Bawana

IMO.. It will all depend on the tune. Back, way back in the day (80's) My first blower motors were either to fat or to lean. I made plenty of ashtrays out of pistons. The blower motors I got to live, I had fat, & after around 80 hours the ring gaps measured .090 to sometimes .130... Blow by was bad LOL New rings bearings ...etc and away I went again for another 80 hours. Now with good AFR meters I think its possible to get 300 plus hours on the bottom ends. For those of you old enough to remember having cars in the 70's before fuel injection, motors were puffing oil, and pretty much junk after 80,000 miles. Now with fuel injection cars don't even need tune ups till over 100,000 miles. In all reality a blower motor .vs a naturally aspirated motor of the same power should last longer. You don't have to put as much cam,spring, compression etc etc.

Bawana

oh & before you all think I am an old fart.. I got my first boat at the age of 14 & bought my first car at 15. So no wise cracks LOL

check300

Did a leak down and had one cylinder at 25% so did a refresh. The block, heads and crank have over 750 hours. That engine has always been over 1200 HP.

check300

The 30 was all white and was a straight bottom. It went 120. There was more speed in the package but it would have required more setup changes and I decided 120 was good enough.

indysupra

Hey check was that you I saw pulled over on 465 in Indianapolis right at interstate 70? Shoot out weekend.

check300

It was. A semi hit something and threw it into our back window shattering it. It was pretty exciting for a moment or two.

MILD THUNDER

You built this engine probably what, around 10 years ago? I think its pretty awesome, to make that kind of power, and go 50 hours, let alone 150 hours. The low end torque that engine made was insane.

kvogt

IMO The tune makes a huge difference followed by how hard its driven.

MILD THUNDER

Good read on what goes on in a NA engine, vs forced induction cylinder pressure wise when pressure transducers were installed.

http://rehermorrison.com/tech-talk-9...essure-spikes/

Automatically everyone assumes a forced induction setup, is harder on things, than a NA engine. It is very common, that the high compression N/A engine, will see higher peak cylinder pressures, than a blown setup, and overall, a harder load on the internal parts. Kind of why you can run say 8:1, with 10psi of boost on 93 gas and not detonate, where a 12:1 N/A engine, might need race fuel. This is not new info, and probably why today, we are seeing so many OEM production engines, using forced induction now. Whether it be a little 4 cyl turbo, 6 cyl turbo, etc . These engines are just as if not more powerful than the larger n/a engines they replaced, and more economical, and longer lasting.

Its like diesel tow rigs. Everyone acts like its the whole "diesel" fuel thing that makes the power/torque. Take away the turbo, and they are slugs, and will get smacked by a N/A big block. Give them diesels 25lbs of boost, and that changes the game. I've driven 12 liter, and 15 liter diesel trucks, that lost the turbos, or blew the turbo hoses. They wouldn't get out of their own way without the turbos.

check300

That dyno session was when we were playing around with a hydraulic roller. It was even better with the solid.