Im just trying to make a list of all the mods i can do with out turbocharging my car. This is what i have so far, if you know of anything else please let me know.

CAI
UDP
Perfomance Header
Perfomance Exhaust
short shifter
larger throttle body
Coil Pack(plus wires)
weight reduction
S-afc??(not sure if this is worth it with non-turbo)
intake manifold
thermostat
AFX computer

if you have anything else, i would really like to know about it?

Cams and headwork. That's where you will get your power from. Safc isn't necessary and port your stock intake mani.

And use the search feature.

NNNNAAAAAWWWWSSSSSSS!


Just messin'... But since you've gone this far, throw on a nice little wet kit and rebuild with some high cr pistons.

Some form of engine managment... And someone that can tune you can get 5-15 hp to the WHEELS from this!

Ditch the SAFC and intake manifold. If you want power NA, you need to be cheap wherever you can. eBay intake, eBay exhaust, used header, DIY MSnS... save your money for quality head work, as mentioned.

I have a leads on used Greddy header, test pipe and N1 catback if you need them.

I love how everyone says an SAFC isn't necessary. I've seen dynoed 9wHP gains from SAFC tuning on an NA car.

It's a good piece for what it is.

Originally posted by DarkOne
I love how everyone says an SAFC isn't necessary. I've seen dynoed 9wHP gains from SAFC tuning on an NA car. It's a good piece for what it is.

I just can't see paying $300 for 9whp (if you're lucky). If your engine is built to the point where you might expect 9whp or more, MSnS is a much better investment - marginally higher initial cost packaged with more function.

If you have a 4G63-powered car, I'd suggest it, but I can't see the value for such limitd tuning ability for so much money. :shrug

As far as I'm concerned (we all know I'm anti-N/A :P)

All those mods. Price them out Including headwork and port and polish.

Now figure $1500 to build your own turbo kit.

Now figure N/A with mods = 165whp
turbo @ 7psi with decent fuel system = 230whp


Common sense isn't really that ocmmon anymore :shrug

Originally posted by DR1665

Originally posted by DarkOne I love how everyone says an SAFC isn't necessary. I've seen dynoed 9wHP gains from SAFC tuning on an NA car. It's a good piece for what it is.

I just can't see paying $300 for 9whp (if you're lucky). If your engine is built to the point where you might expect 9whp or more, MSnS is a much better investment - marginally higher initial cost packaged with more function. If you have a 4G63-powered car, I'd suggest it, but I can't see the value for such limitd tuning ability for so much money. :shrug

first thanks everyone for your help.
well what if i got the SAFC used for under 200? Also what intake manifold should i get, obx????? And yea if you have Greddy Headers i would realy like to get those since i have a Greddy Catback.

Originally posted by Natep
first thanks everyone for your help. well what if i got the SAFC used for under 200? Also what intake manifold should i get, obx????? And yea if you have Greddy Headers i would realy like to get those since i have a Greddy Catback.

If you want to give the SAFC a shot, that's perfectly fine. I just don't see the value in it is all.

DON'T BUY ANY AFTERMARKET INTAKE MANIFOLD. You will see more fitment issues and pains in your ass than gains from one of those. Pick up a stocker from a jYard and have the injector humps machined down flat, the runners gasket matched, and the neck right after the TB bored out as far as it will go before you risk punching through the sides. Then have your stock TB bored to 55mm or find a 60mm (overkill for an NA car, imo) from a 4.0L Jeep in the jYard. This is a much better value that will net you proven gains over stock.

Oh yeah. First to hit 13,000 posts, you dirty whores. }(

Originally posted by DR1665

Originally posted by DarkOne I love how everyone says an SAFC isn't necessary. I've seen dynoed 9wHP gains from SAFC tuning on an NA car. It's a good piece for what it is.

I just can't see paying $300 for 9whp (if you're lucky). If your engine is built to the point where you might expect 9whp or more, MSnS is a much better investment - marginally higher initial cost packaged with more function. If you have a 4G63-powered car, I'd suggest it, but I can't see the value for such limitd tuning ability for so much money. :shrug

Don't forget to factor in the dyno time to eek out that last 9 horse power. I'd personally like to spend that dyno time tuning something worthwhile...like a stand alone (or a piggy pack that doesn't blow donkey nuts, a DTEC).

:shrug

Originally posted by DR1665

Originally posted by DarkOne I love how everyone says an SAFC isn't necessary. I've seen dynoed 9wHP gains from SAFC tuning on an NA car. It's a good piece for what it is.

