darrell cox 2.0 to 2.2 to 2.6l sohc stroker saga

Have a question about how to make horsepower going the all motor route, here's where to ask it.
User avatar
keeders08
2GN Member
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:32 am
Location: Pittsburgh/Connellsville, Pa
Contact:

Post by keeders08 » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:05 pm

blue demon02 wrote:
keeders08 wrote:
SGT BRAD wrote:still tuning...192hp and 177tq so far.
FUCK YEA AMERICA!!!!!!

:-) u have no idea how happy i am, i argued with my buddy about wether it was even possible or not.. that bastard..
Possible to what break 200? its been done in every fashion and form in any varity of 4 cylinder you can throw in a neon.

Brad here is what i don't understand. It is well known that with decent compression (10:1) you can get well over 200WHP in a 2.4 DOHC you have a 2.6 and if DCR claims that this head he made for you will flow better then a DOHC head then you should be in the 250WHP range. 197WHP is just realy, realy low and something is deffanitly not right.
Nope, I know very well 200 has been done plenty of times.
SOHC 2.6L stroker is what the guy argued against me about bein possible.
Keeders
[KUTTER AUTO]
Formerly Of Warner Robins/Bonaire, Ga
Image
aaaw no son, not a bacon slice!!

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:12 pm

ok, folks. i was waiting to be able to give more info, but i'll let you know what i know so far. the motor is running and has made 50+ pulls on the dyno. i've heard it running and unless darrell is revving up another car and claiming it's mine (i don't believe this) it's holding together this time just fine. there have been 3 issues that have delayed the full dyno tune. 1. there was an interrupted tach signal that turned out to be a cracked cam sensor magnet. took a day to figure out. 2. being careful this time not to grenade the motor, darrell and clem noticed that the timing advance that they were programming into the dcr built ms wasn't accurate. they hit it with a timing light only to find out that the motor was actually running almost 10* more timing than what was entered into the ms. whoa...well right there is more than likely what grenaded the 2.2 13.5:1 motor. i'm not sure how they've sorted that out and whether it was a dip switch setting, etc. 3. there was an intermittant miss that would cause the motor to break up b/w 5-6k rpms. 3-4 days of fooling around with it determined that it was a ground issue from sharing a common ground with the pcm, ms, etc. that's now fixed and darrell says the motor doesn't miss a tick to 8500+rpms.

i spoke with darrell last friday and the motor was very fat with little timing added while they worked on the miss. they tore apart 1/2 of the wiring and had the ms apart and on the seat when they realized the common ground issue. monday was supposed to have been the "put it all back together" day. i'm waiting to hear from darrell now about what it's done for final numbers.

i've been so busy that even if i wanted to i don't have time to go get the car. i have always believed the best in darrell and will continue to do so. it's been very frustrating, but in the long run dcr has ended up losing money on this deal and i've gotten quite a motor out of it. mind you i would expect it. it was goaded into this build and i would expect nothing less from darrell than to step up and do the right thing. i still pray that i'll be surprised by the final numbers.

now the big news is that darrell did screw up the compression numbers. he thought it'd be around 10:1 or a little more. as it turns out it's 9:1!!! whaaaa??? essentially i'll have a 200+hp 87 octane daily driver. not too many of those out there. whatever number darrell ends up with is slightly less than what the final number will be. i still have a fully custom amm intake sitting at home that will certainly make more power than the stock based r/ternie box intake.

so here is where we sit, 9:1 compression, 2.6 fully built bottom-end capable of holding 1000hp with crank straps, etc, 197hp and 180tq (not final tune). i expect 205 hp to be about where it ends up with the r/ternie intake and hopefully 210 or so with the amm. if i had the heart to do it, i think that a set of 11:1 or 11.5:1 pistons would really wake things up. i hate to speculate but certainly it would make a streetable 230-240. maybe it will make more on 9:1 and maybe it would make alot more on 11:1+ pistons. i'm not sure why the numbers are low. i'll just wait and see what the final tune says.

as it stands i am going to hopefully get the car and drive it for a thousand miles or so. after that i'll probably boost it with a bw s256 turbo and 18-20psi. we'll see what it will do then.

i will post more as i hear. at least things are running properly and i can see light at the end of the tunnel.
brad
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

User avatar
Danteneon
Former Moderator
Posts: 9591
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:13 pm
Location: Manassas, VA

Post by Danteneon » Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Good news indeed! I hope for your sanity that this time the car comes together correctly :lol:

Oh, and your engine build is my inspiration to go forward with mine :thumbup:
If I could just figure out how to meld the Outback and the Neon into one car...

