High torque is high cylinder pressure at low rpm it can be death on bearings. It is a SBC not a Powerstroke ok... If you want to beat bearings up and rattle pistons to death do what you are recommending. I will grant you Callaway did on a C4 very successfully as I managed the rebuilding of the approximately 435 engines done for the B2K but had big buck bearings Cosworth forged pistons Callies forged steel crank good valves and springs cloyes double roller timing chain and a host of other things done. Everything got magnafluxed or zygloed as needed block stress plate honed to 4.005 bore mains line honed rods big end honed to proper sizes engine got balanced and Mellings hig volume oil pump used. It is something that can be done but not with a pick apart junkyard stock engine LS or not makes zero difference. Just having NA ring end gaps can easily fail a turbo engine. After 40 years of building and tuning engines this is not my first rodeo and have a real good clue what has to happen. After you do design work for people like GM or oversee something for Avco=Lycoming built things for Exxon Mobil R&D have 2 patents or crew chiefed 13 records at Bonneville in bikes and cars then call me.

A good turbo system would give the guy what he wants but it is the big dollar way to go. Even on the cheap just add up turbo exhaust intercooler and turbo pump to pull oil out of the turbo unless willing to put it real high up you have still broke the bank. Especially if someone needs to be paid for all the fab work.

 

I ordered a Lingenfelter 211/219 cam. That’s what I decided on. And I’m going 1.6 rockers all around. Yeah I agree this thread really went off.

 

Oh I agree completely,

But it's still a pick your poison situation. It's either do this: Or find a way to work with the stock stuff that doesn't require all of the equipment the above requires. We can't afford machine shops and so forth, hundreds of engines to test etc... its not going to happen for most of us.

Turbo fab work can be done with a $250 harbor freight gas shielded mig welder with good results (good enough for more power than you are allowed to have with a stock engine) using junkyard stainless tubes from various vehicles. It is possible with some help from online tutorials which exist for this exact reason for more than ten years, its so old that it has been forgotten about already.

Finally just because we run a turbocharger doesn't mean the engine needs to make lots of low end torque. In fact it should mean the opposite- we have complete control over the turbine and gate, and I have even seem some people use CO2 to blow the gate open for low-speed traction/ no boost.

 

It might look disconnected but that is only because you fail to see the connection yet.

Engine volumetric efficiency is at the whim of the environment and affected by engine internal conditions and parts. That is only true for engines without "atmospheric dials". Imagine you have a dial on the console which can dial you up or down a mountain's worth of air density. It is the ultimate "camshaft", the best "heads", better than the most expensive "intake" (not exactly but...). This is the connection: cam/head/intake VE improvements compared to air density improvements, and/or both. It doesn't mean that we need to abuse the dial or the valvetrain with difficult parts; Indeed you should think of it as being set to about 1psi on the dial, or using the weakest valve spring to get the job done. Just 1psi or so of boost pressure and the whole system functions optimally despite having ugly tight truck manifolds and stainless pipes meandering the engine bay. You basically "get back what you had before", and an active, properly sized turbine will also give back economy.

In other words, every engine should be turbo, to give us the control over the atmosphere. It just remains our responsibility to use the dial properly, where applicable. Turbo will negate the need for parts swapping when the output possible without swapping those parts is exceeded through density improvements. If for example we couldn't get the power we needed without swapping them, then that would be another story if the engine in question could handle that power. This is why the stock engine theory stands: there is no reason to abuse the dial and make too much power. Even just a couple psi is going to help in many ways that makes the turbo application desirable. Manufacturers such as Procharger and Vortech market the majority of their ads to this end, "just 7psi for 40% more power for any stock engine in the world- its super reliable guise! " they just don't mention that turbos do it better.

 

You don't get GM to put a 5 year 50k mile factory warrantee by doing a back yard job as you suggest and meet smog to make the feds happy.. What exactly have you ever turbo charged and with what parts and how long has it lasted? Pictures help a lot and some way to know it is not some car off the net as to be candid you do not strike me as having a clue beyond what you read somewhere.

 

I would agree that intakes and headers are a better starting point before going anywhere else. After which, port the heads and do a cam. Problem is who will dyno tune it after that?

 

I guess my question is where do we draw the line as to what is "too much" and why? You want to pick 100 and you can drive it without too much issue. So anything above that is pretty much unnecessary. Certainly 400 is definitely excessive.

OMG!! That is an option? I didn't know that.

 

Why that over a 74219 cam? Just curious.

