DaFlyinSkwirl (PJ) - APU wrote:but show me a bolt on ohv thats been REMOTELY close to a 15.6 and 88mph+
I've never heard of an ohv breaking into the 15s without at least headwork or nitrous
and a mid 15 is a lousy time for an eco (assuming base model and 5 speed)
we like our engines better because they're more powerful from the factory, and have larger aftermarket support than the LN2.
Well I guess Event has seen a near bone stock LN2 in the 15's, but I don't understand what it matters if it's bolt on or not. Never understood why you've made such a big deal about wanting to keep the stock bottom end on your car either. Your car is a 14 second car. It is what it is, a 14 second car. Not a 14 second car on the stock wrist pins. Not a 14 second car on the stock main bearings. Not a 14 second car on triflow cams. Not a 14 second car on a tsudo header. It's a 14 second car, nothing more, nothing less. With the time and money (unless you're getting this $h!t for free
) you've already spent you could have had a faster OHV with your original engine.
You yourself have said in this post you want to see E/T and MPH. If you're serious about racing that's all that matters. If you had boosted your old LN2 and ran a 14.004 it would have been the same as your ECO running 14.004. I could care less about the N/A to boosted argument because the bottom line is 14.004. That isn't fast by any stretch of the imagination to begin with.
Aftermarket support. You lost me here on this one. You can get rods, pistons, a cam regrind, higher ratio rocker arms, oversized valves, DIY lifter upgrade, stronger pushrods, junkyard TB swap, intake, and header. You can also get a Patriot head, or have one worked on at a machine shop. Turbo kits and nitrous is available. Now if you're talking about aftermarket support like JBP's lifters and valve springs for the LN2 believe me when I'll say I'll pass on those. I'm not sure what else there is unless there is some uber leet aftermarket timing set I should know about. A machine shop is going to play an important part with building the LN2, and I don't need ten different manufacturers making a header for my car, only one good manufacturer. That's why I just said pistons and not wiseco pistons.
What I'd really like to know PJ since I honestly can't remember is were you running the stock cam grind and compression (stock pistons) on your OHV. I think you could have been making more power before going to the eco and did a great disservice to the OHV crowd in doing so. You're ballsy enough to do this and push the envelope, and would have been someone who could get the most out of the OHV because of this. Me on the other hand, I'm too lazy, too old (well old enough to grow out of spending all my time on cars or whatever hobby), married, got another kid on the way, really need to sell and get a four door anyway, work's a bitch...hell the list of excuses could keep growing
I just don't want people coming up to get discouraged about the OHV. The potential is there if you don't mind going beyond bolt ons.
Quote:
Aftermarket support. You lost me here on this one. You can get rods, pistons, a cam regrind, higher ratio rocker arms, oversized valves, DIY lifter upgrade, stronger pushrods, junkyard TB swap, intake, and header. You can also get a Patriot head, or have one worked on at a machine shop. Turbo kits and nitrous is available. Now if you're talking about aftermarket support like JBP's lifters and valve springs for the LN2 believe me when I'll say I'll pass on those. I'm not sure what else there is unless there is some uber leet aftermarket timing set I should know about. A machine shop is going to play an important part with building the LN2, and I don't need ten different manufacturers making a header for my car, only one good manufacturer. That's why I just said pistons and not wiseco pistons.
ecos have multiple off the shelf cnc ported heads available, intake manifolds, semi-plug-and-play stand alone ECUs, about 20 different sets of off the shelf cams available, 2 companies make 3 different cranks one in forged steel and the other 2 are billet steel, 2 different companies make high strength steel cylinder liners, adjustable gears for cam timing, not to mention race engine short blocks from gm directly, hardened oil pump gears, jesel valvetrain CNC machined heat treated followers (or more commonly (yet incorrectly) referred to as rockers).
Trust me, its bigger. I've been on both sides of the fence. You can still get this stuff for an OHV but it'll almost always be a retrofit or a custom DIY. More specialized parts for the eco are readily available.
Quote:
You yourself have said in this post you want to see E/T and MPH. If you're serious about racing that's all that matters. If you had boosted your old LN2 and ran a 14.004 it would have been the same as your ECO running 14.004. I could care less about the N/A to boosted argument because the bottom line is 14.004. That isn't fast by any stretch of the imagination to begin with.
