Sameer

Guys,
this is something new to me. Basically our stock 930 which is 300bhp is at the flywheel correct? Which means with the drive train loss of 15%, we are putting 255 at the rear wheels, correct me if I'm wrong.

Now how did ZCAT3 get 371RWHP with about the same mods as Paul and Paul only get 320bhp?

I spoke with a reputable tuner in the US and they told me that the stock 930 having 300bhp is at the rear wheels, which is 300x15%=345FWHP. I have also seen dyno results of stock 930's producing around 300bhp at the rear wheels.

For example if you look at the PowerHaus website, their level 1 upgrade produces 420FWHP or 350RWHP at 1 bar of boost.

pls advise.

KeithC2Turto

I did a search on RWHP Dyno results last week after I had my car dynoed. I found a stock car mesured at numbers like 245, 254 & 257.

The cars with partial mods like just an Intercooler or just an exaust system got results like 294,301,295. :rolleyyes:

One car had just an i/c & 1 bar spring for 311

The guys with full mods (I/c, exaust, boost) got numbers like 346,320,325,313,319,338. <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />

One car mesaured at 346 when it was 70 out and 332 when it was 90 out showing that outside tempture is a factor.

One guy that purchased one of the big advertiser,tuners motors with full mods which was represented to put out over 400 RWHP just pulled only 320 on the dyno. <img src="graemlins/cussing.gif" border="0" alt="[grrrrrrr]" />

Yes there a couple of numbers like 413 & 398 but I would suspect that these were attribuitable to runing a huge 1.2 bar boost, extreem mods like special porting, bigger cc's, & twin plug or possabily an optimistic Dyno. <img src="graemlins/a_smil17.gif" border="0" alt="[blabla]" />

So it seems that 250 rwhp would be a stock motor, 300 w lite mods, and 335 w full mods seems like reasionable expecations. Conditions & different Dynos can make some variance <img src="graemlins/drink.gif" border="0" alt="[cherrsagai]" />

Sameer

KeithC2Turbo, guys,

Reason those cars might have not shown figures close to or 300 rwhp for a stock 930, is due to age, wear and tear, old cables etc.

We have dynoed a stock 930 here in Singapore at Ruf Automobile and got 304 rwhp. How can one explain that. Mind you this is a stock car running at stock boost.

If you have a look at the PowerHaus website, their Level 1 package ecludes porting and serious mods. They are just simple bolt on mods which produce those numbers at 1 bar and not 1.2 whatsoever. They also have dyno graphs to show the results. Now from my understanding, PowerHaus is a very reputable company.

I seriously doubt from what I've seen, heard and read that the stock 930 produces 300fwhp. It's 300RWHP.

If you approach Andial, they'll tell you the same thing.

ZCAT3

Sorry Sameer - Porsche numbers have always been crank HP. The US 930 in the late 80s was quoted at 282 HP and the ROW car was 300 HP (the 18 HP loss in the US was due to emissions equipment, mostly the cat). Many dynos tuners automatically adjust the RWHP numbers to the flywheel to give a flywheel number. My HP numbers were very good for the mods we had at that time, but not unusual. If you follow some of the other people who have done these mods you will have seen that there are many things that can easily cause HP in a 930 to drop by 30-40 HP (I believe John Hunt, a frequent poster here and on the 911Turbo board had a problem a while ago where he was lossing a lot of power due to the way his muffler was set up).

As for tuner claims, I know that at least one of the tuners you mention used to have a dyno sheet on their website that showed very good numbers - if you looked very closely you could see the note at the bottom stating 1.2 bar.

KeithC2Turto

I second Bill.

Another possability could be that the stock car tested has the factory sport option that put out 330 (fwhp), it was a cool day, and or the wast gate spring was out of spec. (A higher probability than three enthusists cars on three different dynos testing the same.)

Have you tested any other stock 930's.

If so, mabie horses in your country are smaller than ours... (kidding)

(sorry, sorry, sorry!!!)

I have found my car to be VERY sensitive to tempeture and boost (91 C2T).

Also, I found that a 1 boost setting or spring does not mean that you get 1 bar of real boost.

In my case just going from .92 bar boost to .95 took me from 320 hp to 338 rwhp.

The cheapest Dyno proformance option would be a bag of ice to put on the intercooler.

Lets see, 1.25 bar boost, play with the dyno corection factor and add a bag of ice and we have a $100 400 hp kit!!! <img src="graemlins/c.gif" border="0" alt="[ouch]" />

Sameer

Guys,

Thanks for the info. I always thought otherwise. Will have to look into this.

Sameer

Guys,
I just spoke to this other guy who had his car dynoed and it produced 369 rwhp at 1 bar similar to Pauls Mods. Which is fair enough cause the tie the car up and it's on a rolling machine where the reaout is on a big screen. Nvm that.

What about this:

The PowerHaus LEVEL 2 Package is for the Porsche 930 / 911 Turbo owner who wants the most power from their 3.3L motor without changing the CIS injection to electronic injection and without head work. This is a proven package which produces 410 HP at the rear wheels, and approximately 480 HP to the flywheel. See Dynomometer Chart.


