Realistic NA Build HP.

User avatar
ToeKnee805
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 299
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:17 pm
Location: Southern California, 805

Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby ToeKnee805 » Sun Mar 29, 2015 8:15 pm

Ok so i know we get a lot of new people coming in and saying I WANT MY AE86 WITH LIKE ONLY 220HP WHAT KINDA INTAKE I NEED?
Ive been in the scene long enough to know that these number are only attainable by some serious NA builds. I used to have an NA 4age with minor head work and oversized pistons and some bolt ons. (Intake, TRD Header, 5zigen ehxuast etc) It was plenty to have fun but not enough to stay close in tandems. I decided to turbo this setup, and managed to squeeze out a decent 150WHP and 163 lb. ft of torque at around 3300RPM from it. Well i blew the rings today and made the decision to go back to NA.

So the real question is: Im looking for roughly the same HP/TQ from an NA build. Roughly in the 155-160 HP range. What will roughly be needed to attain this goal? I plan on doing headwork like port and Polishing the Head, Gasket matching the ports (Largeport head), New valvetrain, some drop in cams (like the PON CAM) Adjustable Gears, Shaving the head or thinner HG. And as far as bottom end im purchasing a good condition GZE block. From my understanding they have lightweight conrods, and maybe try to pair them with some high compression pistons.(not sure what ratio i need) And the usual maintenance like new main and rod bearings. I do have a megasquirt standalone running MAP sensor and a wideband gauge to monitor my fuel, since i would like to continue running 440cc injectors. But i can also go back to AFM/stock ecu setup.

Realistically what number am i looking to achieve with a build like this? Am i crazy? Am i in the ballpark? Any pointers in helping me get there?
1986 Corolla GT-S -- Unmolested -- Now Resto Project
1985 Corolla GT-S -- Turbo Levin Track Car
1982 Corolla 1.8 -- Sitting collecting dust

Disable adblock

This site is supported by ads and donations.
If you see this text you are blocking our ads.
Please consider a Donation to support the site.


totta crolla
Club4AG Pro
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 5:21 am
Location: Oxford U.K

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby totta crolla » Mon Mar 30, 2015 1:55 am

140 whp is realistic but you won't get anything like that torque.
Would you miss the torque ?

User avatar
oldeskewltoy
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby oldeskewltoy » Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:24 am

totta crolla wrote:Would you miss the torque ?


Important question to ask...... my 145 whp N/A 4AGE (165@ the crank) is only 112#/ft @ the wheels (about 130@ the crank)


see my answers in blue below.....
ToeKnee805 wrote:So the real question is: Im looking for roughly the same HP/TQ from an NA build. Roughly in the 155-160 HP range. What will roughly be needed to attain this goal?

I plan on doing headwork like port and Polishing the Head good idea If you want a professional job, my work usually runs about the cost of a set of cams - Oldeskewltoy's porting thread
Gasket matching the ports (Largeport head), You may not want to do that.... Making the opening larger by just matching the gasket may cause some loss of performance
New valvetrain, Valve springs I recommend Toda, you don't need much else if you are running the Poncams... and in reality new OEM spring should work too
some drop in cams (like the PON CAM) many cams are "drop-in", but I prefer to set cam timing
Adjustable Gears, not needed UNLESS you do adjust the cams
Shaving the head or thinner HG. maybe both, OR one OR the other. shaving the head will raise compression a small amount, a thin head gasket will also raise compression, but MORE importantly it gets the piston closer to the head providing something called "squish". "Squish" is the gap between the top of the piston, and the flat part of the head. Ideally this should be no smaller then .8mm, and no larger than 1mm
And as far as bottom end im purchasing a good condition GZE block. From my understanding they have lightweight conrods GZE rods are the heaviest.
and maybe try to pair them with some high compression pistons.(not sure what ratio i need) a Good compression ratio for the Poncams is about 11 to 1

And the usual maintenance like new main and rod bearings. I do have a megasquirt standalone running MAP sensor and a wideband gauge to monitor my fuel, since i would like to continue running 440cc injectors. But i can also go back to AFM/stock ecu setup.

Realistically what number am i looking to achieve with a build like this? Am i crazy? Am i in the ballpark? Any pointers in helping me get there? It is possible to build a 150+hp 4AGE with the poncams, the right compression and careful build quaility

OST Cyl head porting, - viewtopic.php?f=22&t=300

Building a great engine takes knowing the end... before you begin :ugeek:

Enjoy Life... its the only one you get!

User avatar
ToeKnee805
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 299
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:17 pm
Location: Southern California, 805

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby ToeKnee805 » Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:59 am

I may miss the torque but in all reality it was too much torque for me. Nothing but wheel spin without any direction lol.