I disagree. There's a BIG difference between running a 14 with the help of a turbocharger. I don't mean to offend, but in all honesty its kind of embarassing.. a 14 in a turbocharged car that weighs less than 3000lbs is not something to brag about.
boosted to n/a is a valid consideration for ET and MPH. Just as I wouldn't expect an auto to run as fast as a manual (up to a certain degree of modification). If you told me you had a 12 second boosted J, I'd be a little impressed, but its becoming more common now. if you said you had a 12 second ALL MOTOR J, then I'd be completely enamored.
also the reason I like to brag about the bottom end of my eco being factory is not many people are willing to pull out pistons and rods unless they're doing something big. I wanted to see how far I could push the eco without touching anything that major. A head swap isn't really that difficult in the grand scheme of things, especially if you buy an aftermarket head with a valvetrain already installed... its pretty much a bolt on affair.. no measuring or spec'ing required.. just bolt it up and go. Which is something a lot of modders can easily swallow.. especially those not willing to go to extreme lengths with their cars.
I wanted the all motor skwirl to be decently fast, yet easily accesible to a beginner to intermediate tuner/modder.. I want people to say "damn I could do that with my Jbody and it wouldn't even cost that much..."
Quote:
What I'd really like to know PJ since I honestly can't remember is were you running the stock cam grind and compression (stock pistons) on your OHV. I think you could have been making more power before going to the eco and did a great disservice to the OHV crowd in doing so. You're ballsy enough to do this and push the envelope, and would have been someone who could get the most out of the OHV because of this.
the bottom on that engine was again totally stock, which includes the cam.
the other thing is at that point in time, Jbodies had pretty much zero tuning support. that was in the days before HPT.
The setup I had with some tuning could have hit a 15.4 probably. If i upgraded my cam it could have gone faster, but I'll never know. Not many companies make cams. I got tired of having to track stuff down all the time for a car that would never see a 14 n/a.
I personally had a lot of bad luck with the OHV, even before all the modification done to it... and whereas I know its an engine just like anything else, I have a personal prejudice against owning one EVER again..
I've always wanted an eco and once I learned enough about the platform and got the job making the right money and researched it I did what I wanted and I've never been happier.
In the past year or so I've seen a lot more cars here get very fast and I see more of the same next year. Thanks A LOT in part to HPT for opening up our ecus, and letting a lot of the tuners figure out wtf to do to get the most out of these cars and engines.
I really hope that the stereotype of the LN2 gets lessened (it'll never go away completely) and the playing field is leveled a bit between the ohv and the DOHC engines.
A race where its a fight all the way to the end is way more exciting than one where you completely destroy the car sitting next to you.
I know some in the OHV crowd are still pissed at me for swapping calling me a traitor and what not but personally have absolutely no desire for that engine anymore.
Its all up to you guys now.
oh pj hun its on! lol
DaFlyinSkwirl wrote:Jazer wrote:I test drove an ecotec when i myself had doubts about the LN2 (because everyone said it was a piece of @!#$, and wasnt worth putting money in, etc... and it was before i knew much about it, so i thought an ecotec would be better) i drove one and i was shocked that there was no noticable difference than my lil OHV. Thats when i decided to stick with the OHV,
jess I hate to argue about it cuz you know I love you <333
but show me a bolt on ohv thats been REMOTELY close to a 15.6 and 88mph+
I've never heard of an ohv breaking into the 15s without at least headwork or nitrous
and a mid 15 is a lousy time for an eco (assuming base model and 5 speed)
I was more aiming at basic driving. there is such a minimal difference i personally couldnt notice one at all, and its not like the ecotec i drove was beat to death, it had 3k miles whereas my ohv had 30k+ at the time... i guess part of what i was getting at is alot of people do the LN2 to L61 swap and they leave it like that, dont go all out race with it, and just talk down on the LN2... please tell me a reason for swapping in that specific case? especially when the LN2 is known to last a very long time if taken care of, like any engine really. If you just want toi get a lil more "spunk" out of your car, theres absolutely no need to go through and do an entire swap. it varies on what your goal is. the ecotec does have a gm build guide and has a lot of potential... it also comes down to personal preference... some people are just more fascinated by a certain engine type, and if youve done your research and are really intrigued by that engine spcifically, then by all means do the swap, more power to you. its the people that are uninformed and jump into it, that i dont understand....