I just can't see paying $300 for 9whp (if you're lucky). If your engine is built to the point where you might expect 9whp or more, MSnS is a much better investment - marginally higher initial cost packaged with more function. If you have a 4G63-powered car, I'd suggest it, but I can't see the value for such limitd tuning ability for so much money. :shrug

Depends on your area, if you install an MSnS you will fail the OBD-II emissions, unless you switch back. Depends on what you want to do. The S-AFC works, but I think there are better options out there for signal modifiers. GReddy e-manage, Perfect Power SMT-6, Of all the table based laptop tuning I like the Split Second PSC1 or 2 it seems to be the best processor of the batch.

Exile Racing Technologies
http://www.exileracing.com
Go that way, really fast, if something gets in your way... turn. I was too lazy to do it myself.

Well heres my deal, im not really going to be going to the track(not any time soon), and i cant street race(my points on my license are maxed, one more ticket in the next 8months and im gone) so for now im just trying to pep it up with out spending any more that 300 or 400 on one part. After the year is up, if i have the money a turbo will go on! Thanks everybody!

Originally posted by Natep
Well heres my deal, im not really going to be going to the track(not any time soon), and i cant street race(my points on my license are maxed, one more ticket in the next 8months and im gone) so for now im just trying to pep it up with out spending any more that 300 or 400 on one part. After the year is up, if i have the money a turbo will go on! Thanks everybody!

A motor built for all motor performance is not going to be very boost friendly. I suggest you iron on the details on what you REALLY want to do with the car.

Originally posted by slowmitsu
I suggest you iron on the details on what you REALLY want to do with the car.

Like....do you want 150whp so you can beat an auto 2.4l cavalier?

If thats all you want then stay n/a.

If you want more, save your moeny, don't worry about adding some 'pep' and get some of your points back so WHEN you go turbo you have some to lose :P

Why waste all this money in N/A mods when for a grand you can piece together a kit and on 8psi outrun a n/a (sometimes) lol

Originally posted by eclipse982nrRST
Why waste all this money in N/A mods when for a grand you can piece together a kit and on 8psi outrun a n/a (sometimes) lol

Could anyone tell me what are good mods to do before i got turbo that i wont have to change later on, i already have a Greddy cat back, and short throw shifter, UDP and flywheel mabye anything else?

Turbos are air pumps. They only move more air into your engine so, theoretically, anything that allows a greater volume of air to move through your engine will make a turbo happy.

3" exhaust (dp, cat, piping)
larger IC piping
larger TB
larger intake mani (although consensus here is that there are no decent SMIMs for this engine currently available, so don't waste your money on some OBX or Venom crap)

I'd suggest getting your stock IM worked over and finding the Jeep TB before anything else.

Oops got here late. Busy working on the AWD and painting the trailer and.....who gives a crap, huh?

Anyway, do this and you can run into the 14's:

Inside:
JE 10.5
Crower 2
Stainless valves
.020 off head
5 angle valve job
Personal port and polish (intake and exhaust)
MLS Head gasket
Of course, full rebuild on bearing etc. (stock)
Full float wrist pins

Outside:
AF/X pulley
AF/X ECU
S-afc
Jeep 60 mm TB
Personal port and polish intake
1 adj. cam gear on intake side
E-bay Ram air intake
Catch can
E-bay 4-1 header (cleaned up with grinder)
"hi-flow cat"
2.5 exhaust
No power steering

Suspension;
tiens and adj KYB's (1.8 drop) in front
stock springs adj KYB in back

Oh yeah, plus you will need to know how to run.

You can make a NA fast enough to beat most of your average cars on the street. I regularly beat out stocker turbo's (FWD and AWD. Srt's stage 2's) on the track. Plus I beat out many modded cars. If you want to check the 1/4 list on dsmtuners you'll see how many run above me. It'll cost you about $2500 if you do your own work.

That being said, staying NA is kind of a curiousity/stubborn choice on my part. I'm not good with people saying you can't do this, etc. Now. I'm at a point where I am just curious to see how far we take her down (I'm still lowering her at this point). Maybe after next year we'll take a run at Hahn :shrug :P

Please, come join me in this endevour :thumbsup

MB

Originally posted by bullettdsm
Inside:Stainless valves

Standard size, Mark? I wonder how much of a gain you're seeing in your 1/8th mile due to increased charge air velocities into the chamber at lower speeds vs. any disadvantages you *might* be seeing in the top end due to flow restriction. :wary

Originally posted by bullettdsm
That being said, staying NA is kind of a curiousity/stubborn choice on my part. I'm not good with people saying you can't do this, etc. Now. I'm at a point where I am just curious to see how far we take her down.

