Quote:
Originally Posted by Azeka1
|
Thanks for the kind words. Mine hasn't run yet, let alone hit the dyno, so your guess is as good as mine about horsepower.
As I understand it, though, a significant amount of the CSL's horsepower gain comes from running alpha-n (RPM vs. throttle position) after opening up the breathing with the cams. i.e. it sacrifices efficiency (power, fuel consumption) at mid-throttle and safety (lack of MAP / MAF) everywhere in order to make maximum full-throttle power.
So it all depends on your goals. Note that the Schrick cams are around $1,700 but you have to replace your followers at the same time - all 24 of them - and they're at least $50 a pop. So cams are a $3k hit, and you
do need the improved breathing (airbox + exhaust headers) to take advantage of those big nasty cams, and then there's tuning. And if you put a CSL airbox on, you're running alpha-n and part-throttle sucks and don't drive your California-tuned car in Colorado...
So I'm taking a slightly different route and running speed-density (RPM vs. MAP sensor) with a CSL-style airbox and 288/280 degree cams. I've also taken a bunch of weight out of the rotating assembly (pistons, rods, valves). I'm looking at the "rev higher" approach, and we'll see how that goes. Kind of trying to build a pretty rev-happy peaky engine that can be managed safely by careful electronics.
I suspect that M-Cast made the right choice, in the end. More displacement means more power everywhere and at lower RPM, which is way easier on the engine than either forced induction or dizzying rev limits. I've got around $20k in my engine and it's going to be a lot more delicate than his.