Valve spring, if you say oem is perfectly fine I will run OEM. I was thinking of a pon cam or hks 272 at the MAX. The cam gears I'm running cause they came with the car


Would you recommend I not go GZE bottom end? Or will it work just fine. I wanted it because it's a 7rib block.

Glad to hear that I'm not crazy and 150HP is attainable on a NA build
1986 Corolla GT-S -- Unmolested -- Now Resto Project
1985 Corolla GT-S -- Turbo Levin Track Car
1982 Corolla 1.8 -- Sitting collecting dust

Disable adblock

This site is supported by ads and donations.
If you see this text you are blocking our ads.
Please consider a Donation to support the site.


yoshimitsuspeed
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby yoshimitsuspeed » Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:01 am

ToeKnee805 wrote:Ok so i know we get a lot of new people coming in and saying I WANT MY AE86 WITH LIKE ONLY 220HP WHAT KINDA INTAKE I NEED?
Ive been in the scene long enough to know that these number are only attainable by some serious NA builds. I used to have an NA 4age with minor head work and oversized pistons and some bolt ons. (Intake, TRD Header, 5zigen ehxuast etc) It was plenty to have fun but not enough to stay close in tandems. I decided to turbo this setup, and managed to squeeze out a decent 150WHP and 163 lb. ft of torque at around 3300RPM from it. Well i blew the rings today and made the decision to go back to NA.

So the real question is: Im looking for roughly the same HP/TQ from an NA build. Roughly in the 155-160 HP range. What will roughly be needed to attain this goal? I plan on doing headwork like port and Polishing the Head, Gasket matching the ports (Largeport head), New valvetrain, some drop in cams (like the PON CAM) Adjustable Gears, Shaving the head or thinner HG. And as far as bottom end im purchasing a good condition GZE block. From my understanding they have lightweight conrods, and maybe try to pair them with some high compression pistons.(not sure what ratio i need) And the usual maintenance like new main and rod bearings. I do have a megasquirt standalone running MAP sensor and a wideband gauge to monitor my fuel, since i would like to continue running 440cc injectors. But i can also go back to AFM/stock ecu setup.

Realistically what number am i looking to achieve with a build like this? Am i crazy? Am i in the ballpark? Any pointers in helping me get there?



Why ditch the turbo? It sounds like it was working for you very well and with some good pistons you are at the base of the motors potential at 150 WHP where as NA you will be getting close to the practical limits of power.

Also curious on what info you have on blowing the rings. Did you have knock monitoring?

The GZE conrods will not be lightweight. They will be the same as the NA internals from the same year motor. All 7 rib rods except the BT are similar weight and similar strength. With that said they are strong enough for most builds. If you want lightweight though aftermarket is the way to go.

Switching to a 7A bottom end would help out your power curve a lot whether NA or boosted.

If you were dead set on NA I think this is the best bang for the buck package.
http://www.matrixgarage.com/products/16 ... nd-pistons

You could go a little further but much more than this and you will want aftermarket engine management and things start getting a lot more expensive real fast.
I think you would be real happy with a properly dialed in turbo build though.

yoshimitsuspeed
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby yoshimitsuspeed » Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:04 am

ToeKnee805 wrote:I may miss the torque but in all reality it was too much torque for me. Nothing but wheel spin without any direction lol.

Valve spring, if you say oem is perfectly fine I will run OEM. I was thinking of a pon cam or hks 272 at the MAX. The cam gears I'm running cause they came with the car


Would you recommend I not go GZE bottom end? Or will it work just fine. I wanted it because it's a 7rib block.

Glad to hear that I'm not crazy and 150HP is attainable on a NA build


Sounds to me like you need more tire.
Torque at the motor is irrelevant because your transmission multiplies torque as long as there is enough power to do what you want to do.
Power curve is important and a broader power curve will tend to outperform a narrower power curve.

If 150 WHP was breaking loose personally I'd focus on getting more traction not less power hehe.

User avatar
ToeKnee805
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 299
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:17 pm
Location: Southern California, 805

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby ToeKnee805 » Mon Mar 30, 2015 11:34 am

I didn't have knock monitoring and it just shoots about a quart of oil every few miles through my valve cover breather and when I crank it sounds like I got weak compression. I did enjoy the power but I just couldn't get it to stop breaking at the track. I understand reliability has nothing to do with being turbo or NA and it's all about the tune and monitoring so it was probably me that cause it to blow. The reason I ditched the turbo setup is I found a buyer right away for the setup I had so I'm planning on selling it to him.
1986 Corolla GT-S -- Unmolested -- Now Resto Project
1985 Corolla GT-S -- Turbo Levin Track Car
1982 Corolla 1.8 -- Sitting collecting dust

