Focus Fanatics Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
483 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Lets be honest...im never gonna go turbo. At least not on my focus. But I do want a little more power. I think 200 horses is reasonable for the daily driver, then go from there. Right now im bone stock except for a short ram intake and some stickers. I want to get a tune, but I would prefer to add some goodies before I get the tune done.

So what do I need to get to 200?

-Joel
 

·
C2H5OH
Joined
·
11,867 Posts
Does he realize he's in the wrong section? ... and that the duratec and zetec are 2 different animals (let alone the SVT variant of the zetec)

but,


I'm at 200 crank hp right now (little better even, depending on losses). My goal by the end of summer was 200whp. Summer's over and I haven't had time to go down and get the car dyno'd again. I think I'm making a little more now but it's hard to tell.

But strictly my opinion, to get 200whp you need more compression, more fuel, more air (both of which are kinda obvious) and more timing. All of which require a better fuel, one that is more resistant to knock; like say 110 Octane race fuel.
I say this because that's about all I have done really. I'm on basically stock parts with the exception of bigger injectors to compensate for running E-85, which also requires a good tune.
And I figure if I can get ~30hp over a stock SVT (with a mutt of a zetec, zetec bottom end SVT top end) off a fuel change and tune, then similar mod's to a SVT should yield good results also.

BTW, my mod's are listed in my profile page thing. Static compression is around 11.5:1 right now.
 

·
SVT Fanatic
Joined
·
2,615 Posts
200hp. What do i need?
Naturally aspirated, a lot of money and prayer.

BTW, this topic has been beat to death. There are at least a couple of long, epic threads on this very topic.

Why would you not go turbo? I assume because you are broke as it says in your signature. The funny thing is that it will cost more to get to 200 whp going NA than going with boost or nitrous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Naturally aspirated, a lot of money and prayer.

BTW, this topic has been beat to death. There are at least a couple of long, epic threads on this very topic.

Why would you not go turbo? I assume because you are broke as it says in your signature. The funny thing is that it will cost more to get to 200 whp going NA than going with boost or nitrous.
+1. I agree entirely. I think perhaps before picking a power goal number you might want to research what is realistically feasible. Decide what you are willing to do, then pick a number if you feel you need a specific number.

In reality unless you are tracking your car, who cares? Driving an SVT on the street you may not even notice a peak 10 hp difference. Something like Tom's tune which helps not only peak power & torque but also almost everywhere in the powerband, will end up feeling like much more of a "bang for your buck" then a whole lot of work to go from stock to 200 hp NA.

Personally if you are not willing to go with forced induction, I'd suggest a high flow cat, a K&N panel filter in the stock air box, Tom's tune and call it done. [:)]
 

·
C2H5OH
Joined
·
11,867 Posts
Naturally aspirated, a lot of money and prayer.

100% disagree.
If I where a betting man and had an SVT I would bet I could make 200whp for under $1,200 (maybe less).
- I would shave the head to raise the compression ... I made a thread with theoretical compression values vs shaved amount. A machine shop should charge around $30 for a head surface + about $10 per 0.001" shaved from the head. I paid $50 to have 0.045" shaved from mine.

- The remainder of the money goes into tuning and new parts if the old ones aren't up to the task. For instance, I'm not sure what the stock SVT 36# injectors are capable of doing for hp #'s or what type of fuel may be needed.

Also, people forget that HP is just a #. They don't realize that a small change in TQ can result in a good HP gain.

Lets use the stock SVT dyno:



It claims a max HP of 170 @ 7,000rpm.
Now using the equation for HP and working it in reverse we can figure out how much extra TQ is required to hit 200whp + 20% for a drivetrain loss (just pulling a % out of my ass, I think it's actually less).
HP = (TQ * RPM) / 5,252
200 * 1.20 = (TQ * RPM) /5,252
240 = (TQ * RPM) /5,252
240 * 5,252 = TQ * RPM
1,260,480 = TQ * RPM
1,260,480 / 7,000 = TQ
TQ = 180ft/lb

Now the Stock graph is a bit off far as the math says. I look at the graph and it looks like @ 7,000 it's making 110ft/lb of TQ. The equation says it has to make 127.5ft/lb. So that's the # I'll use.

180 - 127.5 = 52.5ft/lb

So to hit 200whp @ 7,000rpm you need another 50 or so ft/lbs of TQ. That is quite a bit and might be tough to come by on a tight budget. So lets see what RPM might work better and be easier to hit the goal. Lets say we want 200whp by redline, 7,400rpm.

