anyone know how to destroke?

[nasty83regal]

ok here it is guyz i have a n/a 4.1 in a 83 regal i just bought and was gonna go bb bu may go destroked and try a lil toyin with it.......any suggestions kits available??? or anything???? any details on this setup>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.flash.net/~rjgeorge/cosner.htm on the website is appreciated...like how he pulled the destroke? what rods used or ?????

thankx
brooks

 

[fc227]

I think the 3.0 liltre crank many work here with the 3.0 liter rods.

The 3.0 liter has a 2.66" stroke.

Correct me if I'm wrong fellows.

I not sure about the flex plate flange & main bearing sizes.

 

[nasty83regal]

any idea what the 3.0 came in???

but this setup i was looking at said it used the 4.1 crank......but didnt say specifics


oh well......lol......i was wondering bored 40 over and then 2.3 rods or 2.2 cant remeber........

oh well
thankx anyhow
brooks

 

[Turbo-Rich]

On a side note

Did anyone notice he was running a Doug Nash 5 speed?
Also a VERY steep gear.
Two supposed "no-no's" for the Buick 231's.

 

[b4black]

No-nos for a Turbo V6. Cosner's NA engine was running completely different HP/Torque curves (high rpms).

I remember reading another articile where they installed a tunnel ram intake with lexan windows between the runners so they could see how well the valvetrain's oiling was working.


3.0's were all FWD transverse motors which used a different flex plate mount. I believe the mains where the same, so it will fit if you can mate it to a transmission.

 

[Turbo-Rich]

Originally posted by b4black
No-nos for a Turbo V6. Cosner's NA engine was running completely different HP/Torque curves (high rpms).

So your another one of those auto. trans. lovers~eh.


I would believe the whole no stick "theory" except I've seen cars (like inline 6's) that have even lower rpm peak HP than ours running DAMN good with sticks.
And as far as loosing boost between shifts,
well I just don't buy that one either. WAY to many turbo'd/stick cars out there. HEy, that's just my openion & this is still America~right? There are people here who can sell the idea pretty good though. & the last thing I would want to do is piss them off again & recieve more viruses for voicing my openion.
**You know who you are & it's a pretty immature thing to do!

 

[nasty83regal]

yeah viruses arnt kool.....not for opinions........but you could always retaliate with the same reaction.....you know action creates an equal and opposite reaction........but.....oh well.....................so does anyone have the specs for the destroked engine???? or?????? and also i was reading on the 4.1 end of things that the stock vs stock heads of 4.1 vs 3.8 the 4.1 breathe about 10% better is this true and so would they better for a turbo app or not?????

thankx again for great info
brooks

 

[b4black]

There is no such thing as 3.8 heads vs 4.1 heads. They use the same heads.

There might be an issue with 6293 castings vs 8445 castings. Many 4.1's have 6293 heads becuase the 4.1 and 6293's were made during the same years - 1981/82 (along with plenty of 3.8's) and all 3.8's in SFI cars will have 8445's because they came out in 1983. In other words, the casting is a function of year, not displacement.

6293 reportedly flow better, but I have never seen where someone has actually proven the difference.



I would love a stick Turbo V6. I keep eyeing a beat up '88 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe with a 5-speed that would make a good winter beater. But a Buick Turbo V6/manual trans has been tried many times and none were successful. Not only do you lose boost when shifting, but you can't build boost by powerbraking to launch the car. If you can make it work, I'm sure many people would like to know how.

 

[nasty83regal]

this is what i read sorry if its incorrect...: Do the same to your heads. Stock Turbo 3.8 heads will work fine. Keep in mind the stock Turbo 3.8 heads are already undersized, and a 4.1 flows about 10% more air so they will be that much smaller. Will they hurt performance, no, but they may not allow you to utilize the extra cubes fullest potential.

off of this site>>>> http://www.gnttype.org/techarea/recipes/41recipe.html

it just mentioend the higher flow of 4.1 vs 3.8 turbo so this is why i asked.....but oh well just curious

thankx
brooks

 

[Turbo-Rich]

Originally posted by b4black
But a Buick Turbo V6/manual trans has been tried many times and none were successful. Not only do you lose boost when shifting, but you can't build boost by powerbraking to launch the car. If you can make it work, I'm sure many people would like to know how.