User avatar
oldeskewltoy
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby oldeskewltoy » Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:02 pm

New OEM spring cost about the same as the Toda springs... OEM springs lower wear on the timing belt because they have lighter pressures... BUT they are only capable of moderate builds - cams with lifts no greater then 8.15mm(give or take a few hundredths of a mm). The Toda springs are capable of much greater lifts, and because they are stiffer, they are less likely to float. The 272 cam may work with the stock springs, but they typically make power higher up in the rpm band. In MY opinion.... I'd draw the line @ 264 cams for use with stock springs... for I'm not entirely sure if the stock springs don't float @ typical 272 peak rpm levels, which are well over 8000. You also don't need 272 cams to get to your goal.

"Float" - Valve spring float - means the cam is going so fast that the valve no longer rides it, but is "bouncing" off it. this bouncing can lead to piston to valve contact causing serious problems.
OST Cyl head porting, - viewtopic.php?f=22&t=300

Building a great engine takes knowing the end... before you begin :ugeek:

Enjoy Life... its the only one you get!

Sportmax
Club4AG Enthusiast
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:47 am

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby Sportmax » Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:05 pm

ToeKnee805 wrote:I didn't have knock monitoring and it just shoots about a quart of oil every few miles through my valve cover breather and when I crank it sounds like I got weak compression. I did enjoy the power but I just couldn't get it to stop breaking at the track. I understand reliability has nothing to do with being turbo or NA and it's all about the tune and monitoring so it was probably me that cause it to blow. The reason I ditched the turbo setup is I found a buyer right away for the setup I had so I'm planning on selling it to him.


Damn I was just about to ask if you want to sell me the Turbo setup and how much you want! Let me know if this other guy falls through!

Deuce Cam
Posts: 1347
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:41 pm
Location: AZ

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby Deuce Cam » Tue Mar 31, 2015 11:07 am

ToeKnee805 wrote:I understand reliability has nothing to do with being turbo or NA.


That's debatable. A turbo physically adds more parts and complexity so there's more to go wrong. They don't like heat or 91 octane (I hope you don't have to deal with both), and a bad tank of gas can be a death sentence. A great tune goes a long way but you'll still have to be closely monitoring everything.

yoshimitsuspeed
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby yoshimitsuspeed » Tue Mar 31, 2015 12:19 pm

Deuce Cam wrote:A turbo physically adds more parts and complexity so there's more to go wrong.


That's debatable.
Technically you are correct but turbo cars off the assembly line can go 200k miles with minimal work above and beyond maintenance. If you build it properly and maintain it properly the amount of increased risk is not significant. Turbos get a bad rap because they are usually cobbled together, beat on and neglected.

Deuce Cam wrote:They don't like heat or 91 octane (I hope you don't have to deal with both), and a bad tank of gas can be a death sentence. A great tune goes a long way but you'll still have to be closely monitoring everything.


This has absolutely nothing to do with turbo or NA. It has to do with how aggressive the build is.
A stock Blacktop will be far more sensitive to detonation, low octane, bad gas etc than say a GZE turbo at 10 PSI.
This is because the GZE has stupid low compression and at 10 PSI it's got a crazy amount of headroom. The 20v on the other hand is built pretty close to the edge from the factory.

The final piece of the puzzle is the power potential and how it's driven. If you have ever seen the Top gear episode where they put a huge motor BMW in an economy challenge against a Prius but the prius went as fast as it could and the BMW just had to keep up. The Prius ran out of gas first because it was pushing so much harder.
In the same way if you took a 120 HP NA 4A and a 300 HP turbo on a race track and the turbo just had to keep up with the NA it's extremely likely the NA would blow up first because the turbo could maintain lower RPM and would only have to drive at 50% it's capability.

Also octane completely depends on altitude and other factors. I am able to run 7 PSI on my Blacktop on 91 octane because I never drive below 5k feet.

User avatar
oldeskewltoy
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby oldeskewltoy » Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:01 pm

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:
Deuce Cam wrote:A turbo physically adds more parts and complexity so there's more to go wrong.


That's debatable.
Technically you are correct but turbo cars off the assembly line can go 200k miles with minimal work above and beyond maintenance. If you build it properly and maintain it properly the amount of increased risk is not significant. Turbos get a bad rap because they are usually cobbled together, beat on and neglected.



We are not talking about assembly line cars.... but I agree with you :shock: a properly designed system (this means the install as well as the engine build) should have few if any additional issues then an N/A build.
OST Cyl head porting, - viewtopic.php?f=22&t=300

Building a great engine takes knowing the end... before you begin :ugeek:

Enjoy Life... its the only one you get!

