Starion + hks 2835r

4g6beat · Post by **4g6beat** » Tue Feb 03, 2004 11:21 pm

Hi guys,
I've been reading the last few topics about vr4 conversions and realise the hastle involved in it vs performance potential.

I recently finished of a vr4 (my brothers) with a hks 2835r conversion intercooler, haltech, custom mainfold, rx7 injectors, walboro pump, malpassi reg, oil cooler, 4 bolt evo driveline, twin plate cllutch etc.

I must say for street performance there is no turbocharger 4g6 combo that comes close to this from power and response (pardon the pun) point of view, this setup was good enough for 11.7 and has wiped the smile off the face of many big dollar 200sxs, gtrs, and of course wrexes.

The question i ask is if i were to do a similar conversion to a single cam 4g63 what would i expect? i know the twin cam has more potential but i am debating whether the twin cam is worth the trouble if instead i can throw stronger internals in the engine, also could the driveline handle such a turbocharger enginge combo with an upgraded clutch?.

NXTIME · Post by **NXTIME** » Wed Feb 04, 2004 12:41 am

The driveline may be able to handle it depending upon your driving style.

Abalistic · Post by **Abalistic** » Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:51 pm

I think if you built up a stronger single cam 4G63 and up the boost and fuel + intercooler or water/meth injection. You will have somthing that will go quite hard. As long as you take out the mass air flow sensor, it's a big bottle neck in performance.
I have converted over to a 4G63 Dash 12valve ( which is a single cam ),
and the power increase is fantastic.

tmz_99 · Post by **tmz_99** » Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:59 pm

if u were to decide to keep the single cam motor/head combo, then yeah, you could get a lot of pwoer out of it, buty basically you would be following the same route that many onthers have already trodden. ie: intercooler, stengthened internals, MPI (which would require aftermarket management) and then bolt on the turbo of choice. Somehow I don't think it'd run 11s, but then again i might be proven wrong :D

NXTIME · Post by **NXTIME** » Wed Feb 04, 2004 7:14 pm

My opinion is that the twin cam is worth the trouble and cost when compared to the amount of money it will cost to get equivalent performance from the SOHC. If I had to do things all over again, I would rebuild the engien the same way I did but with a twin cam head. However, I started on the single cam path years ago and will continue to stick with it as I could not go to a twin cam head without starting from scratch.

decoy · Post by **decoy** » Thu Feb 05, 2004 12:23 am

great replies in here!

dohc be the way to go from the start as it ultimately has the advantage of the sohc with less valves. its just the initial setup that deterrs people even tho they may end up spending that much in the end anyway. You could get a big 5grand bang for ya buck on the sohc or spend it setting up the vr4 which will have more potential in the long run.

4g6beat · Post by **4g6beat** » Thu Feb 05, 2004 12:59 pm

Thanks for your opinions guys,
I'm starting to think twin cam is the way to go even though there are issues with it (ie: more upfront expense) but i think it's it worth it especially since i've seen how much torque and power these engines can handle (25 psi on standard internals eeeeeek!!)thats not to say the single cam engine can't do it aswell.

I was enetertaining the idea of seeing what the diffrerence is bettween the non turbo head and turbo head on 4g63b, if it's just a matter of different cams etc from the turbo version i think it wouldn't be a bad idea buying this instaed since then you could purchase the strengthened internals new valvesprings cams etc with the money you save on not buying a half cut.

Assuming you go straight for an aftermarket management and your planning to use a different turbo, you could save yourself some wasted time and cash.

I underatnd that if all you wanted was to run the standard vr4 engine,turbo,management with light mods this would not be a great idea.
(if you only wanted to do that you probably would be better off sticking with sohc i think :) )

toysrus · Post by **toysrus** » Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:29 pm

NXTIME wrote:My opinion is that the twin cam is worth the trouble and cost when compared to the amount of money it will cost to get equivalent performance from the SOHC. If I had to do things all over again, I would rebuild the engien the same way I did but with a twin cam head. However, I started on the single cam path years ago and will continue to stick with it as I could not go to a twin cam head without starting from scratch.

:x

U gotta be kiddin... I got a Sohc cyclone dash in my cordz and my friend has a twin cam cyclone dash, both wif same turbos (tdo5h) and same boost.

In a drag the twin gets killed...

