Longevity of a 300 hp conversion
I believe that a 300hp conversion with stock internals is not an unrealistic proposition.<p>When modifying a normally aspirated engine to use a supercharger (mechanical or turbo) typically there is a limit in boost (like the PES at 5lbs) without tearing into the engine. The reason typically is to lower the compression ratio so it will live with pump gas.<p>As for our 1.8T engines, they seem to have a very efficient and small combustion chamber. The centrally mounted spark plug with a compact chamber make for good flame travel across a very small combustion chamber, so you don't need as much spark advance. Less advance=less heat buildup in the piston crown and valves, = less detonation.<p>In contrast, try lighting a 4 3/8" chamber from one side (460 ford & derivatives) 35 degrees advance (mechanical & vacuum) at the power peak was common in the engines I used to build.<p>Because the 1.8l engine can be mapped thoroughly for spark and fuel delivery, you can richen the mixture or pull spark lead to avoid detonation, and the knock sensor can help when detonation becomes a problem in the field. none of this was available even 10 years ago with Kjectronic or Kugelfischer injection, much less us poor saps with Holley carbs and vacuum advance distrubitors.<p>As far as the mechanicals themselves go, a plain bearing is pretty much a plain bearing. I am sure you could go into the oiling system and bore it all out if oiling was a problem (like Porsche 944s) but so far I haven't heard much of this.<p>Cams & porting are less of an issue when you are forcing in the air, but I supppose there is room for improvement if you want to go over 300 hp. <p>Heat is the problem. it seems to be what destroys the KKK turbos (ko3 and ko4) when pushed. By designing a suitable exhaust manifold (as APR has done) and mating it with an adequate turbo, I think there is room for more. As long as the fuel delivery is up to snuff (stock injectors <240 hp, APRs >300) and you don't resort to kludges like a rising rate fuel regulator to make up for wimpy injectors that lack the flow rate (more than adequate for 150 hp stockers, or 190 hp chipped motors) for the power you want to develop, I don't see the problem.<p>Sure, blueprinting the block or shot peening the rods sounds racy, but I think production engines of today are much better than the production racing engines of yore. These are not magic parts made of unobtanium, but the little advanceseach year or two all add up eventually.<p>Remember, BMW and Renault used to get 1,000 hp for qualifying out of 1.5l. 650 or more was routine for racing. Granted, these were full-on special purpose racing motors that idled at 4,000 revs. But there is much to be learned from them, and until I see/hear a lot of bottom end failures, I am not worried too much about longevity.<p>Remember also that we are talking 1 bar of boost for most of this stuff, which is rarely seen on the street, but could be seen a lot at the track. Track time will always reduce the longevity of any engine, the question is how much.<p>THe ur Quattro and its ilk lived on steady diets of 21psi and more, and there are thousands of them still on the road many with 100k or even 200k on the factory motor & turbo, with '70s technology (like the kkk 03/04 series).<p>I think those that want a quickie upgrade (new turbo only, a few cheap kludges) will find they are driving grenades. Not so a really engineered product where some thought & money has gone into it. There are tuners out there who have lots of dyno time and have spent considerable time & money making sure drivability is there. Some folks get as far as saying "this bolts on, lets use it" You get what you pay for. You can weld together a part that looks pretty, but doesn't do anything, or you can CAD design and machine one that does. You can pay $150 and get some registers remapped, or $400 and get all that matter remapped. Pay your money and choose wisely.<p>Just my $.02, take it for what it is worth. <br>