[TiGgEr]

hey anyone know if there are some things that could be switched over from the tuscani to work on the 2k tib?
things i am very interested in are
#1 2.0l tuscani head
#2 tuscani hub assembly ... i'd like to have five lug

anyone know anything else?
or if those that i mentioned will work or not?

 

[4doorGL]

The 2.0L head will work as it is still the 2.0L Beta. As for the brakes, it looked like it was the same generic McPherson strut setup when I looked at them (2 bolts holding the hub to the strut), but until I get my hands on a Tuscani I can't be 100% positive.

<img src="http://63.102.174.92/upload/4doorGLSig.gif" border=0>

 

[TiGgEr]

correct me if i am wrong but the head on the 2.0l tuscani doesnt have HLA's right?
it is a solid shim design allowing for safe high revving in lower gears?

 

[Random]

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
correct me if i am wrong but the head on the 2.0l tuscani doesnt have HLA's right?
it is a solid shim design allowing for safe high revving in lower gears?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=1 id=quote>

The solid shim design will allow higher revs, but Hyundai left the rev-limiter in the same spot. With some ECU trickery, or stand along ignition system, you might be able to get a higher Rev limit.

The head on the 2001+ Elantras is the solid shim design, ditto with the new GK/Tuscani. Some of the last 2001/2002 Gen2 tiburons may also have this motor/valve design. Easiest way to tell is to check for a MAF sensor. If it is MAF, it is the old HLA design. If it is MAP, it is the shim over bucket design. Apparently hyundai made the motor change late in 2000 for the then new 2001, and since the tibby shares the motor, some last tibbies got the motor as well.

Red and I are still not 100% sure what other changes were made to the new beta combustion chamber/head design. I'm picking up a 2001 Elantra beta motor for a project motor, and should have it in my hands before the end of november. I can then do a direct comparison between the "new" motor and the 1999 Motor I have now.

Leave it to Random to Needlessly complicate things.

 

[TiGgEr]

so is having the MAP based engine a necessity for the soild shim head design? or will the solid shim head design work with the MAF based beta?

 

[Random]

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
so is having the MAP based engine a necessity for the soild shim head design? or will the solid shim head design work with the MAF based beta?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=1 id=quote>

No, not at all. The MAP is not required for the solid shim design, it is just a "quirk" of hyundai engineering, that they made the switch to MAP and dumpped the HLA's at the same time.

Again...this is just the theory Red and I came up with. It is unproven in practice, as I have yet to rip apart a late 2001 tibby motor to see if it is HLA or Shim, and if it is MAP or MAF.

It is possible some of the 2001/2002 Tiburons have the shim's and MAF, rather than HLA's and MAF....but one guarantee is if you have a MAP sensor, you definetly do NOT have HLA's (for the Beta motors anyway)

Leave it to Random to Needlessly complicate things.

 

[TiGgEr]

how far do you think you can push the revs if one were to swap out heads to the solid shim head design? i believe somewhere before someone has said 8k was very reasonable. i know you'd have to do something about the rev limiter but thats not a biggy at the moment. so whats your ideas on max rev with the solid shim design.
also wouldn't solid shims need to be adjusted every now and then?

 

[^saint]

I remember seeing a tib with a 5 lug pattern, so that goes to show anything is possible!<img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

<img src="http://canineanalrape.homestead.com/files/wavy_usa_flag.gif" border=0>
<b>United We Stand</b>

 

[Random]

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
how far do you think you can push the revs if one were to swap out heads to the solid shim head design? i believe somewhere before someone has said 8k was very reasonable. i know you'd have to do something about the rev limiter but thats not a biggy at the moment. so whats your ideas on max rev with the solid shim design.
also wouldn't solid shims need to be adjusted every now and then?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=1 id=quote>

Tigger, I still would not take it beyond 7500 RPM. The problem is piston speed. The long stroke of our motors that produces torque, means we reach very high pistion speed at low RPM. Compare that to a honda motor, with a short stroke, which has lower Piston speeds, which allows Higher RPM, but the short stroke doesn't give their engines much torque. It's a trade off....

Red and I were just discussing this last night, If I can find the article, I'll post up the techno wennie description of "piston speed and how it relates to max revs" sometime over the holiday weekend.

Leave it to Random to Needlessly complicate things.

