07-01-2011, 11:19 PM | #1 |
walbro fp
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: spokane
Posts: 479
|
the stroked 7m...again. possibly some new info?
so, ill be getting some parts through a trade, one of said parts is a 97.5 mm stroker crank.
after doing some math (albeit some pretty crappy math, mine sucks) i deduced that if you use the stroker crank, and a stock compression height piston, you would need a 5.85" connecting rods. so i searched, and found these. forged eagle "I" beam 5.85" rods. so heres the difference in measurements. stock rods:.......................................... SBC rods: length: 5.984"/151.986mm................... length: 5.853"/148.659mm rod journal: 2.047"/51.991mm.............. rod journal: 2.100"/53.337mm housing bore: 2.167"/55.039mm........... housing bore: 2.250"/57.147mm pin size: .866"/21.995mm.................... pin size: .927"/23.545mm big end width: .977"/24.815mm............ big end width: .940"/23.875mm pin end width: .977"/24.815mm............ pin end width: 1.060"/26.923mm weight: 615 grams............................... weight: 580 grams differences: length: -.134" rod journal: +.053" housing bore: +.083" pin size: +.061" big end width: -.037" pin end width: +.083" weight: -35 grams so its got larger bore for the pin and journal, but i might be able to find a bearing to soak up the extra, as well as a pin bushing. being as they differences are excessive, i should be able to find the appropriate pieces. stock:.................................................. .. stroked: bore: 3.307"/84mm ................................ bore: same stroke: 3.583"/91mm............................... stroke: 3.839"/97.5mm displacement: 184.559cid/3.024L.............. displacement: 197.746cid/3.240L rod/stroke: 1.670:1................................. rod/stroke: 1.527:1 avg. piston speed: 3565.68 fpm................ avg. piston speed: 3814.68 fpm so we end up with an increase of .216 liters, as well as a lower rod/stroke ratio and a slightly higher piston speed, and about 150 grams weight savings over stock (less if you go for a H beam style rod). the benefits are, less dwell for the piston at TDC, increasing cylinder fill velocity in the lower rpm's, which should help out the large ported, long runner 7m engine in the low rpm. the gains are smaller, but i think it could be done, and i intend to build this at a later date. if anyone has any other opinions on this subject, id be happy to hear them, as im thoroughly open to others input and calculations. go!
__________________
87 toyota 4x4 single cab short box pickup, 7MGZE. Last edited by 87hilux7mge; 07-07-2011 at 08:20 AM. |
07-04-2011, 06:35 PM | #2 |
3" Exhaust
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 240
|
Sorry I dont have a more useful comment, but you must really love that truck .... or math. I would think the stock 7mge would have plenty of power for wheelin (maybe not boggin). I never had a problem in my old 86 samurai with its whopping 66 hp and I tested that poor little thing. Not many people have invested that much into the 7MGE, most saying the benifits are too minimal to justify the cost and effort.
I'm not against what you are doing, but why dont you use a gte setup? It's already set up for boost and capable of 400HP so you can worry more about mounting the supercharger and plumbing and installing the engine. Just an opinion, good luck with it, i'm interested in seeing a supercharged 7m in a pick-up (or anything!). |
07-04-2011, 09:06 PM | #3 | |
walbro fp
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: spokane
Posts: 479
|
Quote:
yea, the stroker setup is just workin with parts i have really. when i get forged pistons for 250 and a stroker crank in trade, and i only would need 220 dollar rods, my wheels start turning (probably not the best thing for me to allow). it would be sick to have a stroked, supercharged 7m, and have it be reliable still. and put simply: yes, i love my truck ALOT haha. thanks for the reply and interest tho!
__________________
87 toyota 4x4 single cab short box pickup, 7MGZE. |
|
07-05-2011, 05:00 AM | #4 |
3" Exhaust
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 240
|
Well personal enjoyment is what really matters and if nobody tried crazy tihs like that, the world would be a boring place.
Not sure if you've seen these already but if you havn't it should get the gears turning. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdoGnvPxXJw&fmt=18 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HyhUusmQlQ&fmt=18 |
07-05-2011, 05:14 AM | #5 |
walbro fp
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: spokane
Posts: 479
|
those r sick, that thing puts out some crazy power. i dont know how much power ill put out, but im guessing with the S/C about 260, more tq. itll be sick.
after the stroker gets assembled (if it ever does) then i wanna build a 22re with my M62 S/C. be pretty sick if i put the same effort into it as i am the 7m.