And if someone is going to argue that if its faster on the track its faster on the street (IE, i felt no difference street driving, but the ecotec still pulls better times than the OHV)... well im confused at how my cavalier took my SS off the line all the way through maxing third
multiple times (where i would potentially cross the line in the 1/4) and that SS is a low 13 second car, theres no way my OHV is faster on the track but it still ate up its glory on the street... i have yet to run it but i would estimate it would be somewhere in the 14s... my goal is a 14 flat on it's current build, or at least close.
DaFlyinSkwirl wrote:but they sure do put out a lot more than the twin cam OR the LN2 before folding. (assuming it's in the hands of a competent tuner)
From what I have read on here, there is no record of an LN2 folding that had a good tune...
DaFlyinSkwirl wrote:there's only 2 ohv I can think of that have hit 13s and thats Adler (who's car is long since dismantled), and another that I cannot remember his name.
I would say 3, but i'm unsure if cavattack has hit 13s yet.. but I know he has the power to do it.
Just wait till i get my baby on the track... (stupid NED closes so early...). And I dont want to sound like another "talker" not "doer" on this site, but I think ive at least proved im more than half way there...just have to fix my damn SS that has since blew her ring lands... another ecotec
then i can finish my LN2 block... i guarantee it will be in the 12s, it is my goal, and i will get there. Part of that goal, in fact most of it is because I will be proud of myself with what ive done with that motor, and the other part of that goal is to prove that 100% that engine has potential and it CAN and WILL play with the "big boys".
I wish that I could give E/T and MPH to you PJ but you can thank NED for closing so early, haha. So first day it opens up (of course -
late spring...) you can bet ill be there
ohvrolla wrote:I just don't want people coming up to get discouraged about the OHV. The potential is there
Bingo... that pretty much sums up what i was getting at
DaFlyinSkwirl wrote: I have a personal prejudice against owning one EVER again..
haha PJ i had to let the squirrel outa the bag.. haha. ok not funny.... what about the umm
*cough cough* green sunfire you
*cough cough* own...?
i know it doesnt run but its a 2.2 ohv!!!
<3 you
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Friday, November 02, 2007 6:18 AM
Quote:
With the time and money (unless you're getting this $h!t for free ) you've already spent you could have had a faster OHV with your original engine.
Are you kidding? With the amount of money he's put into the swap, then the head, the cams, the header, the HO manifold, etc, etc, etc, and considering that before the real trouble with the OHV started that he had already dumped a ton of money into that motor, if you handed me a check for the amount that has been spent on the skwirl's various engine phases since it was stock, I could probably build you an 11 second OHV AND a car to put it in. But you know what, thats fine. PJ's got the money, and can do what he wants. And what he's done so far, is show a lot of people on here exactly how wrong they were about a lot of things. I remember not too long ago that no one thought NA mods on an Eco were worth it because Rodimus said so. Now we know thats not how it is. We also know how much ridiculous abuse an Eco and a getrag tranny can take (trust me, anyone who thinks these transmissions are weak needs to ride with PJ for 5 minutes... once you realize thats how he drives 24/7 and that his first trans had something over 75K on it before he broke a shift fork (we think), you understand just how tough these things are). And in the end, with what he's saying, he's right. The OHV camp needs to stop talking and start doing, and I'm just as guilty as anybody else. For a long time now, I've said to a lot of people, don't talk about what you're going to do, talk about what you've DONE. You can say you're going to have the fastest OHV or the fastest Jbody or run this time or that time, but all of that just gets lost in all of the other oral diarrhea this place has started to become famous for. We need somebody to come up with results. I personally need to get off my ass and get started on my car. Hey now... Slow, you wanna throw that motor in an 87 Z hatch?
Arrival Blue 04 LS Sport
Eco
Turbo
Megasquirt
'Nuff said
Eco has support because GM spent $$ to build race parts, spent time and $$ to make it fast, and because they, GM, has said the Eco is going to be "the" engine for the future. Aftermarket is willing to invest when they see the potential return. LN2 just stays below the radar.
