Mods to Increase N/A power???
08-27-2002, 02:15 AM
#31
Pro
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Micah,
Please post! If it makes some power I want it. You couldn't find the GRM website link that I posted???(LOOK ABOVE) It is in project cars, then scroll down to 944 project. If they improved et's great! I am just stating what I have seen. If there is a chip that can make 6hp or more on my motor I will buy it. If they back it up! What were the parameters? A dyno eliminates alot of BS, IMHO.
I can see all the race teams.....Hum, no I can't too many variables.
Ever wonder how some of those sparks plug ads seem to make so much power. Ever wonder how old the previous plugs were? Or would any new plug have made a gain?
Paul
Please post! If it makes some power I want it. You couldn't find the GRM website link that I posted???(LOOK ABOVE) It is in project cars, then scroll down to 944 project. If they improved et's great! I am just stating what I have seen. If there is a chip that can make 6hp or more on my motor I will buy it. If they back it up! What were the parameters? A dyno eliminates alot of BS, IMHO.
I can see all the race teams.....Hum, no I can't too many variables.
Ever wonder how some of those sparks plug ads seem to make so much power. Ever wonder how old the previous plugs were? Or would any new plug have made a gain?
Paul
08-27-2002, 04:58 AM
#33
Drifting
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Espoo, Finland
Posts: 2,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paul; here are the links.
<a href="http://www.grmotorsports.com/proj944.html" target="_blank">Grassroots 944</a>
<a href="http://www.grmotorsports.com/944chip.mov" target="_blank">Chip installation video</a>
<img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
<a href="http://www.grmotorsports.com/proj944.html" target="_blank">Grassroots 944</a>
<a href="http://www.grmotorsports.com/944chip.mov" target="_blank">Chip installation video</a>
<img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
08-27-2002, 06:08 AM
#34
Drifting
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 2,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
they say the chip improved 0-60 because it raises the rev limiter so you dont haveto make a final shift into 3rd gear. not because you actually have more power.
08-27-2002, 06:29 AM
#35
I installed that Europroducts chip about year ago into my friends late (engine fire)'88 944.At the same time i also installed a K&N filter.
My friend claimed it was better than with the original setup, but i just can't tell because i ran this car only with these Europroducts chips.I suppose i am to used to 951 power!
Olli
'88 951
My friend claimed it was better than with the original setup, but i just can't tell because i ran this car only with these Europroducts chips.I suppose i am to used to 951 power!
Olli
'88 951
08-27-2002, 07:22 AM
#36
Race Director
I'm very interested in what John has to say on this. My heart had been set on a SFR supercharger, but now.....?
Anyway, I've driven the black GRM 944 and it wasn't as fun to drive as my car. The powerband was shifted up too high and I had to rev the crap out of it to get any power. And, it had no low end grunt. I'm sure as a track car it would be an improvement, but on the street I didn't care for it too much. I think they gave up WAY too much low end torque. IMHO. It sure looked good, though. Until it blew up, that is......
Tifo
Anyway, I've driven the black GRM 944 and it wasn't as fun to drive as my car. The powerband was shifted up too high and I had to rev the crap out of it to get any power. And, it had no low end grunt. I'm sure as a track car it would be an improvement, but on the street I didn't care for it too much. I think they gave up WAY too much low end torque. IMHO. It sure looked good, though. Until it blew up, that is......
Tifo
08-27-2002, 08:36 AM
#37
Drifting
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Espoo, Finland
Posts: 2,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan, that's why they also have that 40-70 time comparison in the video - maybe not a huge improvement in it, but the times are lower with the new chip so it probably does something 
08-27-2002, 11:58 AM
#38
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 7,262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote]It sure looked good, though. Until it blew up, that is......
<hr></blockquote>
I heard about that. Evidently, Grassroots did all these mods to the car but never replaced the belts. I heard that the new owner drove it about 50 feet and then...BANG.