SOHC = MORE TORQUE
DOHC = MORE POWER (KW)

Torque is how fast your car accelerates....

ProZac · Post by **ProZac** » Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:50 pm

There are to many other factors involved to make such a clear cut comparison like that. The DOHC definatly has more potential, but the upfront expense is no small fry.

JB Starion is rated as: 245Nm @ 3500 rpm, where as an 89 Galant VR4 is rated as: 275Nm @ 3000 rpm, more torque, more accessable.

Then again, i dont believe anything i read on the net :P.

NXTIME · Post by **NXTIME** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 12:18 am

toysrus wrote:
NXTIME wrote:My opinion is that the twin cam is worth the trouble and cost when compared to the amount of money it will cost to get equivalent performance from the SOHC. If I had to do things all over again, I would rebuild the engien the same way I did but with a twin cam head. However, I started on the single cam path years ago and will continue to stick with it as I could not go to a twin cam head without starting from scratch.
:x

U gotta be kiddin... I got a Sohc cyclone dash in my cordz and my friend has a twin cam cyclone dash, both wif same turbos (tdo5h) and same boost.

In a drag the twin gets killed...

SOHC = MORE TORQUE
DOHC = MORE POWER (KW)

Torque is how fast your car accelerates....

Actually, I think you've got your wires crossed...you're the one kidding.

Torque is a function of power. Can you tell me the fastest SOHC cordia time down the 1/4? What about the fastest DOHC Cordia time down the 1/4? Comparing two engines in Cordias from the hundreds of others around means nothing. If you think that a single cam engine will produce more power and torque than a twin cam engine of the same capacity then you better take your head out from the sand.

RiceThief · Post by **RiceThief** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 1:31 am

Nxtime, I thought power was a function of torque and revs, so toysrus with your assumption DOHC = more power, it would need to either rev more or has more torque, so nxtime is right the dohc will make more power and torque than the SOHC.

toysrus · Post by **toysrus** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 8:15 am

........

I'm currently build my sohc and when its finished i'll dyno it, and if i can get my hands on some nice slicks then i'll drag it!

As for codias on the drag stip, i spoke with tony rigoli as he has the fastest twin cam drag cordia in australia. At the current moment his twin cam has pulled a best time of 12 flat!. And he told me that he had a sohc before his put the dohc engine in!! And after installing the dohc he realised that it was pointless as he spent twice the amount of money to get it to the same amount of power. Dont take my word thou..... Call him up yourself!

As for the fastest sohc a mate of mine with a lime green cordia with the same engine as mine (Cyclone Dash 12v SOHC) has pulled a best time of 11.7 on a G-tech as he was doing the full mile run and blew his gearbox.

All the mods he done were basic....

Cyclone Dash 12valve 2.0L SOHC
Microtech
Decent size bar and plate intercooler
Slightly larger turbo (think it was a td05h 20g
external wastgate
Forgies
and bored out to 2.4L

and he blew 2 gearboxes......

"Twin cams da shit man!!!!!!" :x :x :x

toysrus · Post by **toysrus** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 8:22 am

Oh yer!

why doesnt anyone do a twin cam 4g63 conversion on starions???

Cause it a bloody stupid idea!!!!!

Then amount of money u waste you could have bored out the pistons, picked up stonger cams, have a fat multipoint setup, and some rx7 injectors. plus a decent fuel pump put in. Maybe even a water injection setup.....

By the way NXTIME, it's a well know fact that in the first 3 gears below 5000rpm soch have more torque than doch, Dohc have more power = kw's.

I'll try find a dyno who can print out a torque run wif my sohc and my friends dohc.....

Cookiemonster · Post by **Cookiemonster** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:10 am

A debate is healthy.. just keep it friendly....

Barney · Post by **Barney** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 1:20 pm

I think it comes down to finances.

there are many differences in the engines as we know, but as technology impoves power and torque, the main empasis would be on improved emissions and fuel economy. this is not only be achieved by so called bolt on items, but also with the design of the Heads, pistons , cam profiles and timing etc.

in the early days the technology would have been more directed towards power improvement. this is why the SOHC 4G63 goes very well when modern technology is bolted on, such as MPI they really come alive.

Just a thought, I may be talking crap.

ASHLY

Austarion

Starion + hks 2835r

Starion + hks 2835r

Stronger 4G63

..

Who is online