[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by enkeivette

If you're doing all the bearings you are doing the whole damn thing. What head gasket are you using?!

I was going to say, at that point it isn't exactly a ton of extra work to fit new rings and hone the cylinders. But if that isn't "necessary" I guess why bother . .

[enkeivette]

Originally Posted by Vettezuki

I was going to say, at that point it isn't exactly a ton of extra work to fit new rings and hone the cylinders. But if that isn't "necessary" I guess why bother . .

If they're within acceptable tolerances, there's no need for machine work. But he should change the rings if he's going to change the bearings, I would expect the rings to wear faster than the bearings.

It seems silly to tear the engine down and not replace every ring, seal and bearing. You can do a full rebuild without doing any machine work. If it doesn't need it, it doesn't need it.

Brian, whether it be a thicker head gasket or low compression pistons I think you should get this thing ready for some serious boost. You may not be thinking about it in the near future, but you'll get there. You'll always want more, always, and you should build the motor with that in mind.

[TRacer]

All,

Neal & I helped Brian pull the motor yesterday and all reports from the subsequent teardown that took place today are that everything save for the passenger side HG looked great (mileage is over 125,000). The HG blew inward on Cylinder #4 and appeared to have had signs of scarring (please bear in mind that Brian is the 4th owner of this car, two of which we can account for.) The cross hatching on the cylinder walls looks good, the lifters are perfect,the cam is great...can't argue there.

Having driven Brian's car quite a bit, it was a very strong runner prior to the HG letting go. If this was a full-blown build-- and it isn't-- we would have pointed Brian in a direction that would have included such items as a stock stroke steel crank (I have two), steel rods, TRW or J&E forged pistons, bigger cam (probably a 218/218 so it would still pass smog), steel main caps, ported heads & intake, ARP head studs & fasteners everywhere, .020 or .030 overbore, and all that other fun stuff. However, that would have blown through a conscientious college student's budget in no time, and he has to eat & graduate. The HGs Brian will be using will be fine; they can take a lot of boost, and given Brian's ultimate goal (11.7s at 116 or so) he won't have to run a ton of boost to get there given the replacement turbo he has in mind. The 12" 2800 stall Pat's converter he's opted for is a great choice and is one that I'll be putting in my sleeper '87 Turbo Buick when it comes time to pull its tranny.

With regard to reducing compression, a stock turbo Buick V6 runs 8.0:1 compression; lowering it would result in the car not being able to spool a turbo very much at all even with a small A/R exhaust housing, plus it would be an Uber-Pig on the street. If anything, in a gonzo build it's not uncommon to use a stroker crank and up the CR to about 9.0:1 so that you don't have to run as much boost to go as fast.

Oh, and hi, I'm new to this site!

Cheers,
Morgan

[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by TRacer

All,

Neal & I helped Brian pull the motor yesterday and all reports from the subsequent teardown that took place today are that everything save for the passenger side HG looked great . . .

Welcome aboard Captain Morgan. Bet you never heard that before. Sounds like you guys are steering Brian in the right direction. enkeivette and I just love spending non-existent money; it's so gosh darn easy.

Oh and Brian,


Well, it's not worthless, but would be betterer.

[SeanPlunk]

Originally Posted by TRacer

All,

Neal & I helped Brian pull the motor yesterday and all reports from the subsequent teardown that took place today are that everything save for the passenger side HG looked great (mileage is over 125,000). The HG blew inward on Cylinder #4 and appeared to have had signs of scarring (please bear in mind that Brian is the 4th owner of this car, two of which we can account for.) The cross hatching on the cylinder walls looks good, the lifters are perfect,the cam is great...can't argue there.

Having driven Brian's car quite a bit, it was a very strong runner prior to the HG letting go. If this was a full-blown build-- and it isn't-- we would have pointed Brian in a direction that would have included such items as a stock stroke steel crank (I have two), steel rods, TRW or J&E forged pistons, bigger cam (probably a 218/218 so it would still pass smog), steel main caps, ported heads & intake, ARP head studs & fasteners everywhere, .020 or .030 overbore, and all that other fun stuff. However, that would have blown through a conscientious college student's budget in no time, and he has to eat & graduate. The HGs Brian will be using will be fine; they can take a lot of boost, and given Brian's ultimate goal (11.7s at 116 or so) he won't have to run a ton of boost to get there given the replacement turbo he has in mind. The 12" 2800 stall Pat's converter he's opted for is a great choice and is one that I'll be putting in my sleeper '87 Turbo Buick when it comes time to pull its tranny.

With regard to reducing compression, a stock turbo Buick V6 runs 8.0:1 compression; lowering it would result in the car not being able to spool a turbo very much at all even with a small A/R exhaust housing, plus it would be an Uber-Pig on the street. If anything, in a gonzo build it's not uncommon to use a stroker crank and up the CR to about 9.0:1 so that you don't have to run as much boost to go as fast.

