How hard and expensive would it be to make a naturally aspirated engine make as much power as though it was given...

Can I make a miata engine(normally 95whp) n/a make 170whp?

That's an easy goal for a turbo miata.

Can I o so by allowing it to rev higher, itbs, increasing compression? What?

If you have to ask you most likely don't have the skills or cash to build your own engine. There's a reason most people go the F/I route.

and i'm asking for that reason, as in what aspects cost the most. is it the flow tests? is it the balancing of the rods and shafts? i want to know the nitty gritty aspects of how to gain power from natural aspiration and how to do it as efficiently as possible.

not him btw but you're asking really nonsensical questions user

how is it nonsensical? what's nonsensical about a flow test or balancing? are you fucking kidding me? i'm asking how hard this is and your only response is this? you're slipping harder than your miata in the corners.

>changing the displacement
You're a fucking idiot
First of all that's unfair
Second of all you are a child.

>hurr muh v8 will beat your turbo four cylinder
in an argument that is turbo vs na that point is moot, I bring a turbo v8 now. Fucking retarded asshole

how hard would it be to make a jaguar,bmw, or mercedes v12 have f1 specs in terms of power output? would you have to replace all the internals with titanium and harness the inner nazi?

from a stand still with no advanced notice an equivalent V8 will be quicker off the line than a 4 banger producing the same amount of horsepower and torque because the v8 only has to spin up to about 2,500 before it starts making power.
CHECK MATE.

except all that wheelspin will lead to lost energy because it won't retain traction to the ground. kekm8

how much is f1 spec?

in a race theres not a lot of stop and go, in the real world there is and low end torque is more important

thats bullshit, the Turbo engine will also have more Torque which negates the benefits of powerband and throttle response.

Key example Boostang vs v6stang. ecoboost has only 10 more hp but the ecoboost will out run it in every gear even from a dig.

can't i save money by not having to make my own designs and just copy another engine? then it's materials and fabrication.

it would be easier (and probably cheaper) just to buy an old f1 engine

>Big thing about going N/A is you can jack up the compression.

meaning you would need to get new heads and rods to raise compression on the n/a

Well on a Turbo car you go with a screw driver, turn a screw. And low and behold, more Compression (boost)

Also Turbo cars put out more torque then N/A

Not if you use tires worth anything

CHECK MATE.

why compare a v8 to a turbo4. Why not v8 to Turbo6

V8 will still be faster.

Do I have to say it?

GTR

On an NA build you will need intake, headers, exhaust, injectors, manifolds, cams, cam gears, valves, springs, retainers, piston heads, rods, fuel rail, fuel pump, some sort of cooling upgrade, a tune, and finally money left over for whatever breaks or goes wrong.
All of this and maybe MAYBE if you're lucky you might be making 100hp more than stock.

...

This is the perfect example of my last post.
He poured probably around 8gs into that setup to make 185whp....
If this is your hobby, like you really enjoy building NA engines, then awesome more power to you. However, for someone who is simple trying to build a cool car and extract as much power as possible going NA route is simply retarded.

They have insanely low tolerance for the size of the piston and engine block
Because the better sealed your compression chamber is the better power you're gonna have
F1 engine can't start when cold they're seized until they heat up because of that
A regular engine loose power because of that

Even then the turbo equivalent will have a much broader powerband than the equivalently powered atmo variant.

It sounds like OP's funds would be better put towards a well matched turbo or supercharger.

I was also under the impression a lot of F1 motors over the years had the cylinder head and block as one piece, a a gasket of any material would struggle to stay intact over race distance with those sorts of cylinder pressures.