I'm the same way. Although I'm shifting gears with my long-term plans for the Talon, even considering the thought of not modding her any more (there is enough to go back and fix to keep me busy for a long time at this point), but then I see Blair make comments pointing out how stupid and expensive the all motor route might be and I just want to buy a set of Crower 3s and prove that ass wrong. :P

Don't get me wrong. I love turbocharged cars, boosted 2GNTs above all others, but there is something that feels honorable and true in comparing one driver and his engine against another without all the hundreds of different turbo variations out there. When I hold second gear and wind my tired, leaky 420A out to 6000rpm (factory ECU is dumber than shit and it just makes noise beyond that), I love hearing the sound of the engine screaming away under the hood. I'll always be all motor.

Originally posted by DR1665

Originally posted by bullettdsm Inside:Stainless valves

Standard size, Mark? I wonder how much of a gain you're seeing in your 1/8th mile due to increased charge air velocities into the chamber at lower speeds vs. any disadvantages you *might* be seeing in the top end due to flow restriction. :wary

then I see Blair make comments pointing out how stupid and expensive the all motor route might be and I just want to buy a set of Crower 3s and prove that ass wrong


there is something that feels honorable and true in comparing one driver and his engine against another without all the hundreds of different turbo variations out there.

Valve size, absolutely a consideration of mine when I did this (and pretty much the same question I asked myself, but not with the same flair as you ;) ) It came down to a couple of things. My original intent - to make this "affordable" for the normal car owner. And would this kill my power in the low end? Though it doesn't cost that much more for the 1mm bigger w/machine work, It was still more. Also, I felt that I would lose too much down low to not gain enough up top (if you know what I mean). No flow bench numbers etc (I ain't got the cash for that). Just me looking at the flow and considering the outcome (seems to be OK with traps around 97).
I used stainless because I always used stainless. Quicker heat dissappation, takes more abuse in high rpm situations and weight savings (though in this case I think that's nominal). Since I was replacing the valves anyway, I always reccomend replacing with stainless

The Blair comment; Yeah, you get that way too, huh? Stubborn ass. Welcome to the club. :cheers .

You need to be careful there Brian, you're starting to sound like us old school racers! "Honorable and true" good choice of words.

Oh yeah, running sunday at NED. Hoping to lower her again.

MB

I hate to see Blair bashing NA stuff. We're all fully aware that it's cheaper to slap on a tubro than it is to build a natural motor. To me, that's the bitch route.

That's all I have to say.

port your head intake and port match your header
get o.s. valves
deck yur head to the max (mine was .060") for clearance issues
crane race cams
call race engineering and get a 2.2 stroker kit with 10.5:1 pistons
use an afc
walboro 195 fuel pump
2g or honda 450 cc injectors
1g talon/eclipse turbo injector harness modified to plug into a 2gnt
apexi safc (my hero)
ebay clutch masters stage 3 clutch
with tuning look for some deep ! passes in the 1/4

Originally posted by forgedrs
port your head intake and port match your header

I don't want to add insult to injury, given what just happened to your car, man, but let's step it up a bit with some more details. Can't say I've heard too much about porting on headers...

Originally posted by forgedrs
get o.s. valves

If this isn't a brand name, please offer your thoughts as to why oversized valves are better.

Mark and I were just discussing pros and cons of valve sizing. Generally speaking, standard sized valves will offer better low end performance due to greater intake charge velocities at the lower engine speeds (lesser volume of air being flowed) - similar to how a turbocharger has an efficiency range - there is a point where you have to evaluate how you want your powerband. Larger valves all around will move the powerband up, while standard size may encounter some restriction in the top end on a heavily massaged head. There are some people who run oversized intake valves, but standard exhaust. Something to look into. At the same time, as Mark suggested, staying with standard sized valves will save you some money. If I recall, stepping up the +1mms ran me something like $400.

Originally posted by forgedrs
deck yur (sic) head to the max (mine was .060") for clearance issues

While this is a known way to increase compression ratio, the ideal way to do so is with proper pistons.

On a budget, one could probably get away with building the shit out of his head - including such extreme millwork - and a completely stock bottom end, but we're seeing that, in order to really run the faster times, there is a need to wind the engine beyond it's stock redline. Whether or not your tired old bottom end is up to the task in that department remains to be seen. Even so, if I were truly interested in all motor development on these cars and had it all to do over again, I would have invested in the built head before the bottom end and seen what I could do with it.

Originally posted by forgedrs
crane race cams

Which model? Why Crane over Crower?

There are those who feel Crower offers more desireable grinds, but the Neon guys running high-lift cams seem to favor the longer durations of the Cranes, as they feel the gentler ramps on the lobes are easier on the valvetrain.

Originally posted by forgedrs
call race engineering and get a 2.2 stroker kit with 10.5:1 pistons

Do you mean Road Race Engineering? Do they build 420As? :wary If you know of another shop with quality work for this platform and exemplar service, please let us know. This community is always looking for more sources for parts and services.

