|
| jamie22_cole |
|
|||
|
would like to know which is better in the long run a EL XR6 bottom end or an AU bottom end? and can i use an EL tickford head etc on the AU bottom end?
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| DormanAU |
|
||
|
Xr6 bottom ends are the same as std. Use an au one.
_________________ Au factory 5sp, rolling on 20'z, full custom extractors, redback cat and back. has a new motors, only 27,000ks |
||
| Top | |
||
| cjh |
|
|||
|
jamie22_cole wrote: would like to know which is better in the long run a EL XR6 bottom end or an AU bottom end? and can i use an EL tickford head etc on the AU bottom end? Yes, an EL head will bolt onto the AU...not sure about the cam sprocket, may need to use the EL one. The AU bottom end has a better crank & rod & piston assembly, and has a higher CR as well.
_________________ http://youtu.be/jJTh9F3Vgg0 |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| DormanAU |
|
||
|
au valve train is different, will have to use the el stuff.
_________________ Au factory 5sp, rolling on 20'z, full custom extractors, redback cat and back. has a new motors, only 27,000ks |
||
| Top | |
||
| Michael (HYPOEB) |
|
||
|
AU motor will be alot smoother. Will be better for NA.
Wouldnt use a AU motor for boost though since they have longer rods then EA-EL
_________________ EBT-747 - |
||
| Top | |
||
| sams_missen1604 |
|
||
|
Michael (HYPOEB) wrote: AU motor will be alot smoother. Will be better for NA. Wouldnt use a AU motor for boost though since they have longer rods then EA-EL although there are ways of lowering compression...
_________________ FOR SALE: EBII TICKFORD HEAD. Pm me |
||
| Top | |
||
| krisisdog |
|
|||
|
EA-AU cam gears are all the same, AU bottom ends are smoother and rev easier, though EF are the strongest.
Difference in compression is negligible, a few .1s:1 . |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
Michael (HYPOEB) wrote: AU motor will be alot smoother. Will be better for NA. Wouldnt use a AU motor for boost though since they have longer rods then EA-EL the AU has the same length rods as the BA-FG engine. |
||
| Top | |
||
| xcabbi |
|
||
|
Which one has the fully counter weighted crank? EF/EL?
I've driven both E series and AU's that are both smooth as silk and rough as guts. To say one is smoother is purely subjective. It could be the longer rods of the AU or it could be the fully counterweighted crank of the E series that has the greater effect to smoothness. |
||
| Top | |
||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
xcabbi wrote: Which one has the fully counter weighted crank? EF/EL? I've driven both E series and AU's that are both smooth as silk and rough as guts. To say one is smoother is purely subjective. It could be the longer rods of the AU or it could be the fully counterweighted crank of the E series that has the greater effect to smoothness. EF has the fully counter weighted crank |
||
| Top | |
||
| xcabbi |
|
||
|
tickford_6 wrote: xcabbi wrote: Which one has the fully counter weighted crank? EF/EL? I've driven both E series and AU's that are both smooth as silk and rough as guts. To say one is smoother is purely subjective. It could be the longer rods of the AU or it could be the fully counterweighted crank of the E series that has the greater effect to smoothness. EF has the fully counter weighted crank I'm guessing they all have the same journal sizes. Therefore in theory the smoothest bottom end would be an EF crank with the AU-FG rods and pistons. the 6 bolt bottom end on the AU is purely for strength over smoothness I'm guessing. |
||
| Top | |
||
| Michael (HYPOEB) |
|
||
|
sams_missen1604 wrote: Michael (HYPOEB) wrote: AU motor will be alot smoother. Will be better for NA. Wouldnt use a AU motor for boost though since they have longer rods then EA-EL although there are ways of lowering compression... Nar im not talking about lowering the compression. Longer rods = Weaker A EL bottom end will hold alot more power then a AU bottom end. Also AU rods are the same length as BA-FG but there not as strong..
_________________ EBT-747 - |
||
| Top | |
||
| sams_missen1604 |
|
||
|
Michael (HYPOEB) wrote: sams_missen1604 wrote: Michael (HYPOEB) wrote: AU motor will be alot smoother. Will be better for NA. Wouldnt use a AU motor for boost though since they have longer rods then EA-EL although there are ways of lowering compression... Nar im not talking about lowering the compression. Longer rods = Weaker A EL bottom end will hold alot more power then a AU bottom end. Also AU rods are the same length as BA-FG but there not as strong.. Yes my bad... i had "turbo" in my head for some reason... I have read about the bending of rods in big applications. I did hear from somewhere that the AU bottom end revs more freely or something along those lines... i'm quite possibly wrong though.
_________________ FOR SALE: EBII TICKFORD HEAD. Pm me |
||
| Top | |
||
| TROYMAN |
|
||
|
au rods cant be that week..12 months of 12 psi boost on a factory engine and still going strong..
 ba-fg use them in na and turbo aplications, so unless your shooting for 300+rwkw i dont think the au,ba-fg bottom end is going to fail.. |
||
| Top | |
||
| Michael (HYPOEB) |
|
||
|
Im also running 12psi on my AU motor,But its been shown on many cars that EF-EL bottom ends are a fair bit stronger then AU bottom ends. AU should be good for around 300rwkw with a good tune (even though i've seen them die on alot less) But then stock EL bottom ends have seen 350-400rwkw and 10 second passes.
Just my two cents;)
_________________ EBT-747 - |
||
| Top | |
||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 55 guests |
