s of tuning / dynoing the Focus engines I have seen 1-2 engine make power past 5500 let alone 7000

It goes back to the old saying " there is no substitute to cubic inches " not even cubic dollars

Tom

[felixthecat]

Originally Posted by 1turbofocus

If you take a 2.0 engine and use all the same parts , turbo , tuner the larger 2.3 / 2.5 engine will always make more TQ

To say airflow means nothing with a turbo is a little silly , air flow means everything , yes turbos are under boost but the more airflow you get to the pistons the more TQ you make the better the airflow the better the TQ

I do agree people get to cought up in HP where they should be talking TQ , TQ is where the money is and show me the money LOL

If I was doing some form of racing I would think of using a 2.0 vs a 2.3 / 2.5 for the rpm factor but in 95 maybe 98% of the time 7000 will do the job nicely and even the 2.5 can turn 7000 in most cases if you cant get it done at 7000 ....another 1500 rpm to 8500 isnt going to help much if any

In all the years and the 1000`s of tuning / dynoing the Focus engines I have seen 1-2 engine make power past 5500 let alone 7000

It goes back to the old saying "There is no substitute to cubic inches " not even cubic dollars

Tom

There you go.