>meaning you would need to get new heads and rods to raise compression on the n/a
u wot? that's not how engines work

>Well on a Turbo car you go with a screw driver, turn a screw. And low and behold, more Compression (boost)
and that doesn't apply on 99% of turbocharged cars

>Also Turbo cars put out more torque then N/A
good work sherlock

umm, except 6 liter v8's make 400+hp. they did before emissions and they do now. they only sucked from like 1974-90

he fell right into that

>He poured probably around 8gs into that setup to make 185whp
this is the problem with retarded kids who think they want to play at being a "tuner" or whatever the fuck else.
no ingenuity, just throw money at it.

makes no sense to build n/a all motor unless you're working with over 4 liters

>that actually is how engines work

>it does though

>you're a fuckin idiot

cylinder pressures aren't an issue on f1 cars.
top fuellers sure. hell a wrc car will run way more cylinder pressure than an f1 car and it will use an mls head gasket which plenty of road cars run these days.

nah it's pretty good fun to do as a hobby, doing your own machining etc. actually really satisfying. provided you like that sort of thing.

I sort of agree with you, but at the same time I can see the appeal in it.
If you have the money and tuning is something that really makes you happy then I say go for it.

son i've been working on cars since you're in diapers don't try and school me, you'll fail.

Why, yes that is how engines work. You have to decrease the space inside the piston to increase Compression. This is done with new pistons and heads.

>Doesn't apply to 99% of cars
Except it does, Its literally just turning the Wastegates actuator

>doesn't think swapping piston heads and rods changes compression
>don't try to school me diapers
Lol okay faggot.

no one changes rods to increase compression. pistons sure.

the compression from a turbo and the compression from a piston are two different things that have bugger all to do with each other.
read a fucking book or something.

>backpedaling like a bitchboy
>implying a longer rod wouldn't increase pressure
>implying people building NA engines only buy heads without rods
Just stop.

a longer rod would put your piston through your head you daft cunt

how hard would it be to 3D print cast molds for f1 engines?

četniče oš kurca?

HAHAHAHA kid you're embarrassing yourself. Longer rods are a common purchase when tuning NA.

Very difficult and extremely pointless

why would having a powerful engine be pointless?

Not if it's just slightly longer. If it's just a little longer, it will reach farther and give more compression.

Also I guess you don't know that every turbo car has a waste gate and most times a boost controller

most cars are built to a tolerance where longer rods could only ever be slightly longer and get you such a small bump in compression it's not worth it for the cost.
really it's a stupid thing to do when aftermarket pistons exist.

most cars have electronically managed boost that you can't fuck with with a screwdriver without the ecu getting all pissy.
and you wouldn't use a screwdriver anyway, a wrench sure.
but you've never worked on a car so i'll forgive you.

>You have to decrease the space inside the piston to increase Compression
this also makes no sense. what "space inside the piston" are you referring to?

Do you realize why aftermarket pistons can raise compression.. BECAUSE THEY'RE SLIGHTLY BIGGER. Just like slightly longer rods.
God I swear this whole board is retarded.

no one builds engines with the piston halfway down the bore at tdc since about 1950.
i seriously doubt you've worked on a car with this shit you're posting

What part of slightly bigger do you not understand..

what part of tolerances don't you understand
you don't just chuck in longer rods because you want more compression unless you're an idiot who likes wasting money
it's the most inefficient way to get what can only ever be a tiny bump in compression.

pro stock engines make fucktons of power and they're naturally aspirated

but that doesn't answer your question OP because pro stock cars are both hard to build and expensive to race

You're wrong, not that other guy, but increasing stroke increases dynamic compression. Stroker kits involve changing rods & crank.

Compression is the pressure inside the engine.

FI cars use low compression engines because Turbos create..... PRESSURE.

Pressure and compression are the same, one comes from an external, one is created by the space inside the engine.

it'd be better for everyone if you read a book about engines or something

stroker kits are another story, and if you're keeping your original pistons and fitting a longer stroke crank and changing your rods you'd generally want shorter so i can't really see what relevance that has here.