Image

ragek23
2GN Member
Posts: 2476
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:22 am
Location: Torrington, CT

Post by ragek23 » Tue Nov 17, 2009 9:51 pm

Brad can you get a dyno chart from DCR at some point? I would be really interested in seeing the nature of that beast and how much low end it will have compared to our 2.0s

2002 Neon SXT Sold
2006 EVO MR Weekend Warrior
2003 SRT 4 DD
-Kevin

Image

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:26 pm

untuned darrell is saying that the tq curve is essentially flat at 170-180ft/lbs. i will absolutely post everything once i have it in my hands. i'm still a little hesitant to say much more as i've been down this road before. the only really encouraging thing right now is the number of dyno pulls. i've heard it running in the background on at least 4 different occasions in the past 2 weeks including one 8k+ run. at least that gives me some hope.
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

Ntyvirus1
2009 Silver Contributor
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:30 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Post by Ntyvirus1 » Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:34 pm

glad things are startin to look up.
Official "I'm Going to Drive My Neon till it Dies" Club #000038

Image
hul kogan wrote: And from thy shadows he comes to rippeth thine buttholes. :lol
MoxHair wrote:You should never throw parts at a car.. You'll dent the exterior.

ragek23
2GN Member
Posts: 2476
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:22 am
Location: Torrington, CT

Post by ragek23 » Wed Nov 18, 2009 12:29 am

if its truly flat down to say 3k or so it would be a really nice daily driver

he should deliver it for u on xmas :)

2002 Neon SXT Sold
2006 EVO MR Weekend Warrior
2003 SRT 4 DD
-Kevin

Image

User avatar
keeders08
2GN Member
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:32 am
Location: Pittsburgh/Connellsville, Pa
Contact:

Post by keeders08 » Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:21 am

ragek23 wrote:if its truly flat down to say 3k or so it would be a really nice daily driver

he should deliver it for u on xmas :)
Aw how cute would that be... lmao!

Awesome news tho!
Keeders
[KUTTER AUTO]
Formerly Of Warner Robins/Bonaire, Ga
Image
aaaw no son, not a bacon slice!!

User avatar
INVUJerry
2GN Veteran
Posts: 6880
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 9:55 pm
Location: Hanover, PA
Contact:

Post by INVUJerry » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:30 pm

That's badass.

You would pick up a lot of HP with an ITB manifold. Arthur made 161 TQ on his setup, and it peaked at 6200 or so.

Boost would be fucking AMAZING. BOOST IT.

User avatar
BlackRoseRacing
2009 Platinum Contributor
Posts: 12737
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 8:58 am

Post by BlackRoseRacing » Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:19 pm

good news, glad to here DCR is coming through for you.....
What has me baffled is according to PalmerPerformance software I'm hitting 180ft/lbs myself :roll: I need to save some money for a dyno run Vs software results. Hell, my R/T ran the same times in the 1/8th as my brothers Daytona Turbo1 that I built and stock it runs 175ht/lbs of torque......
Congrats on the new motor :thumbup:

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:30 pm

BlackRoseRacing wrote:good news, glad to here DCR is coming through for you.....
What has me baffled is according to PalmerPerformance software I'm hitting 180ft/lbs myself :roll: I need to save some money for a dyno run Vs software results. Hell, my R/T ran the same times in the 1/8th as my brothers Daytona Turbo1 that I built and stock it runs 175ht/lbs of torque......
Congrats on the new motor :thumbup:
the jury is still out on everything being final. i have a feeling something else has gone wrong or i would have heard from darrell since things were supposed to be done (again) on monday.

anyway, 180ft/lbs is wicked stout considering jeffb is only getting 186ft/lbs on his 2.4 with 12.5 or 13:1 pistons. i don't know that i've seen anyone else post numbers breaking 180ft/lbs on even 2.4's n/a. but i may corrected shortly by other members that have some proof.
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

User avatar
INVUJerry
2GN Veteran
Posts: 6880
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 9:55 pm
Location: Hanover, PA
Contact:

Post by INVUJerry » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:03 pm

Jeff's car made 235/185 I think, spinning to the sky. He was running 12.5:1 with a minor head mill to bring it to 12.7:1, and race gas.