Deuce Cam
Posts: 1347
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:41 pm
Location: AZ

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby Deuce Cam » Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:37 pm

In theory I tend to agree.

However, my experience living in Phoenix and having access to only 91 octane has been different. I've never 'turboed' a car, but I've had oem turbo cars and won't even consider one anymore due to the climate and fuel. Once it gets above 85-90* performance starts to noticeably drop off (it's 100* over 100 days a year here). Having to alter driving habits so one doesn't go WOT in the meat of the tq. band to avoid pings... Taking spirited drives/cruises at the coolest part of the day for the best performance and to minimize pinging... I will say that none of these cars had any engine problems in terms of needing maintenance, but when one is getting audible pinging it's probably just a matter of time. It always gave me an uneasy feeling, not if but when.

I've never had a 20v, but a lot of locals have them with little to no issues. 15 years ago I was big into Honda's. All my friends had b and h series vtec swaps. No problems. I used to daily a civic with a b18c type r engine and it saw redline every day. Not a single problem with detonation, etc.

User avatar
oldeskewltoy
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby oldeskewltoy » Tue Mar 31, 2015 4:46 pm

Deuce Cam wrote:In theory I tend to agree.

However, my experience living in Phoenix and having access to only 91 octane has been different. I've never 'turboed' a car, but I've had oem turbo cars and won't even consider one anymore due to the climate and fuel. Once it gets above 85-90* performance starts to noticeably drop off (it's 100* over 100 days a year here). Having to alter driving habits so one doesn't go WOT in the meat of the tq. band to avoid pings... Taking spirited drives/cruises at the coolest part of the day for the best performance and to minimize pinging... I will say that none of these cars had any engine problems in terms of needing maintenance, but when one is getting audible pinging it's probably just a matter of time. It always gave me an uneasy feeling, not if but when.

I've never had a 20v, but a lot of locals have them with little to no issues. 15 years ago I was big into Honda's. All my friends had b and h series vtec swaps. No problems. I used to daily a civic with a b18c type r engine and it saw redline every day. Not a single problem with detonation, etc.


there is a lot that can be done to improve a 4AG chamber to resist detonation

Image
OST Cyl head porting, - viewtopic.php?f=22&t=300

Building a great engine takes knowing the end... before you begin :ugeek:

Enjoy Life... its the only one you get!

yoshimitsuspeed
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby yoshimitsuspeed » Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:42 pm

Deuce Cam wrote:In theory I tend to agree.

However, my experience living in Phoenix and having access to only 91 octane has been different. I've never 'turboed' a car, but I've had oem turbo cars and won't even consider one anymore due to the climate and fuel. Once it gets above 85-90* performance starts to noticeably drop off (it's 100* over 100 days a year here). Having to alter driving habits so one doesn't go WOT in the meat of the tq. band to avoid pings... Taking spirited drives/cruises at the coolest part of the day for the best performance and to minimize pinging... I will say that none of these cars had any engine problems in terms of needing maintenance, but when one is getting audible pinging it's probably just a matter of time. It always gave me an uneasy feeling, not if but when.

I've never had a 20v, but a lot of locals have them with little to no issues. 15 years ago I was big into Honda's. All my friends had b and h series vtec swaps. No problems. I used to daily a civic with a b18c type r engine and it saw redline every day. Not a single problem with detonation, etc.


Do you mind sharing what cars these were? All OEM cars should have plenty of headroom/protection for situations like this. The heat alone will rob a significant amount of power. The air is less dense and therefore will make less power. It's hotter so more likely to detonate but a properly setup car, even stone age L-jetronics should account for this with the intake temp sensor, 02 sensor and AFM.
When it senses hotter air it will pull timing accordingly.
As a last resort every turbo car I have gotten familiar with has a knock sensor. If you can actually hear knock and your car has a knock sensor then something is likely wrong.
I am surprised that at such a low elevation in such a hot climate you would only have 91 octane but any OEM vehicle should have the capability of being pushed to it's limits in that environment without issue.
Turbo vs NA should definitely not have anything to do with it.

Deuce Cam
Posts: 1347
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:41 pm
Location: AZ

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby Deuce Cam » Wed Apr 01, 2015 12:37 pm

My cars were Subarus (wrx and sti). A lot of the newer cars are tuned pretty knife edge, a compromise between fuel economy/emissions and power/reliability. An example is all 2007 WRX/STI's are LEVII compliant. Considering it's a high output turbo engine compromises were made somewhere.

Also over the years I've had close friends with dsm's, evo's, supra's, and turbo'd hondas. The turbo Honda's were always a disaster but that was because they were cobbled together. The oem inline turbo engines seem to do a little better in the heat compared to a boxer, but pinging was still an issue when it was really hot.