Cost is a big issue for me as well as others. I believe in the LN2 but my days of having $300-$400 lying around to blow are long over. And when I had that kind of freedom, I also had smallblock Chevy powered cars to drive and play with. So I see a double "gotcha" in that I have a preconcieved idea of the dollar to horsepower ratio I'm looking for, and I have to be very careful to spend my dollars wisely.
Quote:
Hey now... Slow, you wanna throw that motor in an 87 Z hatch?
Hmmm... Jersey ain't that far away, if ya don't count the commute time on Rte 1! Maybe a 1st gen hatch would be a good alternative for my engine.
Oh, and BTW PJ, remember about 2 yrs ago when I said "I'm going Eco in a 2nd gen" and you said "No! OHV!" I don't forget little things like that.
-->Slow
jazer wrote:what about the umm *cough cough* green sunfire you *cough cough* own...?
its black, and I'm selling it to teh jeffie
slow wrote:Oh, and BTW PJ, remember about 2 yrs ago when I said "I'm going Eco in a 2nd gen" and you said "No! OHV!" I don't forget little things like that.
a lot changes in 2 years, doesn't it? lol god that was so long ago
i'm coming off as harsh but thats because I want you guys to get pissed off. when you get angry, you also get determined.
jess, next year I'm coming to NED when it opens up.
i thought you had said it was green.. o-well, w/e. lol. it was still an OHV you bought, haha
slowolej wrote:Cost is a big issue for me as well as others. I believe in the LN2 but my days of having $300-$400 lying around to blow are long over. And when I had that kind of freedom, I also had smallblock Chevy powered cars to drive and play with. So I see a double "gotcha" in that I have a preconcieved idea of the dollar to horsepower ratio I'm looking for, and I have to be very careful to spend my dollars wisely.-->Slow
I know exactly where your coming from. Whenever I eventually get around to doing the clutch I'd like to pull the engine and have the cam sent off for a regrind, but that's about as far as I can justify spending on a econobox four cylinder. If I wasn't married with a family it might be a different story, but I really don't need to cheat them by spending too much time or money on a **gulp** Cavalier. Plus computers is a more expensive hobby for me, and this X1900XT graphics card is about to take a beating when Crysis comes out so there's an immediate few hundred dollar upgrade. If anyone is in the market for a X1900XT...............
PJ the reason I mention the stock bottom end is because the top end is responsible for a lot of the power, and there isn't too much stock left on your top end
. Shame you had problems with the OHV because I don't think N/A 14's is that far fetched.
Hmm...
Chevette: Relatively unrespected econo-car w/ 1990lbs weight, a tough rally-proved chassis, RWD & factory rear suspension like that found in the 3rd-gen F-body.
LN2: Generally unrespected econo-model engine (Like most econo-model vehicle engines are) capable of being built to produce 300+hp & live (On the street, no less).
Chevette + LN2 = Whoa Nellie! Can you say into the 11s, or 10s boys & girls? I knew that 'cha could!
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Nickelin Dimer wrote:LN2: Generally unrespected econo-model engine (Like most econo-model vehicle engines are) capable of being built to produce 300+hp & live (On the street, no less).
Sooooo can it do it N/A ?????? The Quad Family and the Eco can...
Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:Sooooo can it do it N/A ?????? The Quad Family and the Eco can...
Karo wasn't even 300, and I haven't seen an ECO remotely close to that. Where are you getting these optimistic results?
fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Hahaha, doesn't his username explain enough Notec?
Arrival Blue 04 LS Sport
Eco
Turbo
Megasquirt
'Nuff said
OHV notec wrote:Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:Sooooo can it do it N/A ?????? The Quad Family and the Eco can...
Karo wasn't even 300, and I haven't seen an ECO remotely close to that. Where are you getting these optimistic results?
there IS an ecotec drag car thats 2.6 liters and 350hp all motor.. granted its not really relevant since its a big time build but I'll post pics of it when I get home
from what I hear it runs the 1/4 in mid 10s with an automatic transmission (4t65e)
I've never seen the car myself unfortunatley but I do have pictures of it that I will post when I get home
OHV notec wrote:Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:Sooooo can it do it N/A ?????? The Quad Family and the Eco can...
Karo wasn't even 300, and I haven't seen an ECO remotely close to that. Where are you getting these optimistic results?
no but Karo was 259 to the wheels... which means about 275 - 285 ish to the fly wheel... thats damn near close to 300 ... and if the LD9 can do that... im sure the Eco could be built to do the same (i'm sure most eco fans will not disagree with that statement)
so my original question to the OP still stands... can the LN2 do it N/A
Once an OHV owner figures out how to go fast... He has by then already sold his OHV
.
My Cav
I give up...
i'm buying a VW those people love trees, so they should love eachother too... "Andy"
Thanks Jack! BTW, wadaya think of the header I've tried to bring to everyones attention here?
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
MadJack wrote:Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:so my original question to the OP still stands... can the LN2 do it N/A
Darkstars wrote:anything can be fast with enough money...
Custom billet cam and mechanical roller lifters (A-La JuicedZ4) custom forged pistons, forged 5.7" rods, 1.84"/1.497" valves, billet crank, custom sheet metel intake, stand alone ECU...
Speed costs money, how fast you go all depends on how deep your pockets are! (and how much time and knowledge you care to put in to it.)
Of course, my pockets aren't very deep at all!
Honestly, if I had that kind of money and wanted to go fast a Cavalier would not be my choice regardless of engine.
Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:OHV notec wrote:Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:Sooooo can it do it N/A ?????? The Quad Family and the Eco can...
Karo wasn't even 300, and I haven't seen an ECO remotely close to that. Where are you getting these optimistic results?
no but Karo was 259 to the wheels... which means about 275 - 285 ish to the fly wheel... thats damn near close to 300 ... and if the LD9 can do that... im sure the Eco could be built to do the same (i'm sure most eco fans will not disagree with that statement)
so my original question to the OP still stands... can the LN2 do it N/A
i'd say yes. granted i'm not the OP
byron clemens did 13.6N/A and his setup wasnt really maxed out. he was part of the sdefi automotive group. this was around 1998 - early 2000's before any real tuning software or reflashes were available.
also the guy i bought my griffin dual core rad from, was running 13.1 compression and a 3 inch exhaust on an N/A setup if i remember right. wrecked the chassis, but parted out the engine.
stuff like this can be done. its not far fetched. sure the entire internals will need to be custom forged stuff, but the LN2 is well capable of doing so. now you might not be on stock computer/ECU.
but considering there have been quite a few LN2 builds without aftermarket cams, no tuning, and running relatively low compression ratios of 10:1, 9.5:1 and similar, and they are quite near the 200crank HP level..... it wouldnt take a bag of hammers to nail this one.
now my question here is, whats so special about 300 hp? is there some spinoff or hidden treasure linked to it? perhaps a mighty spartan feel of having 300 associated with the car? whats the deal? or has engine building here now be delegated to making dyno queens where numbers only matter?
DaFlyinSkwirl (PJ) - APU wrote:there IS an ecotec drag car thats 2.6 liters and 350hp all motor.. granted its not really relevant since its a big time build but I'll post pics of it when I get home
from what I hear it runs the 1/4 in mid 10s with an automatic transmission (4t65e)
I've never seen the car myself unfortunately but I do have pictures of it that I will post when I get home
With the resources that guy had, any motor could see rediculous power lol. Although, the ECO does have some qualities that make it very potent in an NA build, although I've never seen anyone actually mention them.
Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:no but Karo was 259 to the wheels... which means about 275 - 285 ish to the fly wheel... thats damn near close to 300 ... and if the LD9 can do that... im sure the Eco could be built to do the same (i'm sure most eco fans will not disagree with that statement)
so my original question to the OP still stands... can the LN2 do it N/A
275-285 is NOT 300. Once you get to numbers that high, anything more is not easy to come by. I don't see 259 to the wheels being impossible for an LN2, although it may not be quite as "well-mannered" as Karo's motor was. The Quad and Eco obviously have displacement on their side, which is hard to make up for, but if you go to power/displacement the results could get interesting?
Funky Bottoms (Event) wrote:or has engine building here now be delegated to making dyno queens where numbers only matter?
