Can I justify headers?
03-08-2006, 02:09 PM
#32
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Tracy,Ca
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I don't think the mods he listed will put out 496hp at the crank, unless he's left something out. 150shot of NOS perhaps?"
Sure it will. I have a 3.0 turbo set up similar to his except that I have the stock factory exhaust, stock air box, SC cams, Andial fuel enrichment and standard K27. Stephen dynoed the motor at 422 rwhp low and up to 433 rwhp at the best. Torque was in the 395 ft/lb range. Thats around 496 to 509 horse at the crank using 15% drivetrain loss. We'll see where it ends up once Stephen is done with the EFI conversion.
Sure it will. I have a 3.0 turbo set up similar to his except that I have the stock factory exhaust, stock air box, SC cams, Andial fuel enrichment and standard K27. Stephen dynoed the motor at 422 rwhp low and up to 433 rwhp at the best. Torque was in the 395 ft/lb range. Thats around 496 to 509 horse at the crank using 15% drivetrain loss. We'll see where it ends up once Stephen is done with the EFI conversion.
03-08-2006, 02:31 PM
#33
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chet 930
"I don't think the mods he listed will put out 496hp at the crank, unless he's left something out. 150shot of NOS perhaps?"
Sure it will. I have a 3.0 turbo set up similar to his except that I have the stock factory exhaust, stock air box, SC cams, Andial fuel enrichment and standard K27. Stephen dynoed the motor at 422 rwhp low and up to 433 rwhp at the best. Torque was in the 395 ft/lb range. Thats around 496 to 509 horse at the crank using 15% drivetrain loss. We'll see where it ends up once Stephen is done with the EFI conversion.
Sure it will. I have a 3.0 turbo set up similar to his except that I have the stock factory exhaust, stock air box, SC cams, Andial fuel enrichment and standard K27. Stephen dynoed the motor at 422 rwhp low and up to 433 rwhp at the best. Torque was in the 395 ft/lb range. Thats around 496 to 509 horse at the crank using 15% drivetrain loss. We'll see where it ends up once Stephen is done with the EFI conversion.
03-08-2006, 02:35 PM
#34
Rennlist Lifetime Member
Joe,
That loss is on our dyno. It is not anything like a dynojet. There is over 3500lbs of enhirsa to move. It is a steady state dyno so our loss factor is far greater than some other dynos. It is more like 12-15 on other dynos like DJ.
That loss is on our dyno. It is not anything like a dynojet. There is over 3500lbs of enhirsa to move. It is a steady state dyno so our loss factor is far greater than some other dynos. It is more like 12-15 on other dynos like DJ.
03-08-2006, 07:33 PM
#38
Race Car
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: England UK
Posts: 3,508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by diabolos88
so then it's 428 not at the wheels but at the crank correct?
Check these out...
http://www.911turbo.com/turboclub/bo...essageID=70393
https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...highlight=dyno
Chets 3.0
03-08-2006, 08:47 PM
#39
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
can someone explain to me what is happening here with Chet930s car? How is his 3.0l putting out bigger power than a similarly modded 3.3l?
this guys car has following: 3.3L, K27-7200, Kokeln I/C, SC330 Cams, Mildly ported heads, headers/borla (no cat), etc, etc, (dyno'ed @ 351 HP at rear tires). This is way less than Chet930s 428HP at the rear, and he only has a k27, fuel enrichment mod, and cams, with stock '89 exhaust. I dont get it, am I missing something?
Maybe his cars got some other mods I'm not aware of,e.g. ported heads, big injectors, 3.4l P/C or...?
If Chet930s car is slamming 428HP at rwheels with just these 3 mods then I'm taking my car to Stephen and have him do exactly the same setup then to my '88!
this guys car has following: 3.3L, K27-7200, Kokeln I/C, SC330 Cams, Mildly ported heads, headers/borla (no cat), etc, etc, (dyno'ed @ 351 HP at rear tires). This is way less than Chet930s 428HP at the rear, and he only has a k27, fuel enrichment mod, and cams, with stock '89 exhaust. I dont get it, am I missing something?
Maybe his cars got some other mods I'm not aware of,e.g. ported heads, big injectors, 3.4l P/C or...?
If Chet930s car is slamming 428HP at rwheels with just these 3 mods then I'm taking my car to Stephen and have him do exactly the same setup then to my '88!
03-09-2006, 12:08 AM
#40
Burning Brakes
Join Date: May 2005
Location: St Johns, FL
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OMG - a dyno discussion.... Use them for reference only - i.e. tuning and baseline runs to measure the mods you've done. Otherwise, take the numbers with a grain of salt.
03-09-2006, 02:21 AM
#41
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Tracy,Ca
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly what Don said. My post was for reference only that the 3.3 liter making 422 at the wheels is very possible with the mods he has. Yes I did forget to mention my intake ports have been enlarged to 37mm and my intercooler is a fullbay style. My bad. My exhaust ports are also a little larger than the 3.3 also but thats because the 76 and 77 930 motors came that way from the factory.
The amusing thing about this particular motor was I when I started putting it together on paper first, my goal was to build the most powerful motor that I could using as many factory parts (or equivalents) as possible to keep the cost down a low as possible. That is what drove me to follow the thought process I put into this thing before actually doing it. And wherever I could find a deal on parts (like the intercooler which I bought on Ebay for $1200) they were bought and used.
The amusing thing about this particular motor was I when I started putting it together on paper first, my goal was to build the most powerful motor that I could using as many factory parts (or equivalents) as possible to keep the cost down a low as possible. That is what drove me to follow the thought process I put into this thing before actually doing it. And wherever I could find a deal on parts (like the intercooler which I bought on Ebay for $1200) they were bought and used.
03-09-2006, 02:42 AM
#42
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chet 930
Exactly what Don said. My post was for reference only that the 3.3 liter making 422 at the wheels is very possible with the mods he has. Yes I did forget to mention my intake ports have been enlarged to 37mm and my intercooler is a fullbay style. My bad. My exhaust ports are also a little larger than the 3.3 also but thats because the 76 and 77 930 motors came that way from the factory.
The amusing thing about this particular motor was I when I started putting it together on paper first, my goal was to build the most powerful motor that I could using as many factory parts (or equivalents) as possible to keep the cost down a low as possible. That is what drove me to follow the thought process I put into this thing before actually doing it. And wherever I could find a deal on parts (like the intercooler which I bought on Ebay for $1200) they were bought and used.
The amusing thing about this particular motor was I when I started putting it together on paper first, my goal was to build the most powerful motor that I could using as many factory parts (or equivalents) as possible to keep the cost down a low as possible. That is what drove me to follow the thought process I put into this thing before actually doing it. And wherever I could find a deal on parts (like the intercooler which I bought on Ebay for $1200) they were bought and used.
03-09-2006, 02:43 AM
#43
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 2,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JoeMag
87turbo911 -- I'd watch those AFR's at the dyno. ...you're going to start to go lean a little at 1bar (that is if you keep that all the way to redline), with no add'l fuel mods. Make sure you monitor boost also during dyno. With what you've listed (assuming you can get enough fuel), 400 rwhp is doable.
Stephen -- You've done enought of these things and I'm sure you've compared actual engine to drive train dyno. ...is drivetrain loss closer to 15 or 20%. Above mentioned divide by 0.85 being 17.6%
Stephen -- You've done enought of these things and I'm sure you've compared actual engine to drive train dyno. ...is drivetrain loss closer to 15 or 20%. Above mentioned divide by 0.85 being 17.6%
I'll have to get my mechanic to do a dyno-tune when I bring the car in for its 3K oil change in about a month...