OP: Sorry for gumming up your thread. Yoshi and OST are much more knowledgeable on these topics so I would take my opinions with a grain of salt.

User avatar
ToeKnee805
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 299
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:17 pm
Location: Southern California, 805

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby ToeKnee805 » Wed Apr 01, 2015 11:41 pm

Nah dude no worries, im lurking in the background soaking up all the info. This forum lacks alot of info that the old one had so its always good when everyone throws in their 2 cents.
1986 Corolla GT-S -- Unmolested -- Now Resto Project
1985 Corolla GT-S -- Turbo Levin Track Car
1982 Corolla 1.8 -- Sitting collecting dust

ssspacely
Club4AG Enthusiast
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:16 am

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby ssspacely » Thu Apr 02, 2015 5:38 am

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:
ToeKnee805 wrote:Ok so i know we get a lot of new people coming in and saying I WANT MY AE86 WITH LIKE ONLY 220HP WHAT KINDA INTAKE I NEED?
Ive been in the scene long enough to know that these number are only attainable by some serious NA builds. I used to have an NA 4age with minor head work and oversized pistons and some bolt ons. (Intake, TRD Header, 5zigen ehxuast etc) It was plenty to have fun but not enough to stay close in tandems. I decided to turbo this setup, and managed to squeeze out a decent 150WHP and 163 lb. ft of torque at around 3300RPM from it. Well i blew the rings today and made the decision to go back to NA.

So the real question is: Im looking for roughly the same HP/TQ from an NA build. Roughly in the 155-160 HP range. What will roughly be needed to attain this goal? I plan on doing headwork like port and Polishing the Head, Gasket matching the ports (Largeport head), New valvetrain, some drop in cams (like the PON CAM) Adjustable Gears, Shaving the head or thinner HG. And as far as bottom end im purchasing a good condition GZE block. From my understanding they have lightweight conrods, and maybe try to pair them with some high compression pistons.(not sure what ratio i need) And the usual maintenance like new main and rod bearings. I do have a megasquirt standalone running MAP sensor and a wideband gauge to monitor my fuel, since i would like to continue running 440cc injectors. But i can also go back to AFM/stock ecu setup.

Realistically what number am i looking to achieve with a build like this? Am i crazy? Am i in the ballpark? Any pointers in helping me get there?



Why ditch the turbo? It sounds like it was working for you very well and with some good pistons you are at the base of the motors potential at 150 WHP where as NA you will be getting close to the practical limits of power.

Also curious on what info you have on blowing the rings. Did you have knock monitoring?

The GZE conrods will not be lightweight. They will be the same as the NA internals from the same year motor. All 7 rib rods except the BT are similar weight and similar strength. With that said they are strong enough for most builds. If you want lightweight though aftermarket is the way to go.

Switching to a 7A bottom end would help out your power curve a lot whether NA or boosted.

If you were dead set on NA I think this is the best bang for the buck package.
http://www.matrixgarage.com/products/16 ... nd-pistons

You could go a little further but much more than this and you will want aftermarket engine management and things start getting a lot more expensive real fast.
I think you would be real happy with a properly dialed in turbo build though.

This is great. Exactly what I wanted to do with head work done by oldskewltoy. Seems like a great street setup without going far from stock appearance and feel

User avatar
oldeskewltoy
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby oldeskewltoy » Thu Apr 02, 2015 8:29 am

ssspacely wrote:This is great. Exactly what I wanted to do with head work done by oldskewltoy. Seems like a great street setup without going far from stock appearance and feel


when you are ready.... oldeskewltoy@yahoo.com
OST Cyl head porting, - viewtopic.php?f=22&t=300

Building a great engine takes knowing the end... before you begin :ugeek:

Enjoy Life... its the only one you get!

jinx
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 10:20 pm

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby jinx » Thu Apr 02, 2015 10:14 pm

turbo vs na has everything to do with reliability.... especially on a race track and novice tuned.
Stop fooling yourself
OEM vs d.i.y. is a poor analogy, and even many hi mileage oem fail at the track..... religiously

something as simple as oil drainback or inadequate crankcase venting can wipe out a motor
163 ft-lb tq could mean a small hotside choking the motor + bottling up heat, or too much timing. Pistons hate both
Turbo car requires much more babysitting an definitely has a smaller window for error

