625 PS at 8,4xx RPM / S85-EVO High Duration Camshaft Program
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.ย. 2024
- Coming soon: S85-EVO High Duration Camshaft Program
--
Estimated Power: 625 PS crank
WHP: 522whp / 500whp weather adjusted on a Mustang Powerdyno dyno
Peak Power +/- 8,450 RPM
Max Rev: 8,800 RPM
Fuel use: 91 octane
Gains over stock: +/- 100 whp
Gains over FBO: +/- 50 whp
The programs consist of turnkey packages of high duration camshafts, uprated & lightened valve springs and optional lightweight retainers.
Off-the-shelf tuning is included and remote dyno tuning will be available.
All OE hardware required for the installation will be included. Bespoke painted valve covers as shown here will be optional.
I will be providing in-depth documentation of the performance gains on the dyno, in the real world with GPS 100-200 accelerometer data along with my impressions after 15,000km of daily driving in upcoming Build Journal entries.
The pre-order will launch shortly and will be quantity limited. Complete installation, engine sourcing and core exchange services will be available.
More info at Euroconnex.co under Sxx-EVO Programs:
euroconnex.co/...
Enjoy,
Matt
@euro.connex
Much more smart thing to do than a Supercharger kit. Dont have to worry about heatsoaking. power as a stroker build almost.
Beautiful! And I like that it kept the stock displacement.
Stroker kits may increase power, but the larger stroke also increases piston speed, which isn't the most desirable thing for high-rpm applications. Even though there are some engines with long stroke out there that rev pretty high, a short stroke one still achieves smoother operation and revs more freely when combined with a head design with plenty of airflow.
@@Roddy_Zeh great points / that’s precisely my thinking. The higher revs will also shorter final drives, in this case, 3.91 will keep very similar top speeds to 3.62.
I’m eager to see the final GPS times later in July.
@@euroconnex2712
It actually makes me imagine a de-stroked S85 revving past 10-11k rpm...maybe the closest to an actual F1 V10 for the street we'd ever see...
Don't forget to keep us updated, please. 🙌🏻😁 And keep up the great work! 😎👍🏻
@@Roddy_Zeh smart man! That is the way I want to further explore these engines.
@@euroconnex2712
S85 the world!!! 👏🏻😂
And let the mayhem begin...😈
Thanks a lot!!! 😎🤜🤛😎
@@Roddy_Zeha 4.5 liter S85 would be ideal, in my opinion. In fact, Gordon Murray initially requested from Honda to make a 4.5 liter V10 for the McLaren F1, before switching over to the BMW V12 that exceeded the power and torque requirements.
Naturally, the only issue with +10k RPM's is valve float.
Amazing work. Will be needing these at some point soon.
So 627 hp on 91 oct right? Anyway the result is outstanding! Congratulations!!
That's right! Thank you.
@@euroconnex2712 how much do you think can be gained with 93-94 oct? Couple hp? Or maybe more… 640 hp would be crazy with pump gas.
@@dronamashina4875 probably, the next step isn’t necessarily octane, it’s gearing.
The extra revs will allow a 3.91 final drive, while retaining the top speeds per gear of the original 3.62.
More torque multiplication should improve real world performance as we are not currently traction limited.
627ps is insane figures , fantastic work on the camshaft bro and tuning.
Why didnt you use 95 octane?
Unfortunately, 91 octane is all we have around here. Still, it gives a very realistic take on what is achievable with relatively conservative tuning.
@@euroconnex2712 bro it means 95 ron right ?
@@salmaniftikhar6583 Yes, we can find 94 octane, but I can't get to that pump in any consistent manner, because.. well, V10 :D
🔥🔥 video
Does the car still jave the infinity headers on it?
Yes
Pistons, conrods and cranshaft stock?
Yes.
Is that Reqr Wheel HP?
Hey Michael!
This is weather adjusted, rear wheel horsepower on a Powerdyno Mustang dynamometer.
I’ll explain the differences with a Dynojet, inertia type dynamometer in upcoming entries.
In short, this reads around ~5% to 8% less than a Dynojet. This car would probably read closer to 530-540whp on a dynojet.
Take this as a 0.02$, I hate making up numbers.