I mentioned NO2 MUCH earlier in this debate, and specifically excluded it from the conditions. Sorry for you that you didn't notice it sooner. You also said in your post that stated the conditions of this debate that you'd make the power with the stock twins. You never mentioned anything about nos.

Also, why didn't your earlier (flawed) calculations here include NO2? LOL!

I mentioned NO2 MUCH earlier in this debate, and specifically excluded it from the conditions. Sorry for you that you didn't notice it sooner. You also said in your post that stated the conditions of this debate that you'd make the power with the stock twins. You never mentioned anything about nos.

Also, why didn't your earlier (flawed) calculations here include NO2? LOL!
WHOA! HOLD ON THERE BUCKO! You said STOCK BLOCK. If it's bored out w/stroker kit, it's NOT STOCK anymore!!!
WRONG AGAIN. You wouldn't be making the power with the stock twins in that build. You'd be making it with the NOS. You said nothing about NOS in your earlier posts, and Evilfurby didn't ask about making power with NOS - he asked about making it with the stock twins.
No questions, but you broke the conditions you set up in post #7 of this thread. As a reminder, you said exactly this: "I am talking about just a stock bottom end(as I have repeatedly said stock block) with the stock turbos. And I meant to say 650rwhp. With a better grind cams, angle cut valves, and a P&P head you can easily squeeze out 650rwhp." Instead, you came up with a build that makes power using a stroker kit & nos. LOL.
Sure you made the power, but not with the stock block and the stock twins. LOL!
STOCK BLOCK = NO STROKER KIT. DUH.
Let's forget stock twins. Why not take them off completely, and spray a 450 shot? LOL. Again, Evilfurby wasn't talking about making power with nos, and neither were you...till now.
You're welcome. I hope you enjoyed loosing when you broke the conditions of this debate. :)
I'm glad that YOU finally admit you can't make 650rwhp with the stock twins alone. At least the others reading this thread know the truth NOW.

HEY YOU TOLD ME I have 25grand and I could use it how I want to all I have to do is keep the stock twins. But ok lets say I cant do anyhting to the motor which is what I said. Thats fine I still can make 650rwhp on the stock block and stock twins. Does that post look familiar? Those are your words for the 25grand game. You said just stock twins not stock motor.



It doesnt matter whethor or not I said it in my earlier posts or not. I said you can make 650rwhp on the stock block and stock twins did I not? I never gave any restriction on what you can and cant do. Eveything else is a go. I never said the turbos alone were to be the ones making that power. So please admit you were wrong in every aspect of this debate. You falied to realize there was Nitrous just like you failed to realize your suposed mk4 doesnt come with ct26's stock.

I know I was playing by the rules of your game. But if you want to change them then thats your falacy.

Yes I did. take out the bore and stroker kit and you still can attain 650rwhp. Nitrous alone is 520. Max the boost you get at least another 100hp then standalone engine management, race gas, better fuel management, better drivetrain you could get more then 650rwhp. So again please admit you were wrong. Any questions? Or do I need to edumacate you on the aspects of nitrous and engine management too?

I was only playing by your rules. But I would rather play by mine which is the original discussion. Which means we must keep the stock block and stock twins. You wanted to let me do anyhting I wanted to the motor as long as I kept the stock twins and I said if you say so. hehehe

Because if you spray a 450shot on a stock block even though its forged you will detonate and/or melt your rings. Ever seen a motor that runs on just nitromethane(which has a lower combustible temperature)?

You losed both ways. Whether we keep the stock block or not I still win. Any questions?

Yes you can, stock motor and stock twins you can make 650rwhp. Thank you for losing this debate as you have from the start. Everyone knows you can add things onto the motor. I never said leave the motor completely stock. Everyone has the common sense to know the implementation of nitrous in this case would be needed. But I guess it took you 3 pages of debate to realize such a thing.

Quote:

If you mentioned it earlier than I am sorry I didnt awknowledge that. However, the fact still remains that on the stock block and stock twins a 650rwhp goal is attainable.

when you get 650rwhp on the stock twins please do post up your dyno sheet and pics of ur car ;)
i'd like to see it

and now this thread is also


LOCKED!

I really have to fix certain things in this thread.
I always wanted to but then Suprra_Girl closed it and I wanted to get her OK before opening it.
Most of this thread was written just before I was modded.
Some clarifications should be stated so that this forum has some credibility to its members.

Experience as in you had an 800whp Supra?
(Because that is how it sounds like to me--like you are saying you had one.)

Please find sources of info--preferable reliable info--before posting.
That way you can back your claim up and if you are found to be wrong, the blame gets shifted to that source. ;)
I highly doubt there was ever such a source from which you claim exists where they said you could make that much power from the stock twins.

First, the 2JZ-GTTE uses two CT12b's, not CT26's.
Second, it may be true that at a certain range, each addition PSI will produce 10 HP, but that equation is not a linear equation. Yes, I am sure there is a mathematical formula for it, but implying that the equation is linear, is very incorrect math.

A turbo pressurizes the incoming air into the cylinder. There is no connection between the intake and the exhaust at all. The turbine drives that attached shaft that carries the compressor wheel and that is how they are related/connected in their function.


But the mathematics that are used are not solely linear equations. If it were true, then compressor maps would have no curve. Also there are power curves and torque curves--the mathematical equation for determining mathematically what power output you will have which would correspond to plotting points on a power curve or torque curve are so complex that I would not dare even think that I could fathom it.

Have you found it?

A turbo engine’s intake air's temperature increases primarily because as you compress a gas, you increase its temperature; conversely, as you decrease pressure, you decrease temperature. This is why air conditioners have compressors and a basic reason why they work, due to increasing and decreasing pressure. Depressurized gas [meaning refrigerant] goes to the cabin, while pressurized gas [meaning refrigerant] goes through a condenser (which is a sort of radiator/intercooler).

Here is a quote from me that I made on another Supra forum:
So untrue, that I just don’t know where to start. After the fuel and oxygen are ignited, they lose their energy. Their energy gets translated into heat energy and then to mechanical energy. When energy is extracted from something, it would NOT be more combustible the second time around. Just like burning a log. You can't burn it twice, because it has already lost its energy.


That clears up the misinformation segment on this thread to a great degree.


This used to be my sig on another forum--I really hope that it is not necessary in the future.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v519/Tony9RR/www.gif

While you are having a good time on this forum, I spent many hours in trying to fix this thread and the repercussions it has made. I don't think that is fair to me at all! People need to be accountable for what they do and what misinformation they post.

On some forums they would have banned you for all this inaccurate information without a good bye. If you don’t like the way I have handled it, then try your luck on other sites with this much misinformation and see how far you get...you will look back and thank me for being so lenient.

Please admit to being wrong when you find yourself wrong.
Don’t go on forever with many invalid excuses as to why you made false claims—that will save us (members and moderators) lots of time!

Some other issues that are on this thread is name calling. I don’t want to see any name calling in arguments because it only creates more problems.

There is even more that I can say but I have been stupid enough to spend this much time on it already.

In the future, I will definitely not spend as much time as I have on this case, but use this case as an example. (I often recycle my posts [as I even did in this case from quoting myself from another site]).


Let's learn and move on,
TM

EDIT:

THREAD IS OPEN
I am leaving this open IF anyone has any true and useful information to add in--and can do it in a civil manner.
I am not opening it to read invalid excuses for every piece of misinfo to save face.
I don't expect people to always be right.
We are all wrong once in a while.
Peopel should, however, have a grasp of what they do and what they don't know, and not to pretend that they know things they don't.