User avatar
keeders08
2GN Member
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:32 am
Location: Pittsburgh/Connellsville, Pa
Contact:

Post by keeders08 » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:12 am

invujerry wrote:Jeff's car made 235/185 I think, spinning to the sky. He was running 12.5:1 with a minor head mill to bring it to 12.7:1, and race gas.
ur right bout the turbo...that'd just set the motor off from others even more :shock: :thumbup:

oh and ur 98k '05 makes my 82k '04 sound not so bad ne more lol
Keeders
[KUTTER AUTO]
Formerly Of Warner Robins/Bonaire, Ga
Image
aaaw no son, not a bacon slice!!

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:05 am

here are my thoughts after doing a little studying on the actual dyno effects of adding compression. it appears that each point of compression increase is good for about 5% increases in tq and maybe 8% in hp on a fully built motor with close to ideal volumetric efficiency. right now the motor is making 9:1 compression or less. if 3 points of compression were added and the static compression was closer to 12:1 the gains would be up to 15% tq and 24% increase in hp. this would yield somewhere around 205-210ft/lbs and 250hp. this is essentially where the initial calculations had placed the motor. unfortunately without me spending another pile of cash on custom pistons and tearing the motor apart we'll never know for sure. this is all just speculation. however, these numbers are at least ballpark from other subjective data on similar compression changes to other motors. it's too bad that the true n/a potential for this combo won't ever be known.
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

Ntyvirus1
2009 Silver Contributor
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:30 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Post by Ntyvirus1 » Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:46 am

howd u end up with such low compression?
Official "I'm Going to Drive My Neon till it Dies" Club #000038

Image
hul kogan wrote: And from thy shadows he comes to rippeth thine buttholes. :lol
MoxHair wrote:You should never throw parts at a car.. You'll dent the exterior.

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:56 am

it was supposed to be 10:1 or so, but somehow darrell goofed and even with the sohc head the 2.6 bottom-end only raised compression up to about 9:1 from what i would imagine were initially 8.5:1 srt pistons. i would complain more, but at this point i just want my car back and i'll drive it for a while n/a and decide if i'm going to add higher comp slugs or go boost. slugs are cheaper, but require the motor be yanked again. boost is just bolt-on and go, but mucho more expensive. we'll see.
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

User avatar
blue demon02
2GN Member
Posts: 1212
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 11:32 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX 78148
Contact:

Post by blue demon02 » Fri Nov 20, 2009 12:01 pm

I would shave the head to get your comp you want. Youy can shave it a lot before you run into issues with interfearance. Especialy even more so sense you have dished pistons that would help even more.
Image

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Fri Nov 20, 2009 12:34 pm

blue demon02 wrote:I would shave the head to get your comp you want. Youy can shave it a lot before you run into issues with interfearance. Especialy even more so sense you have dished pistons that would help even more.
i'm going to talk to arthur about that very thing tonight. if there is enough room to shave and see 11:1 then i may go that route as it would only entail pulling off the head. we'll see. if the final hp numbers are significantly north of 200 then i might just shave the head and see where it ends up. if the numbers are lower then i may look at going boost. i find it hard to imagine that there's enough room to mill the head to gain 2 whole points of compression. but, maybe...
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

User avatar
BlackRoseRacing
2009 Platinum Contributor
Posts: 12737
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 8:58 am

Post by BlackRoseRacing » Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:57 pm

hard to imagine that there's enough room to mill the head to gain 2 whole points of compression. but, maybe
Honestly on the sohc I don't think there is as this may effect the timing belt length. Although when I was working on the dual head for my R/T I had the head shaved around 0.200" IIRK to yield about 10.1:1 on my R/T with stock pistons.
Personally I would not shave the head unless the surface area was rough enough to where it needed to be shaved. The SOHC motor is already an interference motor, shaving the head would just make this situation worse....