I can recall a few years back, alot of failed turbo 4agtes at track days. These were some really nice builds on quality tunes.
Mostly on oz/nz forums. The vast majority went on to sr20s, UZs, etc.... where they found success

yoshimitsuspeed
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby yoshimitsuspeed » Fri Apr 03, 2015 9:08 am

jinx wrote:turbo vs na has everything to do with reliability.... especially on a race track and novice tuned.
Stop fooling yourself
OEM vs d.i.y. is a poor analogy, and even many hi mileage oem fail at the track..... religiously

something as simple as oil drainback or inadequate crankcase venting can wipe out a motor
163 ft-lb tq could mean a small hotside choking the motor + bottling up heat, or too much timing. Pistons hate both
Turbo car requires much more babysitting an definitely has a smaller window for error

I can recall a few years back, alot of failed turbo 4agtes at track days. These were some really nice builds on quality tunes.
Mostly on oz/nz forums. The vast majority went on to sr20s, UZs, etc.... where they found success



I completely disagree. Well except for the novice tuned part. It all comes down to the quality of the build and the tune but neither of those are that hard.

Many high mileage cars will fail at the track. Yes in the case of a turbo car there are a few more components and lines and such that can fail but it still falls under the umbrella that a properly maintained motor should have a very small chance of failure and a poorly maintained motor will have a much higher chance of failure.
If you are saying that there were more turbo 4AGEs than NA 4AGEs failing then you would first have to look at the performance level of the two. Stock 16 valves are built with such a wide margin for error that they will tend to go forever. It's the same reason why there is as good a chance of a 22r lasting 400k miles as a 4AGE lasting 200k miles. They are built so mild, such low revs, so much displacement per hp etc that they can just go forever.
As for them finding success elsewhere. Maybe it was just their time. Maybe they learned lessons on the 4AGE that they applied to the new motors. I know of many people who have had success racing turbo 4AGEs. WC engineering has been doing it longer than I have been into 4AGEs. One of my favorite stories is him racing on an unopened 3 rib at 13 PSI for a full season or more without issue. This can be done if you build and tune properly and this is not that hard to do.

jinx
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 10:20 pm

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby jinx » Fri Apr 03, 2015 6:41 pm

a motor has limits. Physical as well as thermal
When "pushed", a smaller boosted motor will reach its limits long before its normally aspirated counterpart
Whats to disagree with ?

why do u think folks spend so much on a F20c ? Yep, a decent 4agte will outaccelerate it on a short burst
Take both a few laps around a 100+ degree track and flog the snot outta them. You'll find the 4agte weak links

Sure u can run a bluetop @13psi.... but seriously, what would u expect to compete with ? Not a whole lot

4ag engineers didn't design the motor for sliding around a circuit with a turbo hanging off the side. So it can't be 'over built' for that certainly.
When I had time to browse toyomods, rollaclub, ae86 driving, dorikaze, etc... their cars/efforts were a cut above what u find on u.s. forums. I dare not undermine those cats ability, by saying "its not hard".
I guess the lesson they really learned was.... go with a more sensible choice, instead of duming a load on a 4agte :D

Since its "not hard" for these many 4agte to survive track days.... post some links or proven setups. That should help the OP while you steer him towards keeping the turbo ?

User avatar
ToeKnee805
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 299
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:17 pm
Location: Southern California, 805

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby ToeKnee805 » Fri Apr 03, 2015 7:26 pm

you cant compare a stock f20c to a turboed 4ag. COmparing a turbo f20c vs a turbo 4ag would be more fair. In which they both have the same rate of failure.

My turbo setup failed because 1. i didnt vent the crnakcase enough (lazy) and 2. it was cutting timing or fuel(idk?) at high RPM and i decided to still slide the whoel day like that. Eventually the rings blew on a 260k mile block. Im actually impressed with how much power i got out ot throwing a ebay turbo setup with a decent tune on it. It could have lasted me much longer if i would have decied to fix the problems it currently had before raping it.

I was asking to see if an NA build can be made into the same HP and TQ numbers as my turbo setup did. I didnt ask for what engine will get me there or whats a better alternative. Im strictly speaking 4AGE. From most of my research, for a 4AGE to reach those kinda power numbers im gonna need some serious work. In my turbo setup all i had was injectors and a standalone, everything else was scrapped together out of other cars or ebay. The reason he is having me lean toward keeping the turbo is because an NA 4AGE at 150HP and 163 ft lb will be reaching its potential without getting into formula atlantic territory. And my turbo setup was so mild, that 150 HP 16 TQ is just scratching the surface.