To some of us, even if just me, stepping up displacement is like cheating. Sure, there are all motor Neons with 2.4Ls in them currently running in the 12s, but I'd still like to see what the 2.0L 420A can do for itself. Like I said, it just seems like the right thing to do.

Originally posted by forgedrs
walboro 195 fuel pump 2g or honda 450 cc injectors 1g talon/eclipse turbo injector harness modified to plug into a 2gnt

That is a damn lot of fuel for an all motor car, man.

I run 100% stock fuel system and have taken the car all the way to 7800rpm on an AFX ECU with no ill effects. She was still pulling when the rev limiter kicked in. Personally, I think I might step up to 24lbers just to be sure I was covered were I to wind her out beyond 8krpm. (And one of these days, I'm actually going to do it.)

Originally posted by forgedrs
apexi safc (my hero)

:twitch Just not my cup of tea, but Mark got a couple ponies out of it. Dino has seen as much as 9whp from SAFC tuning. Personally, I'd just go with MSnS...

Originally posted by forgedrs
ebay clutch masters stage 3 clutch

I still run the stocker. :P A used stocker at that, which had abotu 10,000 boosted miles on it. Haha. A clutch upgrade is definitely a good idea, but I don't know how serious a clutch one would need to get to effectively put 200hp to the ground consistently.

Like I said, I ain't pickin' on you. I'm just showing you what sort of elaboration you can provide based on your own experience that can really, truly, help another guy out. Personally, I'm going to look into a locking oil cap. ;)

EDIT:
Lots of spaces at the end.

Originally posted by DR1665
but then I see Blair make comments pointing out how stupid and expensive the all motor route might be and I just want to buy a set of Crower 3s and prove that ass wrong.

Then do it I say. And Daisy still has how much money into her and she's still slow.

Just for the record I don't think a 2gnt boosting 7psi is fast. lol It's just faster than an n/a 2gnt and more fun to drive. I don't think anyhting that runs 14's is fast at all.

3 years ago I had never driven a boosted car in my life. Now I've had the privlidge to drive some +600whp cars and they are all boosted. If they weren't turbo'd they would be half assed 300hp cars hence, they would suck :P

Originally posted by cougar694u
I hate to see Blair bashing NA stuff. We're all fully aware that it's cheaper to slap on a tubro than it is to build a natural motor. To me, that's the bitch route. That's all I have to say.

Come on Luke. "the Bitch route" is pretty rough. I mean, your a car guy. Theres no denying that once boost is in the equation it's a whole different ballgame. More so with v-8's.


I would much rather watch a 9 second, blown mustang than a 14.2 second n/a 4.9L :shrug

How can you guys hate on turbines when that what it takes to make good power :shrug

Originally posted by Blizare

Originally posted by DR1665
but then I see Blair make comments pointing out how stupid and expensive the all motor route might be and I just want to buy a set of Crower 3s and prove that ass wrong.

Then do it I say. And Daisy still has how much money into her and she's still slow.

Originally posted by Blizare
I would much rather watch a 9 second, blown mustang than a 14.2 second n/a 4.9L :shrug How can you guys hate on turbines when that what it takes to make good power :shrug

Nobody is hating on turbos, man. One of the reasons why this site was set up was to give the 2GNTer a place to discuss technical issues without being told how pointless and weak their motors are because they're not turbocharged.

If your definition of true performance is some premature ejaculation bullshit straight line drag racing and the cost to do so, then turbo is the way to go - definitely. Fast and the furious was really good at making every dipshit with a compact car think he needed to run tens in order to have a fast car. That's bullshit.

The fastest car is the one with the flattest torque and horsepower curves. Combined with the ability to brake later in the straight and carry more speed through the corner, such a car has the ability to school just about any dyno queen where it really matters - on the road course.

A fast "car" is fast everywhere. A drag car, as impressive as it might be, is merely an engine on a sled. To simply tell someone on a forum focused on 2GNT development that anything other than turbocharging their car is a waste of money is contrary to why this place was founded.

A turbocharger is a replacement for displacement. It's not a replacement for engine building or driving skills.

I'm not bashing your point of view, Blizzo, just your delivery. Now that you don't even own one, your talking shit on all motor development leaves an even worse taste in people's mouths...

Originally posted by Blizare
I would much rather watch a 9 second, blown mustang than a 14.2 second n/a 4.9L :shrug

I'd rather see a 9 second all-motor car, personally. I know of several here in town that pull it off, too.

Originally posted by DR1665
Now that you don't even own one, your talking shit on all motor development leaves an even worse taste in people's mouths...

Exactly.

how would a thermostat be a performance upgrade?