Welcome to www.JeepStrokers.com!!
Not yet a registered user? You are required to Register before you can post within this topic.

Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Performance mods and Advanced Stroker discussion.
duck454ss
Learning to use the board
Learning to use the board
Posts: 38
Joined: November 25th, 2010, 8:43 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 2005
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: LJ

Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by duck454ss » August 9th, 2015, 6:54 am

i'm in the middle of selling off my truck to down size to a Cherokee. the one i'm looking at needs an engine build and i have a plan. but have a few questions for the guru's out there

Engine outline
4.6L
96 block
Scat crank and Rods
Edelbrock head ported
Pistons to optimize head
9.5-10.2 SCR
Harland Sharp rockers (was considering trying to find 1.7 rockers??????)
Comp 68-231-4 or 68-232-4 cam or 68-235-4 (help)
Turbo
maybe water/meth but rather knock down CR

intended use as a casual off road/expedition vehicle and daily driver. so idle to 5000 rpm. looking to build a capable stroker thats efficient.

here are the issues i'm running into and need help with:

Turbo i've looked at several turbos T3/T04E ,GTX3576R, T3/60-1, T3/61, AGP Delta 52 and they all could work. i'm aiming for 10-12lb boost max but dont want to settle for 5-6.

http://turbocharged.com/catalog/compmaps/fig1.html
http://www.full-race.com/store/turbos/garrett-t-series/
http://www.agpturbo.com/agp-turbos/
https://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobyg ... R&panel1-1

above are sources for the turbos i've been looking at. i'm not afraid to spend money on a turbo but if i can get the job done for less why not? realistically any of these turbos would work. my issue comes in when you start selecting the turbine housing. i've seen people use a .63AR or .83AR housing on 4.0L or 4.2L. last thing i want is a restrictive turbo that isnt doing its job efficiently. an option i was looking at was twin scroll housings. from what i've read they spool faster or more efficiently. if that's an option i can find .75 or 1.0 T3 twin scroll housings. i'm confident 1.0AR is way too big fro my application but think 0.75 might work.

help?

next point is cam selection.

when in a turbo application as long as you have an efficient turbo you shouldnt need extra exhaust duration. pressure on the intake should be close to the pressure on the exhaust side. but given how the head flows do i need that extra duration? if i was going to be normally aspirated i would probably pick comp 68-235-4 for the added duration and lift. i like the bigger lobe separation of the 231 and 232 and they have less overlap than the rest of the options with comparable lift.

whats a good turbo cam? do i need that added duration of the 235? what about 1.7 rockers?

head options.

from what i've read the edelbrock head is a blingy chunk of aluminum that flows comparable to a ported iron head.... what i like is the combustion chamber and would like to see if it will help with my goal for efficiency. i also like that its aluminum and will help me run a higher CR and try avoiding detonation issues (how high of a DCR can i run and still use pump gas?)

head question:
given this will be a turbo build is it worth just porting the head? port the head and bigger valves? or just port the head and only upgrade the exhaust valve to help get the gasses out of there? considering this engine isnt going to be a power monster or a screamer do i need to go with the bigger valves? my understanding is that flow is great but you still need velocity to atomize fuel and get the distribution for an even burn.



so to summarize...

what turbos have people used?
what turbine size are people using?
for a DD turbo stroker what cam have people used?
is porting the head and going with larger valves worth it in my application?
with an aluminum head how high can i go with my DCR on pump gas?

help...

i hope this all makes sense and we get some good information sharing. engine will hopefully get built this winter.
Injection is nice but I'd rather be blown..... 4.6L, Eaton M112, Edelbrock Head, 31cc Dish Pistons, 1.7 Harland Sharp...

jsawduste
Strong Poster
Strong Poster
Posts: 978
Joined: February 28th, 2008, 3:13 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.9
Location: Michigan

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by jsawduste » August 9th, 2015, 1:40 pm

from what i've read the edelbrock head is a blingy chunk of aluminum that flows comparable to a ported iron head

I`d save my money if its flow your looking at. The Edlebrock is a disappointment. A stock factory 7120 out flows it. Look at the posts by Russ Pottenger for more info. Both here and on NAXJA


For your turbo application a case could be made for the LS style fast burn, open chamber but only if you demand it.

duck454ss
Learning to use the board
Learning to use the board
Posts: 38
Joined: November 25th, 2010, 8:43 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 2005
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: LJ