__________________
87 toyota 4x4 single cab short box pickup, 7MGZE. |
07-07-2011, 08:34 AM | #6 |
walbro fp
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: spokane
Posts: 479
|
some more info and calculations to input here. ive tried to research the best i can and provide the most accurate measurements.
i calc'd the two assemblies total length: stock:....................................... stroked: stroke: 3.583"/91mm................. stroke: 3.838"/97.5mm rod L: 5.984"/151.89mm............. rod L: 5.853"/148.659mm comp H: 1.299"/32.764mm......... comp H: 1.299"/32.764mm so, divide stroke in half, add rod and piston compression height, and we get thus: stock: 9.0745"/230.503mm........ stroked: 9.0715"/230.404mm so a difference of .0030"/.099mm. id say thats acceptable, especially if a shaved block comes into play. now if i can only find a way to get bearings, revised bushings and somehow increase the thickness of the journal end, id have a cheap solution to a "more effective" stroker for the 7m. i spoke to the machine shops around here, and none of them were confident about getting such undersized bearings, or custom making smaller bushings for the wrist pin bushings. if i could get some 5.85" rod blanks, then id be free to machine them as i see fit, and could possibly work it to use factory bearings and bushings, as well as solve the thickness issue so i can avoid rod slap. the only other problem i see at this point, is the relatively low R/S ratio, especially for what is considered a short rod setup. 1.6:1 is sposed to be the lowest acceptable for a short rod setup, and side loading, ring seal, rod angle and piston slap could become an issue. any thoughts?? if anyone has a line on a place that would do the machine work in the WA area, or where i can get rod blanks, chime in!
__________________
87 toyota 4x4 single cab short box pickup, 7MGZE. Last edited by 87hilux7mge; 07-07-2011 at 08:39 AM. |
08-07-2011, 03:50 PM | #7 |
12psi boost
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 356
|
Just a suggestion, but if you had to get the big end shells made up, couldn't they include side "lips" like a crank thrust bearing to make the difference in journal width & prevent float.
I'd be tempted to agree a better solution would be 5.85" blanks machined to take stock shells & pins, guess it depends on feasibility of any solution to the narrow big end. (actually, some motorcycles use the small end to locate the rods laterally particularly on roller bearing bottom ends. Would the extra width up there help you work a solution maybe with two piece top-hat bushings? )
__________________
'89 MA70 Supra GT aero 3.0turbo JDM, Rebuilt motor, K&N intake, 3" stainless turbo-back. New turbo and braided line kit... '89 Honda NC27 400, NC23 cams, open pipe, PC36a shock & possibly Showa USD forks... '83 Yamaha 29R XJ750E-II, number 69 off the line, only runner in the country? Original except Koni shocks '95 Honda PC26 CB500R, Winter hack, hateful, trying to sell it I'm not paranoid, they really ARE after me!!! |
08-07-2011, 09:28 PM | #8 |
walbro fp
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: spokane
Posts: 479
|
good suggestions, and yea i did actually look into custom bearing halves for the large end. unfortunately, theres not enough room to make thrusted rods. and they have their own inherent problems.
some blank rods would help, but im not finding alot of support from rod companies either. as well as rebushing the small end. no one wants to do it but, ive considered another idea. the alternate piston idea will work, and i found a machinist that will rebore the pistons wrist pin holes. so once i get the money for some ridiculously overpriced honda pistons, then ill be able to maybe come up with something its just an idea in the back of my mind anyway. ive got all the parts except the pistons as of now, so if i can find a dang job then ill be able to put some more effort into this.
__________________
87 toyota 4x4 single cab short box pickup, 7MGZE. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
info on 1984 supra | 84cuddy | MKII Supra | 1 | 11-22-2007 11:00 AM |
Info on MkIII Supra | Nic | MKIII Supra | 2 | 03-15-2007 11:27 PM |
Emissions Test Info in "Your" Area/State | mrnickleye | Supra FAQ | 0 | 03-05-2006 06:01 AM |
89 NA => Turbo SWAP INFO | akadiablo | MKIII Supra | 0 | 12-09-2005 06:21 AM |