Tifo, thanks for the help this weekend and thanks for the ride in your car. Just to let all the listers know, Tifo's car is for real. The brakes and handling are a big improvement over a stock 944. I could feel the seat of the pants difference from the chip also. I'm thinking real hard about John's 3.1L engine. Now how do I explain that to the wife?
<hr></blockquote>
I heard about that. Evidently, Grassroots did all these mods to the car but never replaced the belts. I heard that the new owner drove it about 50 feet and then...BANG.
Tifo, thanks for the help this weekend and thanks for the ride in your car. Just to let all the listers know, Tifo's car is for real. The brakes and handling are a big improvement over a stock 944. I could feel the seat of the pants difference from the chip also. I'm thinking real hard about John's 3.1L engine. Now how do I explain that to the wife?
08-27-2002, 01:22 PM
#39
Race Director
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>From what Paul seems to be showing there is about 10hp out there in these cars.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't believe it.
Jon Milledge is producing 185 bhp IT legal engines.
<a href="http://www.jmengines.com/engines.htm" target="_blank">http://www.jmengines.com/engines.htm</a>
All we can do in IT is balance, port match up to 1" in, all pulleys except the main pulley (it must be stock), header, intake before the AFM is free. Valve jobs must be within the specs in the FSM and we can blend the seat into the runners. We can also rechip the DME, but the 185 bhp is before this was legal.
While Jon is a smart guy, he's no wizzard. I don't know what he does, but he's not allow to do much per the rules.
Please don't suggest he's producing illegal engines.
<strong>From what Paul seems to be showing there is about 10hp out there in these cars.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't believe it.
Jon Milledge is producing 185 bhp IT legal engines.
<a href="http://www.jmengines.com/engines.htm" target="_blank">http://www.jmengines.com/engines.htm</a>
All we can do in IT is balance, port match up to 1" in, all pulleys except the main pulley (it must be stock), header, intake before the AFM is free. Valve jobs must be within the specs in the FSM and we can blend the seat into the runners. We can also rechip the DME, but the 185 bhp is before this was legal.
While Jon is a smart guy, he's no wizzard. I don't know what he does, but he's not allow to do much per the rules.
Please don't suggest he's producing illegal engines.
08-27-2002, 02:30 PM
#40
Three Wheelin'
Paul,
Looks like someone already posted the video for you.
One more thing - I am currently running the stock chip, as I'm planning to go with FRWilk... however, as the vid. shows, the grassroots guys were pretty impressed w/ the europroducts chip - "It works pretty darn well."
Micah
Looks like someone already posted the video for you.
One more thing - I am currently running the stock chip, as I'm planning to go with FRWilk... however, as the vid. shows, the grassroots guys were pretty impressed w/ the europroducts chip - "It works pretty darn well."
Micah
08-27-2002, 02:36 PM
#41
Race Director
[quote]Originally posted by 944pete:
<strong>
I heard about that. Evidently, Grassroots did all these mods to the car but never replaced the belts. I heard that the new owner drove it about 50 feet and then...BANG.
Tifo, thanks for the help this weekend and thanks for the ride in your car. Just to let all the listers know, Tifo's car is for real. The brakes and handling are a big improvement over a stock 944. I could feel the seat of the pants difference from the chip also. I'm thinking real hard about John's 3.1L engine. Now how do I explain that to the wife?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the compliments, Pete! I hope I didn't scare you too much on the "spirited" run thru the backroads by your house. I sometimes forget that I don't have a 8-pt cage around me anymore....
Your car looks MUCH better now that it is at the correct euro ride height.
On the GRM car, they actually DID do the timing belt, but no one ever got it retensioned at the proper mileage (1500-2000 miles). So, it stretched and then came off. Ouch! Let that be a lesson to all of us on timing belt re-tension intervals......
So, I'm still waiting for some more info from John on this motor, my interest is really peaked.