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by duck454ss » August 9th, 2015, 1:54 pm

jsawduste wrote:from what i've read the edelbrock head is a blingy chunk of aluminum that flows comparable to a ported iron head

I`d save my money if its flow your looking at. The Edlebrock is a disappointment. A stock factory 7120 out flows it. Look at the posts by Russ Pottenger for more info. Both here and on NAXJA


For your turbo application a case could be made for the LS style fast burn, open chamber but only if you demand it.
that's my quandry i dont think flow numbers are the end all of what i need. yes i'll be moving more lbs of air but the volume itself will be the same as a mild stroker that would function with a cleaned up iron head. only advantage to porting would be reducing the restriction to flow so the turbo can work efficiently. the advantage i see in the edelbrock head is the heat dissipation and a chance at a more efficient combustion chamber allowing for higher compression.

is it worth it? i dont know... probably not... but that still leaved the question of in this application should i go with larger valves and port the head? port the intake with stock valves, and port the exhaust with larger valves? or just clean the head up and roll with what flow stock valves in an iron head gives me.

am i out to lunch?
Injection is nice but I'd rather be blown..... 4.6L, Eaton M112, Edelbrock Head, 31cc Dish Pistons, 1.7 Harland Sharp...

jeepxj3
Movin on up ^
Movin on up ^
Posts: 372
Joined: December 5th, 2013, 1:55 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 1998
Vehicle Make: jeep
Vehicle Model: xj

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by jeepxj3 » August 9th, 2015, 2:15 pm

I would put the time and effort to a ported big valve head. Worth about 30 HP.
Stock head and valves flow terrible for 4.0L let alone 4.6L, even with FI.

User avatar
SilverXJ
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5793
Joined: February 14th, 2008, 7:14 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 2000
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Radford, Va
Contact:

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by SilverXJ » August 10th, 2015, 4:53 pm

duck454ss wrote: the advantage i see in the edelbrock head is the heat dissipation and a chance at a more efficient combustion chamber allowing for higher compression.
The greater heat dissipation of aluminum is one big advantage I see, especially in your situation.

krom
Where's the "any" key?
Where's the "any" key?
Posts: 20
Joined: January 27th, 2015, 6:00 pm

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by krom » August 10th, 2015, 5:28 pm

Run the edlebrock head, but don't spend the money to port it.

The aluminum, and its ability to dissipate heat will be a huge benefit on your turbo build, as will the superior chambers. If you want a little more power, just turn the boost up (cheaper and easier than porting)

Flow numbers are ok for compairing port work on the same head, but its been proven thousands of times that the head with the high flow bench numbers can make less power than than lower flowing heads, sometimes even less power than unported.

duck454ss
Learning to use the board
Learning to use the board
Posts: 38
Joined: November 25th, 2010, 8:43 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 2005
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: LJ

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by duck454ss » August 10th, 2015, 7:43 pm

krom wrote:Run the edlebrock head, but don't spend the money to port it.

The aluminum, and its ability to dissipate heat will be a huge benefit on your turbo build, as will the superior chambers. If you want a little more power, just turn the boost up (cheaper and easier than porting)

Flow numbers are ok for compairing port work on the same head, but its been proven thousands of times that the head with the high flow bench numbers can make less power than than lower flowing heads, sometimes even less power than unported.

the down side to just turning up the boost is you creating more work to make gains..... in other words your pushing against a restriction (low flow head) thats just going to create heat to get marginal gains... marginal might be a bad choice of words but i rather have a good flowing head and run 8psi rather than have to build 12psi to get the same results out of a shitty flowing head.

its all about breathing easy.... the easier exhaust flows out the head and through a proper sized turbo the easier it is to flow air through the compressor and into the intake. Restrictions create more work and rob power. in my case i want something efficient. i'd gladly spend a little extra cheddar to have 325 hp and get 25mpg out of a stroker. not that thats possible (or my goal) but i do know 20ish MPG is and whatever HP i get will be a considerable gain....

i've looked at Russ's flow results (didnt know they were his till i went back and looked at who posted), and it seems like the big gains on the intake when going big valve are once you have big lift (.5-.65). but the exhaust you get really big results all the way through the lift profile. thats why i ask if i should just focus on the exhaust side and live with the edelbrock intake flow numbers.
Injection is nice but I'd rather be blown..... 4.6L, Eaton M112, Edelbrock Head, 31cc Dish Pistons, 1.7 Harland Sharp...

duck454ss
Learning to use the board
Learning to use the board
Posts: 38
Joined: November 25th, 2010, 8:43 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 2005
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: LJ