So what after market company makes rods for any popular tuning engine that's .001 longer than stock rods to increase compression? Fucking retard you'd be better off spending a fraction of the price for shallower head gaskets. Shut the fuck up you have never actually worked on a car and are a internet bench racer going off """theory"""

To make more power, you need to increase airflow. All forced induction is is a different way to increase airflow. By compressing incoming air, you increase density, therefore increasing volume, therefore increasing flow. On an NA engine, you can increase airflow with better intakes, exhausts, and carbs or injectors. You can do the same with forced induction, but you also have the option of improving somehow the compressor.

Some engines are cheaper to build NA, simply due to parts support and common mechanical knowledge. Other engines are already designed or engineered for forced induction, and respond better with modifications to the compressor.

Making power through NA is not a lost cause. Everyone just follows the loudest voice, and right now, that voice wants forced induction.

>but increasing stroke increases dynamic compression.
Only if you've made an incredibly ill informed choice if rods and pistons, or you were aiming to increase compression.
A "stroker" does not have to maintain the same TDC chamber volume as a shorter stroke counterpart.
A "stroker" does not raise compression in itself.

Very hard and very expensive. Big NA power is and always will be extremely expensive. Extensive time and labor must be put into making the cylinder head flow as well as possible and all parts of the intake and exhaust must be painstakingly tuned for maximum efficiency. High revs are necessary and with them comes the necessity for a lightweight and very strong bottom end and a radical camshaft. Contrary to what some tell you, NA is NEVER the cheaper or easier route to big power. Take for example the ease with which someone can make 300hp with an ancient Volvo Redblock, you see these turbobrick guys slapping junkyard holsets on 100,000mi+ engines and making 300whp, all that's required is a decent tune and a durable bottom end. Try to make that with the same engine naturally aspirated, you'll spend several thousand on the head, several more on the lightweight forged and balanced bottom end, and several more on the ITBs and custom tuned header. Turbo power is the easy way and the cost effective way, that's why you rarely see NA builds that make the kind of specific output turbo builds make. If you're just after power, don't bother with NA unless you have an enormous budget. NA is for applications which require extreme responsiveness, not big numbers.

A lot of V8s like F bodies and modern mustangs benefit form longer rods..

so basically i should just go for a ls1 twin turbo in a nissan silvia?

>Real world works on torque, benches work on horsepower
Fuck off dieselcuck.

Because F1 engines aren't cast into one piece they're machined which gives it the properties of that variant of metal
Cast iron is heavy and shitty compared to the space magic metal F1 uses

Toda race cams can be had for a paltry $10000, that is unless you're a poorfag of course

>tarbos put out more torques than N/A's

Like, on Jupiter?
Because that's not how it works on earth....

Mmm, this is yummy.
Nice build.
Want to race for pink slips?

Ignore the filename, on tablet it was easier to save. I already time-stamped once before.

what heads do you have on that thing?

Bait thread?

Bait thread.

That's how it works everywhere. Take your 454 CID veeyate and strap a pair of turbos to it. Have fun doing burnouts every time you so much as look at the gas pedal.

Afr 185's with 52 cc chambers, no air injection, "strip" port (AFR has 3 levels of porting jobs, this is the middle one). Other chamber option is 76cc iirc
I'm pulling 11.2:1 with 7 pounds of boost.

AFRs worth the money?

I actually rarely drive it now.
Sketchy as fuck.
Fun as hell when I'm in the mood though.
Melt the tires in first, still get sideways grabbing third.
Torques are cool.

afr or compression? still those are fucking decent heads. wish I had the cash. I am currently trying to spec out a budget build and I want to do a 351w, but it seems like a lot of work. I will probably be looking for a 97 explorer to rip the heads off of, but I don't know if I should just take the stock 5.0, put on a dizzy and a edelbrock RPM performer intake and a 750 cfm carb and some upgraded valvetrain and a cam and call it

I just don't know what I want to do.

>NA is NEVER the cheaper or easier route to big power
Unless it involves a tube of JB-Weld and a 2" holesaw.