240 = (TQ * 7,400) / 5,252
240 * 5,252 = TQ * 7,400
1,260,480 = TQ * 7,400
1,260,480 / 7,400 = TQ
170ft/lb = TQ

So 10 less than before, and a similar situation occurs as RPM is increased. Less TQ is required to hit the WHP goal. Which happens to be exactly why Honda's can make impressive HP numbers with minimal TQ, they just push a lot of RPM. They use transmission gear ratios to make up for the lack of TQ, and do a very good job at it.

So there happens to be more than one way to hit this goal. The simple and cheapest way would be to run more RPM with a little better timing advance on the top end.
If you add compression to this, then you are extracting more TQ out of the combustion process which is compounded with RPM and gives more TQ over time.
Add to that a fuel that produces more TQ/unit volume (such as Ethanol, E-85, E-98) and you can bump TQ even more.

And keep in mind my #'s are based on a 20% drivetrain loss. I think a more realistic % would be around 12-14%; which lowers the required TQ numbers and makes things even easier/more attainable.
 

·
C2H5OH
Joined
·
11,867 Posts
LOL

Oh come now. That is kid stuff far as math goes. You should see the amount of work involved with figuring TQ vs crank angle (yes I've figure that out too, in theory), LOL.

But basically the big requirement is better air flow up top. I hate to say it but the TS intake manifold shows good improvements in that regard. And if you'd add more compression to that mix you should see even more. It is the manifold that chokes the engine up top. The cylinder head itself (in stock form) should be good for 8,500rpm before flow takes a dive.

It's just that no one has really concentrated on the N/A game so everyone thinks it's hard or very expensive. But I really don't think that's the case. It's moreso that simple things like CAI's and exhaust won't get you there. You have to go back to the simpler more hot-rodder things.
 

·
SVT Fanatic
Joined
·
2,615 Posts
iminhell, 100% disagree? Really? Not even at least 99% disagree? LOL

It's just that no one has really concentrated on the N/A game so everyone thinks it's hard or very expensive.
That is simply just not true. There are a few people who have tried, including Tom.

And check my profile for mods...I lost power. I'm so ashamed I don't even know where the dyno is but I think I'm about at stock levels.

It only sounds good in theory. You're not getting 200 whp on 93 octane reliably for less money than boost.
 

·
C2H5OH
Joined
·
11,867 Posts
Ok Ok, maybe 99%. But I'm not budging another 1% for anyone (unless I see boobs, *fingers crossed).

Your mods (just the things that might add power):
svt2nv04 said:
Current Performance Modifications
Tom's tune-diablo predator, K&N Filter, Taylor wires, RT high flow cat, 180 degree thermostat, ground wires, CFM 67mm throttle body, ceramic coated header, VCT eliminator, esslinger intake and exhaust adj. cam gears, zx3 headgasket, 3 angle valve job, head milled .008-.010
It's the things in bold that I have questions about.

Still the SVT header?

It's odd that you lost power with the VCT Elim kit. It's the same thing I'm running and I think part of the reason I'm able to make the power I am. But the SVT has my ass kicked in low end TQ by quite a bit, over 10ft/lbs. My thought is, and it's just a thought, that the Cam Position Sensor is what's making you loose power. With the SVT it plays a much bigger role than with the normal zetec. It's involved with injector timing being the SVT is true sequential vs the zetec's batch fire. which means and SVT with fixed cam timing might suffer if the tone ring isn't also adjustable. Or at least that's my theory on it. So pretty much you're screwed unless you can move the tone ring, which would also prevent any cam timing code you might get if the timing is wrong ... and it's also why that code pops up.

Why the zx3 HG?
(my assumption is it's for fear of valve contact with the head being milled slightly, basically a shim)
So you're still pretty close to stock compression and with the cam timing set so as not to set a code, that might be why your down a bit on power. I really want to say with a little more taken off the head and a SVT HG you should see it come back. But the other thing is, from what I hear, the Diablo just can't tune as well as the SCT stuff. So it could be the tune it limiting you?


I know Tom's played in the N/A realm and made some headway. But you and I both know getting him to talk about it is like pulling teeth from a hungry Tiger. But then I'm sure he's mentioned most everything at least once and it's just a matter of where to find it ... I know I've missed a good bit of his advise that I should have taken, and he badgers me for it every time, LOL.
 

·
SVT Fanatic
Joined
·
2,615 Posts
Ok Ok, maybe 99%. But I'm not budging another 1% for anyone (unless I see boobs, *fingers crossed).

Your mods (just the things that might add power):


It's the things in bold that I have questions about.

Still the SVT header?

It's odd that you lost power with the VCT Elim kit. It's the same thing I'm running and I think part of the reason I'm able to make the power I am. But the SVT has my ass kicked in low end TQ by quite a bit, over 10ft/lbs. My thought is, and it's just a thought, that the Cam Position Sensor is what's making you loose power. With the SVT it plays a much bigger role than with the normal zetec. It's involved with injector timing being the SVT is true sequential vs the zetec's batch fire. which means and SVT with fixed cam timing might suffer if the tone ring isn't also adjustable. Or at least that's my theory on it. So pretty much you're screwed unless you can move the tone ring, which would also prevent any cam timing code you might get if the timing is wrong ... and it's also why that code pops up.

Why the zx3 HG?
(my assumption is it's for fear of valve contact with the head being milled slightly, basically a shim)
So you're still pretty close to stock compression and with the cam timing set so as not to set a code, that might be why your down a bit on power. I really want to say with a little more taken off the head and a SVT HG you should see it come back. But the other thing is, from what I hear, the Diablo just can't tune as well as the SCT stuff. So it could be the tune it limiting you?


I know Tom's played in the N/A realm and made some headway. But you and I both know getting him to talk about it is like pulling teeth from a hungry Tiger. But then I'm sure he's mentioned most everything at least once and it's just a matter of where to find it ... I know I've missed a good bit of his advise that I should have taken, and he badgers me for it every time, LOL.
Yes, it's the SVT header, ceramic coated. Tom took like 2 days dyno tuning it and he had to pull back so much timing from engine knock that I lost power (I think it's back to around stock levels, though). I even put in high octane fuel and had him do some pulls to see what would happen but he still couldn't add back too much more timing for added power (I think it increased like 5 hp).

The ZX3 headgasket was a way to raise compression even more. What I'm thinking the problem is is that the retard who milled my head shaved way more than he said he did making my compression really, really, high. Tom had estimated it to be about 11.0:1 with what I supposingly had done but who knows, maybe it's more like 11.5:1 or even higher, IDK. That on 93 octane wouldn't work out very well. Obviously if I replaced the ZX3 headgasket back with the SVT headgasket the compression would come down a bit which would help. I don't think and neither does Tom, that it has to do with the VCT eliminator. That's just supposed to help make it easier to dyno tune. I haven't told Tom that I think the guy who milled my head took too much off but I think that's a real possibility. It would make sense.

All of this happened over 3 years ago. Since then I just haven't cared to sink more money into it to 'fix' it. I do regret doing all this though. I mainly regret the VCT eliminator (getting rid of it when I didn't have a problem with it) and messing with the head to raise compression.

I have thought about over the last couple months going up McNews Automotive sometime soon, which is much closer than Tom's shop for me, to put the SVT headgasket back on and get it dyno tuned again. It runs fine though now, it's just about as slow as it was stock now but I don't really care about how fast it is anymore; I just want something that looks good and sporty and will get me to where I need to go. I've had my car over 7 years, since new, and I will probably be getting a new one in a few years anyway.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,343 Posts
decals lots of decals
 

·
GT40 all the things!
Joined
·
9,482 Posts
I am all for trying things and pushing the limits, but at some point don't you just have to say is it worth it? I respect anyone who goes into an n/a project knowing they will spend more to make less. But if you are contemplating an n/a build just because you "don't want to go boost" then I think you need to re-evaluate.

How much would it cost you to get 200whp n/a?

I bought my jrsc kit used for $900. Add tuning and BAM your making the same hp as John is now. Add a few more mods and 200whp is very attainable.
Posted via FF Mobile
 

·
C2H5OH
Joined
·
11,867 Posts
I guess for me it was a money issue. With N/A you can add parts over time and spend about $500 a time and piece together the parts. But with a turbo you can't really. It's a one time big purchase and a couple little ones for odds and ends. I just don't have that kind of self control. The total cost of all the parts I've had on the car over the years really sucks and I don't even want to add up the cost. But what I have now does seem to be very cost effective, about damn time! AND it seems to work very well.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top