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by duck454ss » August 10th, 2015, 7:55 pm

SilverXJ wrote:
duck454ss wrote: the advantage i see in the edelbrock head is the heat dissipation and a chance at a more efficient combustion chamber allowing for higher compression.
The greater heat dissipation of aluminum is one big advantage I see, especially in your situation.
do you have and feedback on what i could get away with for a dynamic compression ratio? i followed a turbo build on pirate4x4 and he only ran 8:1 SCR with maybe a 10:1DCR on an iron head and was running water meth. any idea how many points the aluminum head would allow me to bump up? extra 1-2 maybe?
Injection is nice but I'd rather be blown..... 4.6L, Eaton M112, Edelbrock Head, 31cc Dish Pistons, 1.7 Harland Sharp...

jeepxj3
Movin on up ^
Movin on up ^
Posts: 372
Joined: December 5th, 2013, 1:55 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 1998
Vehicle Make: jeep
Vehicle Model: xj

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by jeepxj3 » August 11th, 2015, 4:02 am

Aluminum head can go 1 point higher on the compression N/A or FI, all other things being equal.

duck454ss
Learning to use the board
Learning to use the board
Posts: 38
Joined: November 25th, 2010, 8:43 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 2005
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: LJ

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by duck454ss » August 16th, 2015, 7:50 pm

so with all things being equal should i be able to run 9.6SCR and 12ish DCR under boost?
Injection is nice but I'd rather be blown..... 4.6L, Eaton M112, Edelbrock Head, 31cc Dish Pistons, 1.7 Harland Sharp...

Jim K in PA
Making Progress
Making Progress
Posts: 88
Joined: January 16th, 2012, 11:13 am
Vehicle Year: 2005
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler
Location: Pocono Mountains, PA

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by Jim K in PA » August 24th, 2015, 9:27 am

I think you guys have your static and dynamic CR numbers reversed.

duck454ss
Learning to use the board
Learning to use the board
Posts: 38
Joined: November 25th, 2010, 8:43 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 2005
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: LJ

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by duck454ss » August 24th, 2015, 1:05 pm

Jim K in PA wrote:I think you guys have your static and dynamic CR numbers reversed.

just to clear things up
SCR 9.3:1
DCR (N/A) 7.33:1
5 lb boost DCR 10.12:1
8 lb boost DCR 11.72:1
Injection is nice but I'd rather be blown..... 4.6L, Eaton M112, Edelbrock Head, 31cc Dish Pistons, 1.7 Harland Sharp...

Jim K in PA
Making Progress
Making Progress
Posts: 88
Joined: January 16th, 2012, 11:13 am
Vehicle Year: 2005
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler
Location: Pocono Mountains, PA

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by Jim K in PA » August 28th, 2015, 10:27 am

10-4. Thanks for the clarification.

jeepxj3
Movin on up ^
Movin on up ^
Posts: 372
Joined: December 5th, 2013, 1:55 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 1998
Vehicle Make: jeep
Vehicle Model: xj

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by jeepxj3 » September 21st, 2015, 3:35 pm

duck454ss wrote: the down side to just turning up the boost is you creating more work to make gains..... in other words your pushing against a restriction (low flow head) thats just going to create heat to get marginal gains... marginal might be a bad choice of words but i rather have a good flowing head and run 8psi rather than have to build 12psi to get the same results out of a shitty flowing head.
I agree and you will probably make more power with the good flowing head and 8psi vs. 12psi and a stock poor flowing head.
And you need more head flow to feed the larger 4.6L displacement.
A 25 hp gain with head porting will become 50 hp with boost vs. no porting..

duck454ss
Learning to use the board
Learning to use the board
Posts: 38
Joined: November 25th, 2010, 8:43 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 2005
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: LJ

Re: Turbo Stroker DD going for economy

Post by duck454ss » February 20th, 2016, 10:08 am

IT'S HAPPENING!!!!!!!!!!!

so i sold my dodge diesel project and this is at center stage now. i'll be buying a jeep this week and start ordering parts probably next week.

big question...

i have an opportunity to buy an older YJ with the 2.5.... big hitch is ECM and wiring harness... i could go junker and pick n' pull but recycling junk yard finds can come with issues.

thoughts on the ECM and wiring harness? megasquirt and painless?
Injection is nice but I'd rather be blown..... 4.6L, Eaton M112, Edelbrock Head, 31cc Dish Pistons, 1.7 Harland Sharp...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 8 guests