Keep in mind we are comparing 4AGE TURBO VS NA. Not sr20 vs turbo 4ag, or KA vs 4age. My original question is if the 4age is capable of such power, not which engine setups can get me there reliably. Im somewhat of a purist and the 4AGE is staying. I just have to see if NA or Turbo is best for me.
1986 Corolla GT-S -- Unmolested -- Now Resto Project
1985 Corolla GT-S -- Turbo Levin Track Car
1982 Corolla 1.8 -- Sitting collecting dust

jinx
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 10:20 pm

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby jinx » Fri Apr 03, 2015 7:57 pm

already mentioned, a 4ag wont ever see 163 ft=lbs tq atw without boost(spray maybe), so your choice has been made

yoshimitsuspeed
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby yoshimitsuspeed » Fri Apr 03, 2015 8:33 pm

jinx wrote:a motor has limits. Physical as well as thermal
When "pushed", a smaller boosted motor will reach its limits long before its normally aspirated counterpart
Whats to disagree with ?

why do u think folks spend so much on a F20c ? Yep, a decent 4agte will outaccelerate it on a short burst
Take both a few laps around a 100+ degree track and flog the snot outta them. You'll find the 4agte weak links

Sure u can run a bluetop @13psi.... but seriously, what would u expect to compete with ? Not a whole lot

4ag engineers didn't design the motor for sliding around a circuit with a turbo hanging off the side. So it can't be 'over built' for that certainly.
When I had time to browse toyomods, rollaclub, ae86 driving, dorikaze, etc... their cars/efforts were a cut above what u find on u.s. forums. I dare not undermine those cats ability, by saying "its not hard".
I guess the lesson they really learned was.... go with a more sensible choice, instead of duming a load on a 4agte :D

Since its "not hard" for these many 4agte to survive track days.... post some links or proven setups. That should help the OP while you steer him towards keeping the turbo ?


You don't seem to understand the fundamental principals of power energy and heat that really invalidate much of your argument.
To make power you primarily need air and fuel. Now certian things like compression will determine how efficiently that process takes place but you can get a rough idea of how much power a motor will make based just off of how much air and fuel it uses.
This means that a 180 hp NA 4AGE, a 180 hp turbo 4AGE and a 180 hp 1GR at that point in their power curve will be using roughly the same amount of fuel. This also means the combustion process will be producing roughly the same amount of heat. Now the v6 having two banks and some other differences will be able to expel that heat faster but the NA 4AGE and the turbo 4AGE will have no significant difference.
The one difference is the turbo 4A will be making that 180 hp at 6000 RPM and the NA will be making that power at 8000 RPM. The turbo will be making 25% more heat per revolution but the NA will be making 25% more revolutions/time and therefore will be putting roughly the same BTUs of heat into the engine and exhaust.
One notable difference is that more speed means more friction so the faster spinning NA will be turning more power into heat. In other words there would be more heat that the motor would need to dissipate in order to run at the same temp. Even then localized heat around the crank, cylinders and cam journals would still be higher.
This is all kind of irrelevant because the 4AGE does not have a problem dissipating heat. From 280 CHP Formula Atlantic builds to 600 hp turbo builds I have never heard of internal heat being an issue on a properly designed and cooled 4AGE.

Why do I think people jump to F20s? Because they want the easy way out? Because there are a lot more people tuning it and therefore easier answers on what works and what doesn't?
There are some other advantages. The F20 is a more modern motor and out of the box has some notable advantages over a 4AGE. With that said going back to the example I have made before and I think I have made in this thread if I build a 300 CHP 4AGTE (properly designed tuned and built of course) and put it on a track against a stock F20 and the F20 had to run balls out and all I had to do was keep up it is extremely likely the F20 would fail first.
Why? Because the F20 would be pushing at 100% the whole time and the motor would be averaging 8000 RPM the whole time. The turbo 4AGE would be closer to 80% it's capability and probably average 6500 RPM the whole time.
RPM kill motors far faster than boost does.

I have no idea what you mean by not knowing what you would compete with running a blue top at 13 PSI.

No car engineer designed any motor ever for that purpose.
Toyota did obviously know that their motors would be used in Formula Atlantic and it's obvious that they built it with that in mind and it's obvious that over the years they improved upon it with those type of motorsports in mind. You will have a hard time finding a modern day motor that is as bulletproof.

http://www.mr2oc.com/showthread.php?t=454230

It would take some research to find others but if you subscribe to any number of 4AGE FB groups like C4AG, 4AGTE etc you will see a few builds a month that are turbocharged dedicated race cars of some sort.

User avatar
grappletech
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 344
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:13 pm

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby grappletech » Fri Apr 03, 2015 9:39 pm

The title says realistic.... Give him what he wants... No need to get extreme lol.

OP Although Ino don't know a thing about how to build A 4age with turbo, I think you'll have to compromise at some point, mainly from the aspect of torque???

