Brian Crower 2.35 stroker kit

[stumo]

i think you're full of c r a p

 

[ashills]

At first look i would say a big laggy brute and then woosh all at once

That sort of spec on an R could make 5-600 id say but the work needed to get the rest of the enigne there is not worth it strokers are a bit like wild cams the wilder they are more high end flow but somewhere else has to suffer I dont think anyone here has much need above the GT3071R or GT3037R to be honest whats the use in all that extra power high end when the best features of the car is point and squirt! ;-)

the stroker gives u more low down grunt than you could ever imagine
we dyno'd a evo 2 with a 2.3 stroker yesterday and that makes over 500ftlb of torque and is very drive able and also made 620+bhp if ths was a 2 litre the torque would have been alot lower and a hell of a lot laggier but more bhp
the stroker is one of the best ways to make a car have as much area under the curve as possible from low down mega reving 2 litres will do more bhp but be very peaky at the top end and a pig to drive day to day

 

[Keira]

(you b@st@rd allen, you've bloody beat me to it :lol

but i'd agree with you completey stu .

i dont think i've read anything so stupid since he last got technical :lol:

you missed this little gem stu being the newbie mong you are :lol:

clicky

and now we have his latest know nothing nonsense :der:

strokers are a bit like wild cams the wilder they are more high end flow but somewhere else has to suffer

without a shadow of a doubt that is the most ridiculous thing i have ever read, the whole point of stroking an engine is to do the complete opposite of what you would do with 'wild' cams, 'wild' cams need lots of revs, a high power 2litre for example, strokers tend not to rev as high as a full race built 2 llitre, they dont need to, thats the point, they dont need the revs to make the power as they are already moving lots of air..remember, the engine is just a pump...

I dont think anyone here has much need above the GT3071R or GT3037R to be honest whats the use in all that extra power high end

to go faster than you would with either of the above mentioned turbos

 

[Keira]

esp round the exhaust valve

i've gone a different way with mine, the exhaust valve, with my cam spec will be pretty much open permenately :lol:

its going to idle so nicely....:lol:

 

[stumo]

Ooooo built-in anti-lag.:-D

 

[jpward]

Right Diesel weasel you nobber :fu2: you took the wrong context out of what I said in that the simile
I was trying to get across was that a stroker changes the character of the engine like how a wild cam would vastly change the way the engine behaves at different load points!

I never mentioned Torque Allen and I do know that is the main benefit of a stroked engine
(Increased VE) and hence why I mentioned the lag or slower response at lower revs.

Back at Diesel if you feel the need to put a bigger turbo on than a GT3037R on a road car then go ahead I expect
@ 525 odds would be way more than most OC members want including the extra trans bill :lol:


And I got my information from an experienced engine builder who mainly does stroked engines for racing and I spoke about stroking
my engine after a teardown discovered a heavily scored journal so I was in need of a crank anyway!
He advised not really for daily turbo road cars as the R is not laggy
and that’s what I like about it most, also not many R's have been stroked either here or America (sx conversions) which I think tells me money is better spent elsewhere.

 

[scottyd]

To be honest, i think having your engine stroked is one of the more worthwhile mods, as it opens the door to bigger possibilities not really posible with a 2 litre. Hopefully soon i will be upgrading to the gt35/40, and i cant really see that turbo working too well on a non stroked motor.

Depends on what you want from your car in the end though. I really like the sound of this 2.35 stroker kit, but i think im going to stick with my 2.2 for now.

*edit, i really cant see any negatives on having a stroked engine performance wise, surley it improves on all aspects? And on daily turbo road cars, surley two identically spec'd R's, but one being stroked, the stroked one would be even less laggy than its 2 litre brother due to the increased volume of gasses that it passes? Feel free to correct me if i'm wrong as im no expert.

 

[Fast Guy]

Does it increase VE tho? Yes more air is obviously going into the engine, but that's now a bigger cylinder to fill, so the %VE could still be the same.

The wild cam is probably a bad annalogy, as stroking is just increasing capacity, so in theory you should see more power/torque at every rpm point, whereas with the cam, you'd expect to see lose power low down and gain it at higher rpm.

Strokers can use a longer duration cam before becoming uncivilised.
Put the same wild cam on a 2L and 2.3L and the 2.3L should be alot more civilised than the 2L

Only possible negative I can think of is, someitmes a stroker can lower your safe rev limit. But, that's down to the stroke and mass of components. (can't remember if anything else affects it as well)

 

[stumo]

JP, i still think you're full of c r a p.

Your mate must be a nobber too.

The 2.35 kit would be great on a road car, lots more low end grunt so it wouldn't be as bad when off boost, it should bring the turbo on song at lower revs and should give bags more torque and power in the midrange.

The top end will also be better also but you don't need to wring the neck out of the car on the road to go fast.

With the Crower crank and lighter rods (the pistons will be slightly heavier than stock) i doubt you'll have to reduce the rev limit anyway.