 

[TiGgEr]

is this something that would require strengthening of the pistons themselves or is it somehting that is just detrimental to producing power by overreving past 7500rpms?
im really interested in knowing this
either way rev limit could always be bumped to 7500.

 

[Random]

Tigger-

it is a physical limitation of G-forces (acceleration, deceleration...repeat)

When you think about it...at 7500 RPM, each pisting is moving up and down 31.5 times a SECOND!

Think about the interial loads of accelerating a piston and rod, up to TDC, then the inertial forces require to stop it, then start it moving down...then stop it at BDC, then accelerate it up to TDC again..(repeat..etc.) 31.5 times a second. The G forces working against the metal are litterally around 5000 to 7000 G's.

If you have a shorter stroke, the pistion has less distance to cover from TDC to BDC. This means that this piston is moving slower while doing the same 31.5 cycles per second. So shorter stroke, allows for higher Reving, but means less torque.

A longer stroke has much more distance to cover from TDC to BDC, and so it must move much faster to cover the same 31.5 cycles per second. This means higher pistion speeds, which means higher intertial loading, which means you cannot rev as high.

Thing of the force required to just STOP a pistion that is moving fast enough to cover the stroke distance 31.5 times in on second...that pistion is really movin...it wants to keep flying up past TDC, and past the valves and right though your hood to the moon....the only thing that stops it...the pin holding the piston to the rod, and the attachment of the rod to the crank...and the crank itself as the theoretically unmovable object (but it does move).

Anyway...I'm doing a lousy job of explaining it. The article I have does a MUCH better job of explaining it...When I find it, I'll post it up here.

7500 is just a figure I picked out of the air, I do not know how safe even 7500 would be with our long stroke engines...

Leave it to Random to Needlessly complicate things.

 

[TiGgEr]

well then that tells me one thing. the 8000rpm figure that i read somewhere else is a crock .... of ****. which is ok because it doesn't really interfere with the real reason i would want to get a solid shim head to begin with. i was thinking that because the solid shim heads are supposed to be more durable that high revving past the current rev limit would be *another* reason to get the solid shim head for an N/A application. i know red has posted several times about HLA's tend to burn up while under high revs and that the solid shims should be able to handle more abuse than the HLAs could. Anyways I am still anxious to see the article about piston speed and how it relates to high revs. post up doooooooode

btw is there a formula that you can work with to find max rev for our long stroke engines? OR has hyundai pretty much nailed it when they set the intial rev limit to the number they have already?

 

[Random]

There is no real "forumla" as it varries from engine design to engine design, and the quality of the pistions, pins, rods, crank...and how much stress they can take/how high the metal quality is/number and location of bearings/type of bearings...etc..etc..etc. They are just to damn many factors. The only "generic" rule of thumb I can remember is never exeed 7000 G's, but that could just be the example that the author used...like I picked 7500.

What Red stated is true, the HLA's do not like high revs, and would be the first thing to crap out if you regularly tried to Rev to 8000. However, if you had the new shim design, who can say what the "next" failure point/component would be when regularly reving to 8000.

Which brings up the final point. On a "drag" or 'Race' motor that is going to be ripped apart after every run or two, it doesn't really matter, you can probably rev to 8000 once or twice safely. But can you do it in an engine you want to last 5000 miles? What about 50,000 miles? What about 100,000 miles? It will ultimatly comprimise the longevity of your motor by putting more stress on the various bits and pieces. What do you want more, 100,000 mile "safe" motor or 8000 RPM and the commensurate rise in HP for xxx miles?

Leave it to Random to Needlessly complicate things.

 

[TiGgEr]

actually what i want would fall in between. i want a safe/durable motor but with some increase in mechanical performance. if i can squeeze an extra 1000 or even 500 rpms outta the engine WHILE keeping it as safe/durable as possible, i wish to do so. it's not like i am actually planning to rev to 8k rpms on daily basis ... nor do i want to rev that far. what i do want tho is a head that is more durable than the head with HLAs and can handle high rev'n even if it is only 500 rpms above what the current rev limit is and only once in a while.

with the informtion you have given me above i still would like to see what the optimum yet safe rev limit for the engine would be with a solid shim head. how can this be found out? or can it? it is not the quantity of rpms that can be gained i am interested in ... but rather it is the quality.