Well said...powerband>>all.
fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Funky, all I can figure with the 300hp mark is that it ties to the early old-school days of factory power:
300hp was seen as a lofty, mystical mark that had yet to be achieved by a N/A production powerplant. Heck, even most Hot-rodders (about 99
had yet to touch that mark on the street back then. When Ma Mopar finally did it in '55 in a striped-down, entry-level luxury model (Re: Chrysler 300) with a 331ci V-8 (The Gen-1 Hemi) people hurrahed over the notion that such an efficient production of power had been reached. Yes, F/I had been done before this, but F/I was relatively misunderstood by most people back then as being a performance-only thing that stressed the engine more. What Chrysler did was like breaking the sound-barrier in the automotive world back then. In super-cruise, that is.
F.fwd to today when the 4-cyl is seen like the V-8 was back then and suddenly that old mystical mark is back again. And again, there are arguements on how to achieve it. Whether you go N/A or F/I, cam in-block or over the head (Even in pairs), nitrous or blower or turbo, all I know is this: 1.) Total internal displacement of the engine (And how it is displaced) has the greatest effect on total power produced. 2.) The only way to really make a small engine produce a level power like that of a larger engine's output outside of overall design is to make it breathe like a bigger engine & feed it accordingly. And 3.) Proven designs in power production net best results in a trickle-down effect. The Quad4 is Lotus proven, but the LN2's head design in both the 2.2L & 2200 is Big-block Chevy proven. And anyone who knows what can be done with the BBC knows it's all trickle-down for the LN2. I mean, hey... ever hear of Gale Banks? He was blow-drying BBCs in boats when most people only thought to go the Roots-route. Heck, even his truck had twin-turbos at the time. Given that, don't it make sense to go with the LN2?
Excuse me if this is ill-timed, but three more messages linked to this thread came up while writing this. Think I'll go check them now...
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Funky, all I can figure with the 300hp mark is that it ties to the early old-school days of factory power:
300hp was seen as a lofty, mystical mark that had yet to be achieved by a N/A production powerplant. Heck, even most Hot-rodders (about 99 had yet to touch that mark on the street back then. When Ma Mopar finally did it in '55 in a striped-down, entry-level luxury model (Re: Chrysler 300) with a 331ci V-8 (The Gen-1 Hemi) people hurrahed over the notion that such an efficient production of power had been reached. Yes, F/I had been done before this, but F/I was relatively misunderstood by most people back then as being a performance-only thing that stressed the engine more. What Chrysler did was like breaking the sound-barrier in the automotive world back then. In super-cruise, that is.
F.fwd to today when the 4-cyl is seen like the V-8 was back then and suddenly that old mystical mark is back again. And again, there are arguements on how to achieve it. Whether you go N/A or F/I, cam in-block or over the head (Even in pairs), nitrous or blower or turbo, all I know is this: 1.) Total internal displacement of the engine (And how it is displaced) has the greatest effect on total power produced. 2.) The only way to really make a small engine produce a level power like that of a larger engine's output outside of overall design is to make it breathe like a bigger engine & feed it accordingly. And 3.) Proven designs in power production net best results in a trickle-down effect. The Quad4 is Lotus proven, but the LN2's head design in both the 2.2L & 2200 is Big-block Chevy proven. And anyone who knows what can be done with the BBC knows it's all trickle-down for the LN2. I mean, hey... ever hear of Gale Banks? He was blow-drying BBCs in boats when most people only thought to go the Roots-route. Heck, even his truck had twin-turbos at the time. Given that, don't it make sense to go with the LN2?
Excuse me if this is ill-timed, but three more messages linked to this thread came up while writing this. Think I'll go check them now...
understandable, but that was the knowledge or lack there of with engines back in the day. meaning the advancement and racing scene and variety was slim and limited, but still able to churn out a bad arse car.....
also speaking of cars, 300 was pushing a tank darn near, where as today i can push most cars built for exercise and fun.
also back then, as said, it was v-8 territory. way easier to pull 300 from a v-8 than an inline 4. but if you feel its back, hey brah, thats cool. nothing wrong with that. the market, materials, and know how/technology can support it in so many ways. i mean they've built a documented 150mph geo metro with 3 cylinders, and that was just a group of (no pun intended) nickle and dime high school automotive tech class more or less... most of it was done with donated used parts...
my honest view. LN2 well capable of doing that bench mark. LD9 well capable as well as the Ecotec. kinda like my decision the past few months (ironic since you mentioned the Chrysler 300) did i want to get a charger, 300, or magnum.... i went with the charger, but really its all preference. the same can be achieved with either of the three.