Note: I'm just a dude who's looking for the Same info. (Even though I have a beams and could put my knowledge of REAL engine building in a thimble)
87 GTS Coupe Super Duper Clean
87 GTS Coupe Beams 3sge (under construction cuz I'm slow and lazy and broke-FML)
87 SR5 Coupe Shell. (Sold)
86 SR5 Hatch Shell (waiting on a 20v or BEAMS to come cheaply. hell maybe even a 4agze?!)

totta crolla
Club4AG Pro
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 5:21 am
Location: Oxford U.K

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby totta crolla » Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:10 am

It's gone flying off on a 'turbo tangent' as these types of threads often do......

jinx
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 10:20 pm

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby jinx » Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:31 am

that link says nothing
technical mumbo jumbo wont do much good.
As requested, some specifics would help.
show the guy how "not hard to do" it is to reliably track a 4agte...... since he has locked himself into that

F20 needs no tuning. Swap them in then go to work. Yes, we can call it the ez way out
You will have a hard time finding a modern day motor that is as bulletproof.

pfffttt..... once again, lets get real
folks have bolted turbos to bone stock miata 1.8s and gone past 400 atw. RZ past 500 hp and 500+ tq atw. Lots more examples about
stock 4ag will fart and wheez itself trying to touch 300, using same practice. There is nothing special about it
For "light duty"(as the case here) it will get the job done. Throw lotsa money at it otherwise

User avatar
Rogue-AE95
Club4AG Expert
Posts: 456
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 4:03 pm
Location: Tampa Bay, FL

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby Rogue-AE95 » Sat Apr 04, 2015 5:55 am

totta crolla wrote:It's gone flying off on a 'turbo tangent' as these types of threads often do......


I think it's because for the money put into an NA build, a turbo build will have much more gains in power & efficiency compared to NA. That changed my engine build plans when I realized how little I would get (compared to how much I wanted, ~200 HP atw) from the money in parts put into an NA build.
'88 Corolla All-Trac

yoshimitsuspeed
Club4AG MASTER
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Realistic NA Build HP.

Postby yoshimitsuspeed » Sat Apr 04, 2015 9:53 am

jinx wrote:that link says nothing
technical mumbo jumbo wont do much good.
As requested, some specifics would help.
show the guy how "not hard to do" it is to reliably track a 4agte...... since he has locked himself into that

F20 needs no tuning. Swap them in then go to work. Yes, we can call it the ez way out
You will have a hard time finding a modern day motor that is as bulletproof.

pfffttt..... once again, lets get real
folks have bolted turbos to bone stock miata 1.8s and gone past 400 atw. RZ past 500 hp and 500+ tq atw. Lots more examples about
stock 4ag will fart and wheez itself trying to touch 300, using same practice. There is nothing special about it
For "light duty"(as the case here) it will get the job done. Throw lotsa money at it otherwise


I'm confused. If you hate the 4AGE so much why are you here? You seem to have a fixed belief that it's crap and there is so much evidence to show the contrary I don't really understand why or how you could think this.
If a link to someone who has built and raced turbo 4AGEs doesn't mean anything to you and if technical details that contest your claim don't matter to you then what exactly are you looking for? What would it take to convince you otherwise?
People have taken GZEs past 600 on stock internals aside from fasteners and I would guess cams though the dyno I saw didn't mention them. So what is your point? I never said there aren't other good motors or other good options. All I said is you will have a hard time finding one more robust than a 4A.
It's far from stock so not very applicable to this discussion but it says something if you want to talk trash about what kind of power the 4AGE can handle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HMn3EB5Q1I
Power per liter it can hold it's own against just about any motor out there.

Since the OP isn't looking for 300 HP again this is invalid to this argument but running boost 300 hp is barely breaking a sweat for a properly setup 4AGE.

The OP isn't asking about making 300 hp though. He is looking for probably 160 to 180.
That power level is fully possible NA and if the OP wants to go that way then great. A turbo will always be able to outperform it and grow further from there for less money. With proper maintenance it can be very reliable. I'm done arguing which will be more reliable because neither of us will be able to provide quantifiable statistics to back our opinion. The fact though is that a turbo setup can be 100% reliable as long as maintained properly.


grappletech wrote:The title says realistic.... Give him what he wants... No need to get extreme lol.

OP Although Ino don't know a thing about how to build A 4age with turbo, I think you'll have to compromise at some point, mainly from the aspect of torque???

Note: I'm just a dude who's looking for the Same info. (Even though I have a beams and could put my knowledge of REAL engine building in a thimble)


By torque I assume you mean low end power. Torque tells you nothing till you include RPM. At that point you are talking about power.
Generally speaking a turbo motor will have a broader power curve than an NA of the same displacement and peak power.

Disable adblock

This site is supported by ads and donations.
If you see this text you are blocking our ads.
Please consider a Donation to support the site.



Return to “TECH: 4A-GE ENGINE”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests