nadracer Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I'm not really too knowledgeable on this subject, but figured I'd chime in since no one has even mentioned the option to supercharge a larger displacement engine. Can this not be down on the 3.6 Legacy? There seems to be some info out there related to throwing a supercharger on 3.0 engines...http://www.raptorsc.com.au/. That would be a pretty amazing jump in power, kind of expensive tho! I'm sure there are other options out there for something like this...No? It's not possible with this engine. Nor is it cost effective if you had the money to make it work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChasWG Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 The problem with the 3.6R and adding a supercharger to that engine is buried deep inside this engine. Specifically the connecting rods. They aren't straight, but slightly angled to the side which becomes a problem when you add positive manifold pressure. Think of it like this: if the rod were laying on a table so that each of the holes (wrist pin and crank shaft hole) were facing you and the crank opening was centered on two intersecting lines so that the left to right, horizontal line ran directly through the spot where the lower part of the rod's cap was bisected and the vertical line ran straight up perpendicular to the horizontal line, then the wrist pin hole would not be directly over the top of of crank hole, nor on the vertical line, but off to the side a few degrees. The con rods just can't take it and you'd more than likely trash the engine unless there was a lot of very serious re-engineering of the con rods. A huge expense and for what, a daily driver? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChasWG Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Hondas are the fastest Super Fast! And Super Furious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmspecb Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Considering that is about what a stock LGT runs, I kinda doubt it. Rutchard is stage 2 and ran a 12.9. I've owned both... you? I also said from a roll, I can guarantee you he pulled at least a 1.8 60', which of course gives him a crazy advantage when it comes to runs from a dig. FWD = sucks which is why I don't own it anymore. What was Rutchard's trap speed on that run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmspecb Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 +/- 12 is well within the error rate for a dyno. You'd have to dyno your car about 15X with each variable to get anything that would be statistically significant. This has been tried and tested... a million times. The RSX community is 10x larger than the LGT one believe me. lol I didn't want to turn this into a Honda Hate topic... Just wanted to interject how my old Honda responded to mods. Love it or hate it, I made 225 whp with boltons and a tune. Pretty impressive if you ask me for a 2.0 N/A engine no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rao Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I don't think it is particularly impressive, but nobody cares what I think I'll try this gain - Hondas are the fastest!!!! Rob IF YOU CARE ABOUT YOUR CAR YOU SHOULD NEVER DRIVE IT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmspecb Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I don't think it is particularly impressive, but nobody cares what I think I'll try this gain - Hondas are the fastest!!!! lol fine, be that way :rolleyes: No hard feelings. For the record, I would consider my honda pretty slow, but I don't believe Stg 2 lgt's are world beaters either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CL21376 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I've owned both... you? I also said from a roll, I can guarantee you he pulled at least a 1.8 60', which of course gives him a crazy advantage when it comes to runs from a dig. FWD = sucks which is why I don't own it anymore. What was Rutchard's trap speed on that run? You realize this is the 5th gen forum, right? And mods and times and power output at the various stages are different..... I just don't get the whole roll racing thing. These cars arent dogs down low, although obviously you can pick a roll speed that is more advantageous to one car vs the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmspecb Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 You realize this is the 5th gen forum, right? And mods and times and power output at the various stages are different..... I just don't get the whole roll racing thing. These cars arent dogs down low, although obviously you can pick a roll speed that is more advantageous to one car vs the other. I know that... various guys here were asking me to back my claims so I did. Roll Racing makes sense when it comes to FWD vs AWD. ALso the same reason I asked what the trap speed was on that 12.9 run someone mentioned earlier. A LGT that traps around 95 mph is about a 13.5 - 14 second run IIRC, 95 mph will only generate a roughly 15 second 1/4 mile pass on the rsx. Then I had a few expected honda hater responses. You guys can resume your normally scheduled conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HansGT Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 How about we keep on topic ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rutchard Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 http://legacygt.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3550098&postcount=46 104.93mph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChasWG Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 What were we talking about...? Oh yeah, performance mods for the 3.6R engine. Yup, nothing... end of discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rao Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 A nice Honda engine swap might solve the problem Rob IF YOU CARE ABOUT YOUR CAR YOU SHOULD NEVER DRIVE IT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChasWG Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 A nice Honda engine swap might solve the problem OTM? :icon_roll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeltaSniper Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 K20 Swap ALL DAY ERRDAY BRAH. But no seriously, I find it unimaginable that a 215whp RSX can take a Stage I or II LGT from a roll... Not hatin, just sayin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmspecb Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 K20 Swap ALL DAY ERRDAY BRAH. But no seriously, I find it unimaginable that a 215whp RSX can take a Stage I or II LGT from a roll... Not hatin, just sayin. lol, man owning a honda has doomed me to all others... First of all I had 225 whp, 2nd of all, the rsx is 2800 lbs, significantly lighter than an LGT, 3rd - it has much more aggressive gearing, with a 4.7 FD ratio. What do typical stage 2 LGT's dyno? 240whp? So the Rsx would have 15 less whp but weigh 500 lbs less... so beating a LGT from a roll would be a stretch? IDK. Stop baiting me back into this topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeltaSniper Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 But the difference in Torque? Quite a lot... IIRC Stage II LGT's have 300~ Tq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CL21376 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 More like 260 and 330tq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmspecb Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 But the difference in Torque? Quite a lot... IIRC Stage II LGT's have 300~ Tq noted, but is that a typical stage 2 LGT? I am referring to 05-09 LGT's btw... sorry if I didn't make that clear... From what I know Stage 1 2010+'s make like 300whp. However they are heavy. I trapped 100 mph with my dinky 225 whp and 161 ft lbs... Like I said that was with a HORRENDOUS launch... 2.35 second 60" if you could fathom that. I've owned both guys... keep this in mind. What were we talking about again? Oh yea. Just find it weird to me that I can suck 50whp out of a 2.0 liter N/A engine with bolt ons, and a 3.6 liter 6-cylinder motor can't find anymore power? Just weird to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmspecb Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I'll just stop it here. I get it, my rsx was slow, couldn't beat anything, especially not the god-like stage 1 and stage 2 LGT's on this website. Message received. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CL21376 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 noted, but is that a typical stage 2 LGT? I am referring to 05-09 LGT's btw... sorry if I didn't make that clear... From what I know Stage 1 2010+'s make like 300whp. However they are heavy. I trapped 100 mph with my dinky 225 whp and 161 ft lbs... Like I said that was with a HORRENDOUS launch... 2.35 second 60" if you could fathom that. I've owned both guys... keep this in mind. What were we talking about again? Oh yea. Just find it weird to me that I can suck 50whp out of a 2.0 liter N/A engine with bolt ons, and a 3.6 liter 6-cylinder motor can't find anymore power? Just weird to me. Yes, those are typical stage 2 2010+ #s. Nobody said your rsx-s was slow, just that your claim was questionable, and that this was the 5th generation forum, so that your comparison was interpreted as being relative to the 2010+. FYI, the 5th gen only gained about 100 pounds over the 4th gen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue77 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I had a 2002 RSX type-S (N/A) at one time and it was rated 200 HP at the crank, how did you get it up to 225 at the wheels with bolt ons? Just curious - are you sure it wasn't at the crank? Also, I had a 4th gen Spec.B that was stage II with intake and made 262.94 whp and 313.41 wtq after a protune. I'm just here for the mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rao Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 What were we talking about again? Oh yea. Just find it weird to me that I can suck 50whp out of a 2.0 liter N/A engine with bolt ons, and a 3.6 liter 6-cylinder motor can't find anymore power? Just weird to me. Maybe Honda engineers aren't very good and they left a lot of power on the table due to their incompetence. Rob IF YOU CARE ABOUT YOUR CAR YOU SHOULD NEVER DRIVE IT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmspecb Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Maybe Honda engineers aren't very good and they left a lot of power on the table due to their incompetence. lol... be nice, stop replying and bringing me back to this thread!! 2006 Rsx is rated @ 201 hp to the crank (SAE corrected). Normally they dyno @ about 175ish whp. Bolt on and tuned Rsx's will make 225-230whp on any dyno. It is what it is. As I said before, there are all motor K24's out there making over 300whp, along with stock block K20 turbo's making 400whp reliably. Built Rsx's can do in the vicinity of 800-1000whp, though most like to be around 650-750. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmspecb Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I had a 2002 RSX type-S (N/A) at one time and it was rated 200 HP at the crank, how did you get it up to 225 at the wheels with bolt ons? Just curious - are you sure it wasn't at the crank? Also, I had a 4th gen Spec.B that was stage II with intake and made 262.94 whp and 313.41 wtq after a protune. I don't know what to say... you clearly hadn't had the rsx for very long or just never bothered doing any research on clubrsx... I lived on that forum for 3 years... I've got a 4th gen Spec B now though so no more rsx for me lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.