Here we go again.
I've tried to have an actual conversation about this several times but no-one wants to even discuss it. All I've gotten is FLAMES & attitudes from rude ppl for even bringing it up(not to mention the virus bombardment). I've heard all the popularly held beliefs, I just don't buy 'em. It's the same attitude some ppl here give us for trying to build fast DT's. When someone has a lot of $$$ invested in something (ex.-200r4=$2,000) the last thing they want to see is something else go faster for less cash. It's simply an ego thing as far as I see it.
#1-There are plenty of stick turbo'd cars out there that have NO problem with losing boost between shifts.
#2-Boost can be built on launch much easier by injecting air into the turbo than powerbraking or even by injecting fuel like the Outlaw Pro Street cars do to build boost on launch with sticks.
#3-Buddy Ingersol not only ran a stick shift against popular oppenion of the Buick engineers, he had the FASTEST TB out there. He tried to run an auto. first like he was told he had to do & had NO success. Buddy DEMANDED a stick & it was obviously imperrative to his success.
The fact is it's not profitable or popular to go v6/stick so it will always be poo-poo'd within this crowd.
I'm not going to 86 my auto. personally just to prove a point but if I were starting from scratch I would go with a stick.
On that note me & Tonya have decided to convert our '64 Fairlane to a carb/turbo Buick V6 & it will more than likely be a stick car. We both love the car but nothing about Ford motors excite me like these Buicks do. Plus I can be a lot more abusive to that car than I am willing to be to my 'T. You can expect someting really radical when that one get done.

Anyway,
sorry nasty83regal but I don't know Jack about stroking a 4.1.
I think a better place to ask that question would be in General Tech. A lot more ppl in there.
& as far as fighting fire with fire (or virus with virus), well, I'm a much more of a, eh~physical person than that.
And you know, It really is a small world after all

 

[nasty83regal]

thankx for the suggestion i will try posting it there....and yes i understand the "rising higher then them" attitude on the virus thing....but sometimes it'd be nice to see them get what they dish back at them........

good luck on the stick/v6 thing.......

brooks

 

[b4black]

Originally posted by Turbo-Rich
I've tried to have an actual conversation about this several times but no-one wants to even discuss it. All I've gotten is FLAMES & attitudes from rude ppl for even bringing it up(not to mention the virus bombardment). I've heard all the popularly held beliefs, I just don't buy 'em..

But like I said, there are plenty of people that have tried (not just talked about it) and failed. And I don't mean half-assed attempts. Since nobody has been succesful, who do you expect to support/discuss it? If you believe it will work, then do it and shut them up. I hope it does work - I would like a stick-shift.

If somebody tries something that works, others will follow. That's how the SFI cars became so fast. A good example is the powerplate. There were a lot of nay-sayer's, but now that it's proven, people are buying.

It's the same attitude some ppl here give us for trying to build fast DT's.

And other than Fred, nobody that frequents this board has put up a sub 16 second timeslip.

#2-Boost can be built on launch much easier by injecting air into the turbo than powerbraking or even by injecting fuel like the Outlaw Pro Street cars do to build boost on launch with sticks.

What can be cheaper and easier than one foot on the brake and one the gas?

 

[unboostedV6]

Ron Cosner's "destroked" ride was a Stage 2 powered Comp Eliminator car that turned around 9000 rpm with its billet crank. It had nothing to do with modifying an existing crank, or buying one meant for another engine. Like Fred said, the 3.0 liter crank will bolt in, but since it was only available in front drive cars, it has a different flexplate flange. The 3.0 rods were 6.33" long. GM "N" cars came with them in '86- '88 or so..Grand Am's, Skylarks, and Ciera's. GB

 

[fc227]

Don't forget , Greg has posted some 12 second ET time slips.

 

[nasty83regal]

kool....honestly i didnt notice he had a n/a till you mentioned his timeslips......lol..........

thankx

theres hope..........

 

[Turbo-Rich]

Originally posted by b4black
But like I said, there are plenty of people that have tried (not just talked about it) and failed. And I don't mean half-assed attempts. Since nobody has been succesful, who do you expect to support/discuss it? If you believe it will work, then do it and shut them up. I hope it does work - I would like a stick-shift.

------Actially I named 2 ppl that made a stick work. What, are we talking about ONLY on a stock set up or something?---------



If somebody tries something that works, others will follow. That's how the SFI cars became so fast. A good example is the powerplate. There were a lot of nay-sayer's, but now that it's proven, people are buying.

------------You nailled it right on the head there Rich. "people are BUYING" There is no fiancial bennefit for anyone in the TB world to push stick shifts. Whereas crappy 200r4's reqiure more than just an average trans. guy to be built right & it keeps the cash flowing for several ppl on this board & in the TB community in general. Think about it, if ppl found out sticks worked better, there would be quite an uproar, not to mention a few bankruptcies.
Face it Rich, there is no-one out there willing to help someone build fast cars for cheap. Why would they? Do you actually think someone is going to just give away an idea that works so that they can be beat by it? It'scalled an having an edge. Plus it's just not profitable to anyone. Luckily I was "Guru'd" be a master mech. that loved cutting past the high priced BS. Almost everything I have done personally concerning racing I have been told couldn't be done.
-"You can't launch with a double pumper & a stock torque convertor & not bog"-Owner of SECO perf.
-"You can't lift a front tire off the ground with radial (not drag radial) tires"-Decatur Vocational auto shop teacher.
-"You can't build a 12 sec. car for under $2,000"-practically everyone.
-"a 4:88 is to steep for the street"-My own Father, lol.
-"You can't drive a 671 blown smallblock in an ice storm"-mngr. of Whitlock auto.
-"a junkyard TH350 will never hold up to continuous 12 sec. passes."
-"TB's don't like a whole lot of timing"-This board
-"You need a 4 bolt main 350 to go that fast"
-"And other than Fred, nobody that frequents this board has put up a sub 16 second timeslip. "-b4black
So you see, I am quite used to being told I couldn't do something. If anything it inspires me.---------------------------