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Sat Nov 21, 2009 4:49 pm

my bigger reason for not shaving the head is that it's a heavily ported and polished with completely reshaped ports and combustion chamber. to screw it up by shaving it too thin would be a real shame. i've got an extra sohc head in the barn. maybe i'll knock off a ton on that one, port the stink out of it and see what happens. right now i'm still waiting...
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

User avatar
bone-yard-racing
2GN Member
Posts: 2328
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:36 pm
Location: York PA
Contact:

Post by bone-yard-racing » Sat Nov 21, 2009 4:49 pm

Its usually accepted that 0.01 is 0.1 increase in compression
Image

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Sat Nov 21, 2009 5:54 pm

that's all fine and dandy, but these are dished pistons and i for one have no clue how to determine at this point how much to take off to gain the desired comp ratio. honestly i think that 11:1 and 93 octane would be amazing, but to get there is going to mean something herculean on my part and i'm just not sure i have it in me anymore to keep doing this.
brad
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

hybrid-Srt2001
2GN Member
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 6:06 am
Location: reno/cali
Contact:

Post by hybrid-Srt2001 » Sat Nov 21, 2009 6:05 pm

just drive it and enjoy the car for a while. Turbo it later, e85 and that setup would be awesome.
ImageImage
[/quote]Yup it definately needs to go lower. If its not scrapeing constantly why you are driving then its not low enough bro. :lol:[/quote]

esteinmaier
Supporting Vendor
Posts: 3324
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:40 pm

Post by esteinmaier » Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:41 am

You really need to get into domed pistons to get high compression. There just isn't enough physical space in the CC to get high compression from shaving the head that much. I have mine shaved .030, and that's about all that I would consider logical.

They way I see it, either drive it as is, with a big loss in power, swap out the pistons for something taller, or boost the crap out of it. Naturally, I'm all about lots of boost, but you have to decide what's worth it to you. You already have a ton of money in it. It seems like a shame to not make 500hp+ out of it.
ASP - First NGC SOHC in the 13s and the 12s. First SOHC neon over 500whp. First NGC Neon on MS.
Winston Churchill wrote:Yes, Madam, I am drunk, but in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be ugly.

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 pm

erick is indeed the voice of wisdom. maybe i'll do both. i'm still miffed that we weren't able to max out an n/a build. i have always wanted to see what the absolute most was that you could get out of a stroked 2.0 and now i'm curious to see the same for the stroked 2.4. vic just sent a pm stating that pistons can be swapped just by taking off the head!!! is that true. never having taken the head off of one of these motors i had just assumed that the pistons had to be changed from the bottom. heck if the head can be pulled off to swap pistons then i'm game for a high comp piston as boost later as well. that's a fairly easy deal. pulling the motor out along with all of the nitrous gear is just more of a headache than i'm wanting to tackle.
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

hybrid-Srt2001
2GN Member
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 6:06 am
Location: reno/cali
Contact:

Post by hybrid-Srt2001 » Sun Nov 22, 2009 8:01 pm

you goyya pull the head and the oil pan. un bolt the rods, then pull the pistons out the top.
ImageImage
[/quote]Yup it definately needs to go lower. If its not scrapeing constantly why you are driving then its not low enough bro. :lol:[/quote]

User avatar
SGT BRAD
2GN Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by SGT BRAD » Sun Nov 22, 2009 8:17 pm

that's what i thought. that's not too bad. shouldn't take but a day to pull it off and put it back together. i was hoping not to have to pull the crank straps off and drop the crank. i'd pull out my oem shop manual, but dangit the thing is with the car at darrells!!!!!!
ooh...there's a glimmer of the dream left!!!

User avatar
BillyMike
2GN Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:40 am
Location: Central Texas
Contact:

Post by BillyMike » Sun Nov 22, 2009 8:46 pm

SGT BRAD wrote:t i'd pull out my oem shop manual, but dangit the thing is with the car at darrells!!!!!!
I hope that manual is still in there when you get your car back.

In a way you and I are kind of at a similar crossroads I cant decide if I want to continue NA or go boost.

Anyways good luck with your choice.

BillyMike
03 Neon R/T Untuned
Central Texas

JeffB#2
2GN Member
Posts: 428
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:55 pm

Post by JeffB#2 » Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:44 pm

SGT BRAD wrote:gains would be up to 15% tq and 24% increase in hp.
it won't be that much just by swapping pistons going from ~9:1 to ~12:1 without changing any other parts. i would be surprised to even see a 10% increase.

what cam? i'm not reading all this for just one question.
BoogerMan
'95 Ply NYG ACR sedan 12.31 @ 111 all motor 2.4 swap - puked
'95 Ply NYG Sport Coupe 2.4 SOHC. Yes, 2.4 single cam.
'01 ACR Stone White
www.boogerbushings.com

Image

User avatar
INVUJerry
2GN Veteran
Posts: 6880
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 9:55 pm
Location: Hanover, PA
Contact:

Post by INVUJerry » Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:49 pm

Crane 005 is what he has right now.

Post Reply

Return to “Naturally Aspirated”