Chris' 200 20v Sedan - The Revver

[loxxrider]

All the better to suck small children in with!

[dana]

All the better to suck small children in with!

i would advise against sucking children of any general size.

[loxxrider]

Dammit, I knew that was coming hahaha

[dana]

hah, sorry, obviously i have zero self control.

[Hank]

Still not available quite yet, but I have dibs on one of the first out of hte factory Chris.

[loxxrider]

Thanks Hank. You want to try one out too? I'm not in a real hurry because the engine is far from complete, and I think it should still be the last thing to be purchased, but I'm excited to have this option.

On a different topic, I'm still scared about running a fluidampr. I've been told it'll be fine, but I've also been told I'd be an idiot to run one by others, even with a nice crank. Those vibrations have to go somewhere and instead of them being absorbed by movement of the crank and in fact, sort of damped in this way, now other components will see these stresses.

[PRY4SNO]

Jeff did fine revving high with an ATI... a properly built Fluidampr should be fine. No?

[themagellan]

It looks amazing I hope you build this soon!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[loxxrider]

Yes because an ATI damper is a proper solution to the problem. Fluidamprs are not tuned to a specific frequency and thus are not as effective at damping vibrations where they are at their worst. It's like having a mill/lathe combo. The mill portion will never be as good as a dedicated mill.

Fluidampr has requested more information to determine if the damper will be of use or not so even they are not confident in a more universal solution (fluidampr) working for an extreme application like this.

[PRY4SNO]

Yes because an ATI damper is a proper solution to the problem. Fluidamprs are not tuned to a specific frequency and thus are not as effective at damping vibrations where they are at their worst. It's like having a mill/lathe combo. The mill portion will never be as good as a dedicated mill.

Fluidampr has requested more information to determine if the damper will be of use or not so even they are not confident in a more universal solution (fluidampr) working for an extreme application like this.

Solid info, thanks!

[mushasho]

Awesome that they answered your wishes Chris...

I just hate their sometimes confusing/vague naming at times on the none EFR stuff... Here they seem to have a readily available AirWerks S400SX-E 72mm , but clearly the picture of the one you posted is different... guess we'll have to see how they label that one.

[loxxrider]

That picture I showed might be of the 88mm, but the one on the jegs site is probably of the old 72. The new one is supposed to have a 10 full blade compressor wheel.

[loxxrider]

The block has shipped! Thanks Hank.

Apparently this thing weighs 50lbs more than an 07k. Ouch! Hopefully that means its stronger

[chaloux]

[85oceanic]

Man that's a monster turbo.

[PRY4SNO]

What kind of block was it again? AEL or AAT maybe?

[loxxrider]

I honestly don't know what the code is.

But here are some pictures finally.

Here's the block just after arriving at Jeff's

revver block at jeffs.jpg (65.47 KiB) Viewed 59733 times

Before clean-up

revver block clean up.jpg (86.01 KiB) Viewed 59733 times

Disassembly

revver disassembly.jpg (187.3 KiB) Viewed 59733 times

[loxxrider]

Something bad happened to that piston lol ^^^^


I've been talking to someone about making custom main caps for me which don't require line boring, only line honing. The reason is because the cost for line boring is significant. Having caps made with reference to the stock caps and measurements from the block they go in may offset that cost. The other option is to treat the stock caps, but I'm not very keen on that idea compared to a beefier cap made from a high performance alloy.

revver main cap design.jpg (12.15 KiB) Viewed 59731 times

revver main caps 2.jpg (20.4 KiB) Viewed 59731 times

revver main caps.jpg (27.73 KiB) Viewed 59731 times

[Mcstiff]

[Juizer]

I've been thinking of those billet main caps as well lately, but are they any good if one tends to stay under 8000rpm?

[loxxrider]

Oh wow! That's crazy, I had no idea.

Juizer, it's not worth it at all for less than 1000hp. Even then, it's debatable. I just like to overbuild in this situation.

[loxxrider]

Also, I just realized I never posted the full flow data for this head. From Jeff:




"Valve opening……Stock/Revver Intake……Stock/Revver Exhaust

.050……………………………16/48…………………………13/41

.100……………………………49/89…………………………41/86

.150……………………………85/128………………………66/113

.200……………………………115/166……………………96/134

.250……………………………149/196……………………118/155

.300……………………………171/223……………………128/165

.350……………………………186/244……………………134/184

.400……………………………192/259……………………136/197

.450……………………………198/268……………………137/203

.500……………………………???/274………………………138/203

As you can see the exhaust is mostly done at .400, this is normal.

The really great thing on this head is that it has zero exhaust port turbulence between 250 and 350 lift . Most of these will have turbulence that bounces the manometer so much you cant take an accurate reading at .300.

I even cranked the bench up to 42 inches (from the standard 28) and still no break up of flow within the port! This really important because its right in the middle of valve travel and a point that get passed going both directions.

If you port these exhausts with the 29.5mm valve for the biggest number at full lift they will always have mid lift turbulence.

It will be a great head for supporting flow at hi boost / hi rpm and should hit the turbo a lot harder as well."

[loxxrider]

And because I'm a nerd, here are plots of my head vs stock vs another member here FRCFD5.

Intake Head Flow.JPG (45 KiB) Viewed 59626 times

Exhaust Head Flow.JPG (44.93 KiB) Viewed 59626 times

Some interesting numbers related to this. Total flow under the curve (not in CFM... I still have to wrap my brain around this lol)


RevverIntakeIntegral = 88.0807


FRCFD5IntakeIntegral = 87.5234


StockIntakeIntegral = 63.1604


RevverExhaustIntegral = 69.1274


FRCFD5ExhaustIntegral = 67.4617


StockExhaustIntegral = 46.8809

[loxxrider]

After thinking about it for bit, I see that the unit for these numbers is [in*ft^3/min] which is rather meaningless, especially when taken out of context. It is best to just use it as an arbitrary number to compare with. The best way to do that would be to compare to stock as a percentage. As a total over the valve lift profile, the revver has an improvement of 140% on the intake side and 148% on the exhaust side.

[Wheeljack]

Very nice...some good info there...

As far as the area under the curve, if you have the cam profiles between stock and whatever you're running, plotting the flow versus an engine cycle would tell a much more meaningful story. Increased lift and duration will only add to the improvement shown from the valve lift data and be a little more indicative of actual engine flow.