pros and cons of stroker kit

[pete-r]

as above ,what are the pros and cons of making the bore bigger?and what is the maximum,i.e 2.2,2.3etc?is it a reliable conversion?what would need to be done to the head?if anything.what cams would be needed?sorry for all the questions ,but id appreiciate some sound advice on this .obviously a more mahoosive turbo would be required?
pete.

 

[ex-gtir]

piston velocity is greater so dont like being reved and conrod angle can get sharp cause side loading of pistons (some say)

 

[Keira]

you can go 2.4 very max, jwt do a stroker for it...

you can do 2.2 on standard sized rods with 90mm pistons using liners if you know where to look

 

[pete-r]

jwt?2.4,would this be too much stress on the block?are there any R,s with a 2.4 block?i take it the bigger the bore,the sharper the con rod angle?doesnt the stroker kit crank take this into consideration?

 

[pete-r]

you can do 2.2 on standard sized rods with 90mm pistons using liners if you know where to look .

so i wouldnt need a full stroker kit for this keiron?what about the crank,could i retain the standard one?

 

[Fast Guy]

as above ,what are the pros and cons of making the bore bigger?...............is it a reliable conversion?.............what would need to be done to the head?if anything.what cams would be needed?.................obviously a more mahoosive turbo would be required?
pete.

You get more power and torque with less effort from a stroker kit. ie you can run less boost to make the same power or the same boost to make more power.
The kits are all made by reputable companies so there's no reason why it shouldn't be as reliable as the Nissan kit as long as it's put together properly.
You could do nothing to the head if you wanted, it would still work. If you want tho you could get the head ported and fit wilder cams. They should work be abit more friendly nearer idle with the stroker kit than the standard capacity as the engine is sucking more air in.
You could stick with the standard turbo, but it would be a waste not to go at least abit bigger and make use of the reduced lag the extra capacity will give you.

 

[Dooie Pop Pop]

sorry to hijack but iv gotta ask. wouldn' t you just be beter off just building a higher revving 2ltr engine?

 

[pete-r]

thanks fast guy.what about what keiron said about the 90mm pistons,liners and standard rods,could i still use the standard crank?

 

[pete-r]

thats why im asking stu.im just doing my homework first to see what the better option is.i havent seen many 2.2s or bigger so dont really know the sort of limits are within reach with these options.i havent decided on this route,yet .

 

[Keira]

thanks fast guy.what about what keiron said about the 90mm pistons,liners and standard rods,could i still use the standard crank?

yes, the increase in capactity is down to the massive overbore not the stroke on the crank, the liners will give strength to the block...

pm for more info

 

[Fast Guy]

sorry to hijack but iv gotta ask. wouldn' t you just be beter off just building a higher revving 2ltr engine?

I don't know to be honest.
You could either go high revs 2L, but I think it'll start getting exspensive very quickly and there's only so high you can go (as noone probably makes stuff for silly revs 9000+??)
Or you could go large capacity and make the same power on less revs and boost but then you might need to alter the gearing to make optimum use of the power/torque (even tho it'd be just as happy if you left the gearing alone)

 

[pete-r]

whats the difference then with a stroker kits crank and the original?so basically i shouldnt need to fork out for an expensive stroker kit?

 

[Fast Guy]

The stroker crank will have a longer stroke than the standard crank. You could just go the overbore route, but that won't get you as much capacity increase as boring and increasing the stroke.

 

[AJ4]

Another point to note is changing the bore / stroke ratio if you just go for an overbore without a stroked crank. Some people get really anal about it not being square ( 86 x 86 ) There is some pro's and con's about long stokes anyway, about the longer time the piston dwells at the top of the stroke or something, can't really remember...

Just something else to consider anyway

 

[campbellju]

Pro: As per everyone elses (more) Intelligent comments above
Con: Blooming expensive

Looked into it and then just overbored with larger pistons to give 2050cc

Not a storker kit but better bang per buck for a 400bhp type car. If I was after 500-600 then I'd have considered it more.

 

[Rishi]

There is some pro's and con's about long stokes anyway, about the longer time the piston dwells at the top of the stroke or something, can't really remember...

Yeah its the piston speed... You can calculate this from the bore and stroke...

You don't want too high a piston speed...



Rishi

 

[AJ4]

thats what I was thinking of, cheers. I also remember something about the longer the dwell at the top of the cylinder the better heat dissipation because the piston is moving slower, and approaches TDC slower which lessens det. Or its the other way round. Or something.

 

[robinsongtir]

I have gone the stroker route with mine but from what the thread seems to convey is that stroker+high revs doesn't go together however I am gonna be using steel rods and billet crank the rods and crank are very light as well I am gonna be revving to 8500rpm minimum in my car so how can this work is it down to having a lighter assembly? this is with a 2.3 displacement.

 

[pete-r]

where are you getting your parts from robinson?

 

[pete-r]

am i right in saying,bigger the bore then more torque?