When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I've got 180/30s. I'm sure once I have some parts in front of me to start fitting together my mind will wander less.
copy that, not sure why I thought you had the 205/30
I have run the 180/30 and the 363/68 .91 on both an auto and a zf6, they pair very well together. I would see zero reason to change the housing size
copy that, not sure why I thought you had the 205/30 I have run the 180/30 and the 363/68 .91 on both an auto and a zf6, they pair very well together. I would see zero reason to change the housing size
You're probably right. I guess I figured the smaller housing would increase the power-band by lowing peak torque RPM. That's my big goal with this build*. That being said, I have no idea if a gated S300 housing would even clear the RR plenums.
*HEUI seems kind of wasted above 2800 RPM what with shrinking injection window and comparatively slow injection. Lot of people use hybrids to deal with this and focus on big power between 2000-3000... not sure why there's fewer looking for a wider power-band with more torque below 2k?
You're probably right. I guess I figured the smaller housing would increase the power-band by lowing peak torque RPM. That's my big goal with this build*. That being said, I have no idea if a gated S300 housing would even clear the RR plenums.
*HEUI seems kind of wasted above 2800 RPM what with shrinking injection window and comparatively slow injection. Lot of people use hybrids to deal with this and focus on big power between 2000-3000... not sure why there's fewer looking for a wider power-band with more torque below 2k?
Housing choice is also dependent on elevation, being on the west coast this may be a factor to consider.
not sure why there's fewer looking for a wider power-band with more torque below 2k?
Maybe due to windowed blocks of the past?
I agree, especially with the 4R100. Loads of torque between 1500-2500 would be great as it seems mine is always floating in there somewhere. The PMRs are currently one thing keeping me from trying the .83 housing.
Lots of people fear getting a windowed block when adding power at lower RPM. DP Tuner was apparently famous for that which is why they have fallen out of favor. I may be jinxing myself but I have been running a DP Tuner with a somewhat built bottom end (that’s what she said) and I like it a lot.
Edit: @RacinJasonWV beat me to it.
I agree, especially with the 4R100. Loads of torque between 1500-2500 would be great as it seems mine is always floating in there somewhere. The PMRs are currently one thing keeping me from trying the .83 housing.
Forget to reply to your earlier post in this thread, my truck has PMRs with the .83 housing.
Lots of people fear getting a windowed block when adding power at lower RPM. DP Tuner was apparently famous for that which is why they have fallen out of favor.
Originally Posted by RacinJasonWV
Maybe due to windowed blocks of the past?
This is a valid concern. I also get the impression that, for a variety of cultural and historical reasons, the enthusiasts and the market targeting them have other priorities (mostly if you're spending lots of money you're after big peak power).
Originally Posted by RacinJasonWV
I agree, especially with the 4R100. Loads of torque between 1500-2500 would be great as it seems mine is always floating in there somewhere
Yeah I feel like the 4R100 makes the narrow power-band more apparent. Maybe less of an issue with the 6-speed?
Originally Posted by RacinJasonWV
The PMRs are currently one thing keeping me from trying the .83 housing.
Originally Posted by brokestroke
Forget to reply to your earlier post in this thread, my truck has PMRs with the .83 housing.
IIRC the T444E High Torque config was rated as producing a peak 620 ft-lb at 1400RPM, and those used PMRs after the changeover.
Lots of people fear getting a windowed block when adding power at lower RPM. DP Tuner was apparently famous for that which is why they have fallen out of favor. I may be jinxing myself but I have been running a DP Tuner with a somewhat built bottom end (that’s what she said) and I like it a lot.
Edit: @RacinJasonWV beat me to it.
Anybody that has met you, knows, you don't have a "somewhat" built bottom end.
IMO as long as boost stays below 30psi @ 2000rpm or 20psi @ 1800rpm you should have nothing to worry about if you have good tuning. Have been running like this for a few years now on a stock bottom end with no concerns. Hitting 30psi between 2000-2100rpm makes for a fantastic towing experience and great powerband. That is A LOT of air getting crammed into the engine.
This is a valid concern. I also get the impression that, for a variety of cultural and historical reasons, the enthusiasts and the market targeting them have other priorities (mostly if you're spending lots of money you're after big peak power).
Yeah I get that impression too. To be specific, it seems to be all about tractor-pulling which doesn’t always translate to long-term reliability.
Originally Posted by PriusLover
Yeah I feel like the 4R100 makes the narrow power-band more apparent. Maybe less of an issue with the 6-speed?
That’s true of any “peaky” engine attached to a transmission with too few gears. It is why race cars have gearboxes with as many gears as they can cram in.
For fun. I think this one has maybe 200k on it. It becomes a tenth under sized below the groove. Not bad for iron guides?
I found the intake valves from the original 350k engine while sorting through some boxes... Evidently old shop cleaned them up.
The stems all read 0.0001 to 0.0002 over the minimum size clearance, with a tighter distribution than the new melling valves. I was considering bronze valve guides but this tells me that iron guides are the way to go.
This is a valid concern. I also get the impression that, for a variety of cultural and historical reasons, the enthusiasts and the market targeting them have other priorities (mostly if you're spending lots of money you're after big peak power).
Yeah I feel like the 4R100 makes the narrow power-band more apparent. Maybe less of an issue with the 6-speed?
Grunt grunt mo big powa.
I agree, lots of people just want big HP numbers no matter what. Many others just don’t understand what those bigger parts do to their powerband, or that there’s even such a thing.
Drive-ability will always be more pleasant with a broad torque curve. And in the case of the 7.3, the typical cruising rpm is fairly low with the 4R100. It’s easy to get under the curve unless running the ZF6 or adjusting shift points.
There’s just not enough gears in our trucks. The band between gears tends to stretch beyond the range of good power. Shift up, rpm too low. Shift down, rpm is screaming at you. Stock-ish powerband seems to help this… go figure.