VAC Motorsports | VAC 4.4 S65 Stroker Kit Build (CP, Carrillo, Darton, Schrick)

[bigjae1976]

It all depends on the service demands. Frequent track use? Hot climates? I'd stick with an N/A build.

[mdoughty]

Any dyno charts or video yet?

[ussoldierforhire]

subbed for the dyno charts

[Skunk]

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

One major drawback I see with sleeves in the S65 is heat transfer is greatly reduced when going from an aluminium bore to a cast iron liner (Alusil conducts heat at a rate 400% higher than that of cast iron). Since the S65 is very sensitive to knock, and knock is usually a result of higher cylinder temperatures, any means a person can take to get rid of heat will benefit the engine by means of additional timing and reduced detonation risk. Sleeves may be good, but I have yet to see the S65 block itself fail without a rod first failing and going through the side of it. Personally I don't think anyone has gotten to the HP celling of the block casting yet and I would like to see it pushed harder before people just start doing sleeves out of fear.

FYI, not all cylinder liners are iron. There are some Aluminum Metal Matrix Composite liners, but the do cost more (more expensive materials and manufacturing processes). The MMC liners do have a thermal conductivity near that of aluminum, but depends on the volume fraction of ceramic particulate, which usually ranges between 20-60%.

Cylinder liners will also be used on blocks when the increase of the bore diameter leads to rather thin cylinder walls that can no longer handle the stresses of the combustion. Some engine designers utilize sleeves to their advantage to try to get the smallest and lightest block possible and work in into the design from the beginning.

Good job describing the oleophilic nature of Alusil

Originally Posted by dvpouldar26

A dry sump setup allows for a much shallower pan. With a shallower pan, you have much more clearance to lower the motor down (Yes, that means new motor mounts if you do want to lower the motor down). The dry sump system itself would not lower the center of mass, but because of the shallower pan, it gives you more room and allows you to run the motor lower in the car, which in turn lowers your center of mass. A dry sump setup does not cause a lower in CG. The ability to lower your motor because of a shallower pan however does.

I think he was getting at why the dry sump would lower the CG if the engine was not lowering. There is still the transmission, which isn't changing unless you want to fork over some $$$ for an Xtrac, Ricardo, or Hewland, so the engine would not be moving lower otherwise. In addition to the reduced windage, as mentioned, you could also see a reduction of the amount of oil needed if the system is well designed. This would result from work on reducing aeration of the oil from spinning it in the reservoir tank. The reservoir can be place closer to the CG than where the oil pan is located and less sloshing of the oil can also make the CG slightly more stable as well.

Originally Posted by Mike@VAC

How many nikasil/alusil engines have you built/sleeved? How many sleeves have you supplied to people with these engines? We have done a bunch .

Mike, many years ago, I was working on sleeving a motorcycle engine. One of the things that needed to be considered what the deformation of the bore at temperature. When you guys are sleeving the engine, are you mounting a heat exchanger to the top of the block to simulate the operating conditions, thermally?

[Mike@VAC]

Sorry for the delay guys.

[m3an]

Originally Posted by Mike@VAC

Sorry for the delay guys.

you draw that yourself? lol, looks like connect the dots

[VCMpower]

I would love to see a video so I can hear this beauty! What an amazing build that will be.

Originally Posted by Mike@VAC

Sorry for the delay guys.

[swamp2]

Wow finally!

In summary...

539 (crank) hp - 30% gain
394 (crank) ft lb - 34% gain

122.5 hp/l VAC
103.5 hp/l stock

More torque at 3500 rpm than peak torque of stock engine (for all those who are torque obsessed...)

Impressive

[swamp2]

VAC: How "aggressive" is this build? More precisely:

• Is this still a daily driver, suitable for all climates, and use on track as well as a grocery getter?
• Will it run well on all of the various high octane "pump" fuels across the country?
• Any reason to believe the engines lifespan is significantly altered?
• Is the rpm limit raised?
• Any warranty offered?

Any cost information available yet?

[Mike@VAC]

Another project:

4.4, 13:1, custom aggressive cams and one off headers (e46 fitment) made 570/395 on the same dyno. Fatter curver and made power well past 8k.

A 600hp, 100 octane 4.4 is absolutely possible. These are all track cars, so they are running after market ECUs.

[Mike@VAC]

Originally Posted by swamp2

[*]Is this still a daily driver, suitable for all climates, and use on track as well as a grocery getter?[*]Will it run well on all of the various high octane "pump" fuels across the country?[*]Any reason to believe the engines lifespan is significantly altered?[*]Is the rpm limit raised?[*]Any warranty offered?[/list]
Any cost information available yet?

Our S65s are for track cars. We have not explored the stock DME, that's not really our target market.

This build came in in the low 30s with billet dry sump. Not a bad price really.

[mdoughty]

So would vac be unwilling to provide customers who daily their cars the gts treatment. Namely the increased stroke on the stock bore with a custom crank and new cams that will shift the power curve to the right unlike the the present stroked motor options (dinan, rd sport). I believe several of the the tuners who frequent this forum would be willing to tune on the stock dme.

[Mike@VAC]

Unwilling is not the right word, we simply have not gotten to the street stroker kits yet. We have everything but the tuning sorted and proven - that is actually quite achievable, just need to coordinate and allocate the time. 2014-2015 hopefully

Trust me, I'd LOVE to be able to offer such a solution for sale. We are not there yet, but IMO we are still in the beginning of the mod lifecycle for the S65. In 2012 we built quite a few track and street M10s, M20s, S14s, M/S5Xs, and S54s. For the S65, we haven't seen anything yet ;-)

Originally Posted by mdoughty

So would vac be unwilling to provide customers who daily their cars the gts treatment. Namely the increased stroke on the stock bore with a custom crank and new cams that will shift the power curve to the right unlike the the present stroked motor options (dinan, rd sport). I believe several of the the tuners who frequent this forum would be willing to tune on the stock dme.

[jordanE92]

Originally Posted by Mike@VAC

For the S65, we haven't seen anything yet ;-)

Can't wait! I'm surprised it's been this long, I'd be willing to sell another car right now for a streetable 4.4 s65 and proper brakes.

[leigh]

How about a low comp motor? Any info about that 4.4 you guys did with the vf supercharger on it?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Mike@VAC

Unwilling is not the right word, we simply have not gotten to the street stroker kits yet. We have everything but the tuning sorted and proven - that is actually quite achievable, just need to coordinate and allocate the time. 2014-2015 hopefully

Trust me, I'd LOVE to be able to offer such a solution for sale. We are not there yet, but IMO we are still in the beginning of the mod lifecycle for the S65. In 2012 we built quite a few track and street M10s, M20s, S14s, M/S5Xs, and S54s. For the S65, we haven't seen anything yet ;-)

Very nice honesty/integrity here.

[M3PO]

I would love to have something like this over an SC, any day. And twice on sundays!

[mdoughty]

Originally Posted by M3PO

I would love to have something like this over an SC, any day. And twice on sundays!

I'm with you, surely there is a motor builder that can give our motors the gts treatment.