XR6T 1900rwhp rumour?

[Momus]

92mm = 6647mm2

86mm = 5808mm2

Diameter might be 7% but the area is more like 15%. And that is before it is re sleeved to be bigger. Huge bore spacing suggests it can be a lot bigger than what it is. Can any engine builders comment on this?

Yes, but assuming optimisation is possible the valve size/area will only go up pro rata so the relativity with the 2j remains.

[<---cop]

The engine development over the years has been outstanding.

Can you imagine Holden selling new VEs with an alloy DOHC turbo 202? :D

[data_mine]

On a well developed engine horse power potential is governed by intake valve area and flow.The intake valve area is closely related to the bore size, not the overall capacity of the engine.

The std Ford engine has a 92 mm bore, the std Toyota 86 mm; about 7% bigger. In an optimised engine the Ford would have proportionately larger valves because there is more room to fit them. So, based on this rule the peak hore power potential of the Ford at any given pressure would be about 7% greater. If the Toyota engine running 5 Bar absolute is making 2000 hp then the Ford would make 7% more say 2140 despite its 33%
bigger capacity.

This is not the full story because the optimised bigger engine will have higher average horsepower and be able to accelerate the car faster for the same peak.

It's a bit hard to tell from the photo, but the Ford head doesn't look as good as the Toyota's. It seems to have a shallower, flatter entry angle which is usually an indicator of lower efficiency.

The Ford head is longer, but no deeper, so possibly not as mechanically stiff to resist combustion and engine block twisting loads.

The Ford crank is obviously a lot longer as well as having a 13 mm longer stroke than the std 2j. Some challenges there if it is to operate at the necessary 8K or so rpm required

FWIW

"barra" I6 (heads are the same, turbo or not)
Intake 35mm
Exhaust 32mm

2 "no shit" JZ
Intake 33.6mm
Exhaust 29mm

So valve area goes to the Ford, by 4.1% In / 10% Ex with as you say bore area 6.9%

I'd say mechanics aside (crank strength), the ford will be filling and (especially) emptying it's cylinders easier. So should be able to push the same power easily enough.

There's already examples of 900+RWKW (1200rwhp+) examples on the track. eg: http://www.xtremefordtuning.com.au/i...news&Itemid=67
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW3WjtDE2p8
31psi (GT47), standard head/cams, standard crank, and ~7200rpm.

800more hp. Certainly doable. Has it been done yet? Well I haven't heard about it.

[nitrane]

If you waltz into a engineering shop and ask them to make a custom stroker crank out of billet I can see $20k disappearing pretty quick.

Measure original crank
Check block and pistons for clearances
CAD design crank
CNC machine crank from billet
Machine journals
Cut double keyways
Tap/thread snout
Linish
Internal balance

Fuck one thing up and start again.

Internal balancing of a 4340 crank cost me $1200 alone... mallory metal isn't cheap.

[Greg Rust]

yeah - was at ford for the 50th falcon anniversary and chatted to some ford dude - said that the bore spacing was still same as 1960 ford 6 falcon engine

Conversation at Ford water cooler circa 1960
"Hey Burt, yea Dick, I betcha some crazy guys in the future will get 2000 of those horses over there in that paddock to do the same amount of work that this here engine could eventually produce"

[Supercrown]

As you scale an engine up, the ratio of cylinder volume to valve area always gets worse -purely as a geometric function.

In plain terms, if you double the capacity of an engine by scaling the entire thing up (crank, rods, valves etc etc etc), the 2x capacity engine will not produce 2x the power as the valve cross sectional area will not be increased by 100%.

[Spoonfed]

The engine development over the years has been outstanding.

Can you imagine Holden ditching the RB30 for a 3.6 Buick 1960's weapon for another near decade, or running pushrod engines in 2011? :D

Fixed :rotflol:

[BigMuz]

The engine development over the years has been outstanding.

Can you imagine Holden selling new VEs with an alloy DOHC turbo 202? :D

Haha nice.

[9triton]

Conversation at Ford water cooler circa 1960
"Hey Burt, yea Dick, I betcha some crazy guys in the future will get 2000 of those horses over there in that paddock to do the same amount of work that this here engine could eventually produce"

ha ha

[Grumpy Rooster]

At the Sydney Jamboree on the weekend the commentators were talking about a black turbo Falcon with 1200hp at the wheels. It did run decent mph. Was a collaboration from 2 companies apparently.

Anyone know how much power the light blue early Cortina with the turbo coon engine is making?

[MRMOPARMAN]

The engine development over the years has been outstanding.

Can you imagine Holden selling new VEs with an alloy DOHC turbo 202? :D

^ this is why imo its an absolute fucking shame that fords going to drop the motor after all the fucking development and persistance they've done with it.

[2JZR31]

Wow the bore spacing is the same. Therefore the falcon is just a revamped Model T since it has 4 wheels.

[Tils]

^ this is why imo its an absolute fucking shame that fords going to drop the motor after all the fucking development and persistance they've done with it.

Isn't that an old threat that they keep reversing? Or is there newer news that they are infact moving to that piece of shit V6?

[Rona]

US guy pretty much confirmed it a month back I thought, we are getting the FWD/AWD taurus POS platform.

[Tils]

Falcon=Magna in terms of longevity... Bye bye Ford.