And other than Fred, nobody that frequents this board has put up a sub 16 second timeslip.
---------------So your telling me that hardly no-one here can shave less than a sec. off thier car? 78SC I believe was running pretty good. Bill too. Tonya was getting 15.7's-15.9's when we last had hers on the G-tech. After roughly 50 test & tune (almost every morning) passes after work, my T is seeing times well in the 14 now.--------------------------------------


What can be cheaper and easier than one foot on the brake and one the gas?

Nothing cheaper I guess but it sure takes it's time to build. That can mean big trouble on a .500 tree. With injecting air boost is built almost instantly & you could build something suitable for less than $50.00 if you were so inclined. Plus it has an added cooling effect to the turbo. But I guess that sinse Kirban doesn't have a kit for that flying off thier shelves that must mean it doesn't REALLY work either~right

 

[b4black]

------Actially I named 2 ppl that made a stick work. What, are we talking about ONLY on a stock set up or something?---------

Well, yes, since most people here have stock set ups. Cosner and Ingersol had all out race cars with very different set ups than almost everyone here. (And a lot of money in there cars.)

------------You nailled it right on the head there Rich. "people are BUYING" There is no fiancial bennefit for anyone in the TB world to push stick shifts. Whereas crappy 200r4's reqiure more than just an average trans. guy to be built right & it keeps the cash flowing for several ppl on this board & in the TB community in general. Think about it, if ppl found out sticks worked better, there would be quite an uproar, not to mention a few bankruptcies.

Yes, money drives vendors. So no, there won't be any auto trans builders pushing sticks. But they're only <1% of this board - this board is loaded with non-vendors. What motivates them is speed. The other 99% would push sticks if they could get them to work. And them we would all be driving sticks.

Make it work, create the uproar. I already said I'm pulling for you. What else do you want from me?

So your telling me that hardly no-one here can shave less than a sec. off thier car? 78SC I believe was running pretty good. Bill too. Tonya was getting 15.7's-15.9's when we last had hers on the G-tech. After roughly 50 test & tune (almost every morning) passes after work, my T is seeing times well in the 14 now

Great! Lets see some times and some recipes. We do have a person or two from time to time saying they ran 15's, but they never say how or stay around to help the rest of us out. You mentioned you run 17 psi of boost before. Tell us how you do it. I'm having trouble pushing past 10 psi.

(78 SC has 4 total posts and Bill hasn't posted since 2001.)

 

[Turbo-Rich]

Originally posted by b4black



Make it work, create the uproar. I already said I'm pulling for you. What else do you want from me?
------Sorry if I seem defensive. After the virus BS I'm left feeling that way. I'm posting on Tonya's comp. because of it. My e-mail has been totally wiped out. Anyway, thats all I ever wanted to start was some good back & forth on what hasn'tworked & could possibley be the the ticket. I really don'tmind taking flak to stimulate idea's/conversation but someone just took it too far.
-------------------------------------------------------


Great! Lets see some times and some recipes. We do have a person or two from time to time saying they ran 15's, but they never say how or stay around to help the rest of us out. You mentioned you run 17 psi of boost before. Tell us how you do it. I'm having trouble pushing past 10 psi.

(78 SC has 4 total posts and Bill hasn't posted since 2001.)

I've been meaning to start a post outlining what has worked for me & what has been a total headache. I just haven't had time.
Between work, the kid, the house & wrenching on like 5 cars I'm beat for a spare minute(sleep or otherwise). Heck I missed out on my morning nap with the boy just posting on this(I type slow). I'll get to it tho, I promise.

 

[unboostedV6]

Just a couple thoughts on the auto vs stick thing....there's lots of turbo road race guys out there with manuals - hell...every CART car is a clutched ride.......back in the day - the mid '80s- I don't think anyone built a TH400 or 'glide that could live behind a 1200hp Pro Stock mill whether it was Ingersoll's turbo 6 or Glidden's 500 inch Ford Shotgun....of course, things are different now........as far as what's faster on the dragstrip? It all depends on who's driving, BUT clutches don't multiply torque like torque converters do, it's pretty hard to miss a shift with an auto, and an auto's gears are always meshed....Whatever you like is good for you....I'm a lifer in the bracket racing world, so I'll always use an automatic for consistency. GB