FG, even if the VE was the same (it would prob go down if you don't do anything to the head/cams) you've still got an increase in volume , therefore you should get an increase in power.

More air through the engime = more power.

 

[Keira]

Right Diesel weasel you nobber :fu2: you took the wrong context out of what I said in that the simile

oh dear, name calling :lol:

i take it your trying to spell 'similar' ? a stroked engine is so completely different to running lairy cams they couldn't be any more dis-similar.

I was trying to get across was that a stroker changes the character of the engine like how a wild cam would vastly change the way the engine behaves at different load points!

indeed the stroker does change the 'character of the engine, and for a road car it can only change it for the better, what you actually said is :

That sort of spec on an R could make 5-600 id say but the work needed to get the rest of the enigne there is not worth it strokers are a bit like wild cams the wilder they are more high end flow but somewhere else has to suffer I dont think anyone here has much need above the GT3071R or GT3037R to be honest whats the use in all that extra power high end when the best features of the car is point and squirt!

the stroked engine would give you more 'point and squirt' thats the whole point of doing it.

I never mentioned Torque Allen and I do know that is the main benefit of a stroked engine
(Increased VE) and hence why I mentioned the lag or slower response at lower revs.

you still dont get it :doh:, the stroked engine on any given turbo will get it spooling quicker than a smaller capacity engine (unelss you were running nitrous maybe) thats the whole point of doing it. You get more air in, you get more exhaust out at the same revs.

And I got my information from an experienced engine builder who mainly does stroked engines for racing and I spoke about stroking
my engine after a teardown discovered a heavily scored journal so I was in need of a crank anyway!

good luck with your rebuild...and i mean that sincerely

He advised not really for daily turbo road cars as the R is not laggy
and that’s what I like about it most

stick a gt42rs on your car and then say 'the R is not laggy' .

i'll repeat it once more, in really simple terms just to see if it finally sinks in, if you increase engine capacity (making its internal volume bigger, either by stroking or over boring) you will be able to get more air in as you now have more room to squeeze it into than on a smaller capacity engine, say a 2 litre. That air goes into the cylinder, is mixed with fuel, compressed (squashed), spark plug sparks, mix goes bangdiddy-bang-bang, piston descends rapidly, exhaust gases go through turbo before exiting at rear of car, whilst this is all happening the crank goes round and round like the wheels on a bus and, via the flywheel which is now spinning with the clutch bolted to it which has a shaft that is part of the gearbox through the middle of it, drive is finally put to the wheels.

So, If you had the exact same set up on a stroked engine and a 2 litre one of them is getting more air into it which will go bangdiddy-bang-bang bigger due to the larger amount of air/fuel mix which will get the turbo spooling lower down the revs which means you will make power earlier...

come on jp, we're all rooting for ya...which one makes power sooner

also not many R's have been stroked either here or America (sx conversions) which I think tells me money is better spent elsewhere.

people dont want to stroke them due to the cost of the crank, thats the only reason there aren't more.

With the new darton liners and larger bores being possible you can now get 2.2 without spending 2k on a crank, with the short stroke and larger bore you can still rev nice and high so it will make a very good set up, will be interesting to see how stu and a few others get on.

 

[stumo]

*must not snigger*


what diesel said but i couldn't be arsed typing all that.

 

[Keira]

]Only possible negative I can think of is, someitmes a stroker can lower your safe rev limit. But, that's down to the stroke and mass of components. (can't remember if anything else affects it as well)

piston speed is affected by the longer stroke,

Thats why the kit stu has is good, 86mm stroke maintains piston speeds, bigger piston than standard, he gets more capacity but still able to rev, just like an f1 car...almost :lol:

 

[stumo]

gimme another 11,500 revs and it'll be like an F1 car:lol:

 

[Fast Guy]

FG, even if the VE was the same (it would prob go down if you don't do anything to the head/cams) you've still got an increase in volume , therefore you should get an increase in power.

More air through the engime = more power.

That's what I said:thumb:

as stroking is just increasing capacity, so in theory you should see more power/torque at every rpm point

 

[stumo]

yes you did, i was just pointing out that the VE doesn't have to remain the same to get an increase in power.

 

[Fast Guy]

Ah :thumb: Nope, you just need more air/fuel, which could even happen at a lower VE on a stroker.

 

[Keira]

unless you live in the world of jpward of course :lol:

 

[jpward]

oh dear, name calling :lol:

i take it your trying to spell 'similar' ? a stroked engine is so completely different to running lairy cams they couldn't be any more dis-similar.

"Simile" if you had two educated brain cells that were able to spark off one another then, you would have realised it means, "To compare something with another"

Like YOUR as thick as champ Diesel weasel :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[pulsarboby]

are you saying fit the darton liners but retain your original crank, mr weasel?

as thats what i was thinking of doing, as my liners are fooked.

but would an oe crank take that extra torque without throwing a rod?
im very dubious about it being man enough for the job!

 

[ashills]

the oe crank will take all you could throw at it

thats a good idea bob thats what i was gonna do with a spare engine as it will rev very well and have the extra torque