 

The warranty is a gamble. I don't count on it to indicate much. It isn't an unlimited warranty. LPE gives me a 3 yr 36K warranty. They know you are going to beat it. GM warranty is based off on most won't beat it and the few that do, well, it's par for the course and already factored in.

 

Even if I had purposefully built five or ten, or 15 cars all with identical engines/turbo/transmissions, it still would not be extremely useful for statistical analysis. Instead, let us look at the thousands of people using myriad of combinations to display power such as the recent 184mph from a large limited quantity of dwindling availability Aluminum 5.3L engines produced between specific years. Newer stuff is all DI and these flex fuel engines will be gone, get em while they are hot.

 

I believe the 2017 ZO6 is already 760hp. But that's not every 2017 corvette. Most are 460hp. The only 2 ZO6 corvettes I know personally are raced. Maybe only a few times a year but I know one has already raced the Silver State Challenge. The owner loves it as the car controls everything from suspension to traction. And the owner is retired.

Though I'm sure some owners will never race their high HP cars there is little use for 600hp in a 3500lb car. Do you need 600hp to change lanes? Pass on 2 lane roads? Accelerate on the freeway entrance ramp???. I expect 400hp will do that well enough.

Good night.

 

I don’t really seeing myself getting the super ram plenum anytime soon. And I read the 211 works better with the long tube runners. Believe me I was going back and forth between the 2 before I decided.

 

My wife drives a W220 with 300 hp that does it more than adequate. So is that the benchmark? What about her W140 that she used to drive at 140 and it does the same. Can you explain why 400 is fine when you can work with 217 does work for what you described too? Can you shed how you derived 400?

 

Oh I agree, 400 is also a great number. Even with 280rwhp my car went 11's @ 2800lbs. That is the beauty of the dial on the console; I drive around at 350~ but I can turn it up all the way to 600 if I want. It's wired into the computer to pull timing (torque) when the rear tires start to spin faster the fronts; this way I never have "too much". There are all kinds of tricks I know to keep a car going straight... and fast...

 

Sorry for the slow reply. I use 400hp as that level is in reach of a second Gen LT1 with only a big cam and head swap or even ported stock LT1 heads. That would apply to a ZZ3, ZZ4 short block also - relating to what the OP is working with. Keeping it simple.

 

You can let a cam question degenerate down to how much power is enough. My theory is you have enough power when it is a bit scary to use all of it for someone other than Wyle Coyoty or Tim Allen on 'Tool Time'. That is a different number for each person and road.

 

Point of my question is this. Isn't that line rather arbitrary? If I used the 2019 Corvette, the number should be 755. If you used a Fiat with a 1.4L engine, it could be 101. Using your example, I could also consider a stroker and make an easy 500. I guess what does 400 have to do with need? Or even 300 or 200 if all you consider is LEGAL lane change, acceleration (eventually to speed limit) on a highway or lane change. I mean, for all you ask, 100 will do the job adequately.

Ask yourself honestly. If your car were available in a 100 HP version or the 200+ HP version, would you buy it? I know I wouldn't unless it is just for the frame. If not, you really have no business drawing a line at 400.

 

That's way to complicated! Gives me a headache. I don't draw lines for calories or horsepower. If I want a chocolate muffin I'll have a chocolate muffin for breakfast or after supper. Still tastes great. Buy mine at Sam's club BTW.
If I want to build a 350 I build a 350 with parts that compliment the engine as a whole and the car it goes in. If I build a 400 sbc I build a 409 or a 420 but not a 427. I won't build a 427 sbc because most end up a 426 or 428 but it's too difficult and complicated to build a for real 427 c.i. sbc. Not a line but too complicated.

So why would I build a 100hp Fiat? Or a 200hp Fiat?? Just to complicated selecting all those Italian parts in meteric sizes. W220 parts for German made horsepower? I don't see a line between a W220 and a W140 but if you want to make one that's fine with me.

Hey, try a chocolate muffin instead of a line. It works for me but I am overweight.

 

That is why I was saying that 400 is enough for some, too much for some and too little for others. Hard to say what is enough.

 

I don't know why you think its strange to have a dial that dials up or down the pressure, when the "gas pedal" throttle valve does the same thing, except it has a hard cap on atmospheric maximum pressure where the dial is limited by the compressor instead.

It's like you are saying no thanks to one pressure regulator, but perfectly fine with the lesser variety because it is more familiar. Comfortable with your bills, I see.