Well then you need as much air without obstruction, and as much fuel you can get. Probably increasing the displacement wouldn't be a bad idea either.

Twisted wedge are slightly cheaper and great performance.
I hit 592 on the dyno on a tune I did myself (twEECer rt piggyback ecu after a friggin year learning ford ECU's).
Honestly, the only thing better "maybe" is dart or that other company I can't think of because I'm at the bottom of my 12 pack.

Easy, if you don't consider nitrous oxide cheating. Next to impossible if you do, an engine is just an air pump and to make more power you need to get more air in and out. With very good head and manifold design you can get a VE of a little over 100% in an NA engine over a few hundred RPM with a turbo or supercharger you can get 200% over most of the rev range and a lot more than that over a very limited range if you want a dyno queen.

11.2:1 compression
My AFR is a fat 14 on throttle. Leans out to 20+ downhill coasting. Can be in the 12's at times.
Still working on my ecu map.
Having a wideband gauge in-car is very different. I'd love to see one in a "stock" car and watch it bounce around.
Those gt40 heads are more than respectable.
Performer is the standard.
750 is too much though. A 350ci engine @5,000 rpms only pulls something like 400cfm (can't remember actual number, but its 400 something).
You'll lose torque and responsiveness.
Biggest I'd go is 600.
Vacuum secondary if automatic, double squirter if manual.
You'll actually see better day-to-day power and drivability and fuel economy with a 450 cfm vac secondary carb 4 bbl.

*my air fuel ratio is a fat 40 on throttle
*edelbrock performer manifold is the standard

Too many similar terms for any lurkers trying to follow.

Not to mention using "gt40" nomenclature on a pair of heads for the 5.0 used in a damn explorer...

interesting. what kind of bumpstick should I get for a daily driver cam that I occasionally take to the track? I liked the look of the lunati voodoo, and they are only like 130, but I don't know the difference of drivability of a roller vs a flat tappet. I know I will go hydraulic though, but what is better suited to babbies first engine build on a budget?

Ehh screw it, not fixing my post

I know they don't flow as well but it seems like GT40s are a lot less of a PITA than the Ps are when doing headers and machining and everything for not much of a hp penalty

I get paid a lot of money to tell people what kind of bumpstick to use.

Always go roller if you can.
Free 15+ pony's and a lot less wear.
I've seen a fair amount of broken ears on roller lifters though, so don't cheap out.
Fuck ford crap for that.
If you're using an older block, you'll have to use married lifers, and they can be loud.
Newer roller blocks have boss' in the lifter valley to bolt down the spider for lifter alignment so you don't have to run link-bar lifters.

tq vs hp is my fav meemay

HP=TQ(RPM)/5252

Want to make power n/a? Make more RPM and let it breathe

Put the turbo on the bottom and pretend it isn't there

thanks man. you think the voodoo would be a good cam? also looking to go for 9.5:1 compression so I could run pump gas. going to be a vacuum-advance mechanical dizzy, not sure on the rocker ratio yet. don't know if I want flat top pistons or what ever.

Any build you should do a match job on.
Literally nothing lines up with factory castings.

Also, spend the extra $140 and buy a set of cometic mls (multi layer steel) head gaskets.
You'll have to do some research on how to prep the head/block, and you better be sure you're ready when you do the install because there no going back... But you'll never blow a head gasket.

>Real world works on torque, benches work on horsepower.

you're retarded, you know that?

the only reason torque is good is because the engine spins, i.e. it makes horsepower.

horsepower is directly related to the amount of energy the engine can put into the wheels.

Gimme lift and duration on the voodoo.
Automatic or manual.
I already know its in a '65 F100 long bed, so thats like 4,100-ish pounds.

You have to decide heads before pistons.
Some will requires reliefs.
Flat tops with the gt40's on a 351 9.2 deck will be around 9+ iirc