Oh, and hi, I'm new to this site!

Cheers,
Morgan

It sounds like everything is going fairly well. I think with the generous help you and Neal have provided, Brian's car is really going to be running pretty well here soon. How is your car? Brian told me you have the new turbo, injectors, etc. all on now. Any idea on what it'll run? Say hi to Tracer for me

[enkeivette]

Originally Posted by TRacer

With regard to reducing compression, a stock turbo Buick V6 runs 8.0:1 compression; lowering it would result in the car not being able to spool a turbo very much at all even with a small A/R exhaust housing, plus it would be an Uber-Pig on the street. If anything, in a gonzo build it's not uncommon to use a stroker crank and up the CR to about 9.0:1 so that you don't have to run as much boost to go as fast.

Wow, I had no idea it was already that low. Why does he need an alcohol injection system to keep up with the increased boost if the CR is so low? Is this car not intercooled?

[TRacer]

Vettezuki,

Brian has been taking pictures of this project's progress with his camera phone so I'll be sure to remind him to get 'em on here. We took a few on Saturday with the engine on the lift, a pic of the "Gee, what's wrong with this motor mount?" (that's a pretty good one) and I imagine he shot a few yesterday.

Yes, Brian's car is intercooled; in fact, all '86-'87 Turbo Regals are. At the time these vehicles were being built 92 to 94 octane non-oxygenated gas wasn't uncommon, but now we (especially in CA) have to contend with 91 octane oxygenated (read: "crap") gas which is a limiting factor. Also, the intercooler isn't very efficient by today's standards (the inlet is small, & the core isn't very thick) and the stock turbo runs out of steam at 22 psi. So, alcohol injection is a nice compromise in lieu of $8 per gallon race gas to add performance.

Although Brian put in 36 lb injectors recently, we've advised him that a set of 43 lb. injectors from a Ford Lightning will eventually be in his future to ensure that he has a "fuel cushion" to work with once he breaks the 12-second barrier. He already has a 255 lph in-tank pump in the car fed by 10 AWG wire so he is set on the tank end, a new in-line filter and AFPR, so once 43#ers are in that's all he'll need. As for a turbo, an old-school TA-49 will do the job, and a used stretch intercooler will suffice once we find one. By way of comparison, back in 1998 I ran this very same combination on my '87 GN that had over 140,000 on its unopened stock motor and tuned it into the 11.30s at 118+ with no issues. It is also the same combination I am running on my sleeper TR now, except that I was fortunate to find an even better (& bigger!) stock location stretch intercooler than the one I had on the GN.

Sean: Tracer is going to test for his Orange belt in Tae Kwon Do this week!

Cheers,
Morgan

PS: Here are a few quick pics of the sleeper TR:

[bgn8711]

Guys,

Thankfully I think Morgan addressed many of the issues already so I can keep this short . Things are going well Neal and I (and Morgan on saturday) are going very slow and I get explanations for any retard questions I have which is great. I have about 12 pics of my phone that I'll have to E-mail to myself and put up here eventually. We put the new timing chain and gears on and cleaned out the intercooler and about half the hardware so next weeekend will be all putting things back together. Anyway, that's kind of where we're at and I'll give you more updates as they come. Morgan are you going to be available this weekend at all?

Brian
P.S Joanna is going to turn my blown HG into a picture frame with pics of my car in it...thought that was a cool idea.

[Vettezuki]

Holy crap, why does it need that much of a fuel cushion? I think my stock injectors are 26lb on a 450BHP V8, and they're only running about 80% duty at WOT. Do TBs run a bit rich to help keep the charge temperature down or something Then again, LSx motors are pretty lean burning, my A/F is like 14:1.

BTW, I'm counting on you to keep Brian to no faster than 11.7; I'm targeting 11.5.

[TRacer]

Running a bigger injector won’t want tax the fuel pump as much, plus it will give Brian more room as 36’s are maxed out at 114-115 MPH. Trying to compare a N/A LSx V8 with 10.5:1 compression and two additional cylinders to a forced induction V6 isn’t an apples to apples comparison, as the compression ratios we are talking about at 1.0 bar to 2.0 bar boost on a Buick V6 are in the 18:1 range which is Dodge/Cummins turbo diesel territory. To support those kinds of cylinder pressures and airflow, you’ve got to have fuel, and enough of it. On my 10-second GN I ran a PT-70 turbo and 72 pound injectors using a modified stock ECM and stock MAF, and that car still passed the chassis-dyno smog test, and no, I do not mean the “$250 to a friend” kind (this was the car that I let Brian drive back when he had his learner’s permit.)