Product Description
h.p.

PowerHaus Stainless Steel Headers, with Heat Exchangers
40

Header Installation Kit - all gaskets, hardware, and oil lines
n/a

PowerHaus Stainless Steel Muffler, single or dual tip
15

PowerHaus K-29-DR Turbocharger and Installation Kit
45

PowerHaus Longneck Intercooler with pop-off update
20

PowerHaus Sport Camshafts (exchange)
20

PowerHaus Lightweight 8.0:1 Pistons w/ Rings
15

Fuel Enrichment Controller
5

1.0 bar Wastegate Spring
20

PowerHaus Lightweight Clutch Package
n/a

----------
180FWHP

Note they use the 1 bar spring.

Geoffrey

Sameer,

I'm not sure how believable the Powerhouse mods you listed are. I think that a CIS injected engine is good for at most 450-480FWHP, thats its limitations with every mod you can think of.

I didn't see any head work, twin plug ignition, or the Euro fuel setup, so I'm not buying the claim. You simply are not going to get that kid of horsepower without addressing one of the Turbo's major limitations; the relatively small port size of the Turbo head and the poor flowing intake manifold.

My car has a stock 3.3 bottom end and I achieve fill boost at 4000rpm and at 3000rpm I am producing 150hp, 30 more than Paul. Probably the Headwork, 3.2 Carrera intake and EFI are responsible for that difference.

PorschePhD

Ahhhh the list. Bottom line is a CIS car is pushing hard to go over 450-475. 500 is almost never unless you are running BIG BIG boost. In a very short time you wouldn't be running anything! The other hard fact is a 911 will not use 15%. The loss even on its worst day is 12%. So that puts numbers for some tuners in check. Things such as head work, twin plug etc are a much needed piece to achieve real HP in these cars. Things such as enrichment and intercoolers DO NOT add HP. They are a much needed insurance policy, but not a performance factor. 320 is low without a doubt. I ran similar mods and had two broken headstuds on cylinder and still pulled 380-390 to the wheels. The 964 cams also should add a little more HP on the top end. Not sure what is going on unless the fuel system is so starved it is choking back, yet if that was the case a hole would be present very soon.

Bruce M.

Hey Stephen--

Thanks for the 930 clear corners! They should go on tomorrow, just as soon ast they show up...

FYI, I have gotten 14% drivetrain loss on my car, back to back, more than once. Right on the button.

Sameer

Stephen, Geoffrey,
thanks for the input.
Just like Stephen mentioned, he had similar mods to Paul and was pushing out 380-390 at the rear wheels.

Geoffrey

Sameer,

Stephen's mods were different in that he was not running at altitude and I imagine he had the euro fuel setup and some sort of fuel enrichment knowing Stephen's attention to detail. As I said earlier, Paul's mods with everything taken into consideration was probably accurate.

ZCAT3

Sameer - go to Stephen's website at look at the "Big Bad" package - that is based on the car he was mentioning. I just had Stephen build my engine to these specs, with the addition of 3.4 Ps&Cs and twin plug ignition. It is a very nice setup so far. Even running .8 bar boost my top end feels a bit stronger than in my old dyno chart above, so I am estimating 380 HP or more at the wheels (at .8 bar), and the bottom end is phenomenal. I have seen boost building as early as 1500 RPM and under load will reach full boost by 2500 RPM. 930s have pretty good top end even in stock form. Building the low end really makes the car shine.

Paul '87 Slant

Didn't think that my simple question would stir this much passion.

A few more comments since my last post. I do not have any fuel enrichment on the car. When I ordered the parts (through Evolution), they also ordered me a set of Euro fuel lines. One of the six was on backorder. It is 6 months later and it is still on backorder. So when I do get it, I will have them installed. Maybe that will help.

The one thing that leads me to believe that the Dyno run was flawed was the dyno reading of MPH. As I stated above, the car was run in third gear and shows 101 MPH at 5834 and 104 MPH at 6012 RPM.

I had a chance to ge the car up to speed this weekend and the spedo showed 115 to 118 for these RPMs. I am sure that there are some minor variance +/- 5MPH but not 14MPH.

There are some other number on the DYNO sheet that may help:

ratio: 4.052
tcf: 1.00
gain: -5.1

Please enlighten me.

Thanks,
Paul

CamB

tcf = transmission correction factor - my tuner uses 1.1x FWIW (implying 9.1% loss) for a 915 gearbox to estimate FWHP. Yours shows nil - ie rwhp.

ratio = presumably final drive ratio. Mine was listed as 3.865 and should be 3.875 (8:31 R&P). I dunno what a 930 is. Since the dyno measures RPM (I assume) and axle turns, it should KNOW what the ratio is (ie calculate itself). The MPH difference is probably related to an incorrect tyre diameter assumption.

gain = gain to previous run (loss in your case)

Here is my dyno graph (sorry NA engine - you guys have more power!):

<a href="http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads/3_2_dyno_270hp_small_size.jpg" target="_blank">http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads/3_2_dyno_270hp_small_size.jpg</a>

I suggest you try and figure out if there has been an effect due to the difference in altitude which the dyno hasn't calculated.