Tifo
<strong>
I heard about that. Evidently, Grassroots did all these mods to the car but never replaced the belts. I heard that the new owner drove it about 50 feet and then...BANG.
Tifo, thanks for the help this weekend and thanks for the ride in your car. Just to let all the listers know, Tifo's car is for real. The brakes and handling are a big improvement over a stock 944. I could feel the seat of the pants difference from the chip also. I'm thinking real hard about John's 3.1L engine. Now how do I explain that to the wife?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the compliments, Pete! I hope I didn't scare you too much on the "spirited" run thru the backroads by your house. I sometimes forget that I don't have a 8-pt cage around me anymore....
Your car looks MUCH better now that it is at the correct euro ride height.
On the GRM car, they actually DID do the timing belt, but no one ever got it retensioned at the proper mileage (1500-2000 miles). So, it stretched and then came off. Ouch! Let that be a lesson to all of us on timing belt re-tension intervals......
So, I'm still waiting for some more info from John on this motor, my interest is really peaked.
Tifo
08-27-2002, 03:34 PM
#43
Race Director
[quote] While Jon is a smart guy, he's no wizzard. I don't know what he does, but he's not allow to do much per the rules.
Please don't suggest he's producing illegal engines.
<hr></blockquote>
GEO - I have seen the 185 bhp claims.
Is that Flywheel or rear wheels?
If Paul is putting down 132 to the rear wheels and a Legal ITS is putting down 185. Then a guy like Paul would not stand a chance. That is over 50 hp. Seems kind of strange to me that one guy could get about 10 hp from mods and another gets 60 bhp from a similar rule set.
Now if that 185 is at the flywheel then.
assume 20 hp loss through drivetrain (consistent with 143 vs 123 stock flywheel rating vs stock rear wheel dyno).
Then his engines put out 165 at the rear wheels.
Wow that is still a 40bhp gain vs Pauls 10 bhp.
I am not sure of the details in the rules for IT and they are probably not 100% the same as for the 944 spec Paul is in, but that seems like a huge gain for only few different mods.
I know this subject can get touchy, but I am firm believer in using the facts cold hard logic. These tend not to lie. I realize that I do not have all the facts, but from what I know it appears that few mods that IT allow vs 944 spec or PCA appear to be the huge. I guess Jon would hate the let those secrets out the bag since he seems to be the only one who know what they are. And that is competive advantage for Milldege Engines which means $$ and survival for any business.
I would intersted to know if John Anderson has any idea what these type of mods may be. He seems to be one of the few on this board that know in the inner workings of NA motors well enough.
Of course I hate to put John on the spot since both Anderson and Milldege are basicly in the same business and it is not cool to comment about your competition. <img src="graemlins/nono.gif" border="0" alt="[nono]" />
Anyway 185 bhp is pretty darn good for a 2.5L 8v NA. I assume Jon Milldege has Dyno #'s to show 185bhp <img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[burnout]" />
Obviously a engine JME is "required" ITS
M758
DYNO=PROOF
Everything Else is just talk
Please don't suggest he's producing illegal engines.
<hr></blockquote>
GEO - I have seen the 185 bhp claims.
Is that Flywheel or rear wheels?
If Paul is putting down 132 to the rear wheels and a Legal ITS is putting down 185. Then a guy like Paul would not stand a chance. That is over 50 hp. Seems kind of strange to me that one guy could get about 10 hp from mods and another gets 60 bhp from a similar rule set.
Now if that 185 is at the flywheel then.
assume 20 hp loss through drivetrain (consistent with 143 vs 123 stock flywheel rating vs stock rear wheel dyno).
Then his engines put out 165 at the rear wheels.
Wow that is still a 40bhp gain vs Pauls 10 bhp.
I am not sure of the details in the rules for IT and they are probably not 100% the same as for the 944 spec Paul is in, but that seems like a huge gain for only few different mods.
I know this subject can get touchy, but I am firm believer in using the facts cold hard logic. These tend not to lie. I realize that I do not have all the facts, but from what I know it appears that few mods that IT allow vs 944 spec or PCA appear to be the huge. I guess Jon would hate the let those secrets out the bag since he seems to be the only one who know what they are. And that is competive advantage for Milldege Engines which means $$ and survival for any business.
I would intersted to know if John Anderson has any idea what these type of mods may be. He seems to be one of the few on this board that know in the inner workings of NA motors well enough.
Of course I hate to put John on the spot since both Anderson and Milldege are basicly in the same business and it is not cool to comment about your competition. <img src="graemlins/nono.gif" border="0" alt="[nono]" />
Anyway 185 bhp is pretty darn good for a 2.5L 8v NA. I assume Jon Milldege has Dyno #'s to show 185bhp <img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[burnout]" />
Obviously a engine JME is "required" ITS
M758
DYNO=PROOF
Everything Else is just talk
08-27-2002, 05:53 PM
#44
Race Director
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>GEO - I have seen the 185 bhp claims.
Is that Flywheel or rear wheels?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm sure that is at the flywheel. Jon appears to have an engine brake dyno in his shop.
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>I am not sure of the details in the rules for IT and they are probably not 100% the same as for the 944 spec Paul is in, but that seems like a huge gain for only few different mods.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am not sure what Paul is allowed, but I imagine it's prety close to IT (which I've already described).
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>I know this subject can get touchy, but I am firm believer in using the facts cold hard logic.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
As do I. I have to admit I don't have a dyno chart from a JME engine. I guess it's possible the numbers are fudged, but I rather doubt it. If he ever got caught fudging numbers, that would be the end of his reputation.
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>I would intersted to know if John Anderson has any idea what these type of mods may be. He seems to be one of the few on this board that know in the inner workings of NA motors well enough.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The mods that are allowed in IT are few. I'm sure there is considerable attention to detail.
I think it's also possible that is for the 2.7 liter engine since that is also legal for IT albeit at a higher weight.
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>Obviously a engine JME is "required" ITS</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wouldn't go that far. I assure you I won't have one. The machine work and measurements for my engine when I build it will be done by Don Istook in Ft Worth.
<strong>GEO - I have seen the 185 bhp claims.
Is that Flywheel or rear wheels?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm sure that is at the flywheel. Jon appears to have an engine brake dyno in his shop.
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>I am not sure of the details in the rules for IT and they are probably not 100% the same as for the 944 spec Paul is in, but that seems like a huge gain for only few different mods.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am not sure what Paul is allowed, but I imagine it's prety close to IT (which I've already described).
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>I know this subject can get touchy, but I am firm believer in using the facts cold hard logic.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
As do I. I have to admit I don't have a dyno chart from a JME engine. I guess it's possible the numbers are fudged, but I rather doubt it. If he ever got caught fudging numbers, that would be the end of his reputation.
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>I would intersted to know if John Anderson has any idea what these type of mods may be. He seems to be one of the few on this board that know in the inner workings of NA motors well enough.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The mods that are allowed in IT are few. I'm sure there is considerable attention to detail.
I think it's also possible that is for the 2.7 liter engine since that is also legal for IT albeit at a higher weight.
[quote]Originally posted by M758:
<strong>Obviously a engine JME is "required" ITS</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wouldn't go that far. I assure you I won't have one. The machine work and measurements for my engine when I build it will be done by Don Istook in Ft Worth.
08-27-2002, 07:14 PM
#45
Race Director
Hmm,
Did not think about 2.7L motor.
That would definitly change the picture.
I think those came stock 163 flywheel so 185 bhp for a 2.7 IT motor is not bad.
M758
Did not think about 2.7L motor.
That would definitly change the picture.
I think those came stock 163 flywheel so 185 bhp for a 2.7 IT motor is not bad.
M758