Horses - Euro vs US
06-20-2005, 04:35 PM
#76
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had my 1980 Euro S 5 speed with 74k on it dynoed last summer, did three pulls. They were 267 hp, 266 hp, and 263 hp. Using a 15% correction factor for RWHP to CHP puts my car at between 314 and 309 hp. It was rated at 300 hp in 1980, maybe the german standard for hp was different than the US back in 1980. The car was stock except for a small pipe, three muffler Ansa exhaust system. The car did not have a cat. What suprised me is not the hp but the low torque numbers 239 to 241 ft lbs. I changed the exhaust to a 2.25" dual system with one muffler a dual inlet/outlet Magnaflo with an X-path. The exhaust change really changed things, it revs so quick now that I have to be very careful or I hit the limiter at 6,200 rpm I never had that concern with the Ansa exhaust. Compared to the four valve cars my car is a bit slow under 3,000 rpm and they will leave me in a roll on. But above 3K rpm I can show them tail lights with ease. Part of the reason is weight the later cars weigh much more than my 80. The later 84/85 Euro S cars had more compression and the LH fuel injection and were rated at 310 hp but the rating was said to be quite conservative. I woud imagine that the 84/85 cars would have more torque than my 80 with the same rev hp curve.
Paul
1980 Euro S Red/Blk Lea
Paul
1980 Euro S Red/Blk Lea
06-20-2005, 05:25 PM
#79
Three Wheelin'
Why do the LH Euros have so much more torque than the CIS Euros? I would think the extra compression would effect torque and HP equally. Is it the better fuel mgmt of the electronic injection or the later cams?
06-21-2005, 02:50 AM
#82
Rennlist Member
Just checked the manuals, looks like the main bearing thrust bearing journal is the same for the 80 to S4 cranks. (ie 30.2mm) so, when was the journal smaller? ive installed the later crank in the 82 euro block, and axial play seems to be in spec. i just dont see what you are talking about below! let me (us ) know .
MK
MK
Originally Posted by Vilhuer
Crank oil holes were enlarged from 4mm to 5mm for '84 model year. You'll need later type main bearings with large holes.
Other change done at same time was crank thrust bearing, it was widened. '84+ crank will expect wider thrust bearing when up to '83 block uses narrow version. Also block in that area has different width to support the bearing. It will not be simple bolt on to put later style crank on older style block AFAIK. Can material be added to block halves to make old style block to work with newer style crank? Old crank in newer block is doable by machining crank to accept wider thrust bearing.
Other change done at same time was crank thrust bearing, it was widened. '84+ crank will expect wider thrust bearing when up to '83 block uses narrow version. Also block in that area has different width to support the bearing. It will not be simple bolt on to put later style crank on older style block AFAIK. Can material be added to block halves to make old style block to work with newer style crank? Old crank in newer block is doable by machining crank to accept wider thrust bearing.
06-21-2005, 03:50 AM
#83
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by mark kibort
Just checked the manuals, looks like the main bearing thrust bearing journal is the same for the 80 to S4 cranks. (ie 30.2mm) so, when was the journal smaller? ive installed the later crank in the 82 euro block, and axial play seems to be in spec. i just dont see what you are talking about below! let me (us ) know .
From "Service Info Tech 1984.pdf", page #4 on Jim's CD's.
"Important Modifications on Crankcase and Crankshaft
Crankshaft / Crankcase
The crankshaft thrust bearing has a wider contact collar. This increases the area of the bearing surfaces and reduces wear.
The bearing seats in the upper and lower sections of the crankcase as well as the bearing surfaces on the crankshaft have been changed accordingly because of the modified thrust bearing.
The diameter of the lubricating oil bores for the connecting rod bearings in the crankshaft has been changed from 4 mm to 5 mm to improve the supply of lubricating oil.
To avoid leakage around the front crankshaft seal, a relief groove has been machined in the bearing sea’t near crankshaft bearing no. 1 in lower section of the crankcase."
Hope this clears up what changed for '84.
06-21-2005, 11:46 AM
#84
Rennlist Member
Thats good. I was getting a little worried. sounds like the bearing change is just the area change on the sides of the thrust bearing. (and i guess on the crank) that could explain why the newer crank and the older block were rubbing) anyway, thats all fixed before assembly and are free and clear. It looks like i (scot) may be leaking out the front seal, but thats just a kitty litter issue!
it sure looks good now, and cant wait to lite it up!!
MK
[QUOTE=Vilhuer]My misundestanding. Thrust bearing collar is taller from '84 forward. Bearing is still same width it seems.
From "Service Info Tech 1984.pdf", page #4 on Jim's CD's.
"Important Modifications on Crankcase and Crankshaft
Crankshaft / Crankcase
The crankshaft thrust bearing has a wider contact collar. This increases the area of the bearing surfaces and reduces wearn.
The bearing seats in the upper and lower sections of the crankcase as well as the bearing surfaces on the crankshaft have been changed accordingly because of the modified thrust bearing.
The diameter of the lubricating oil bores for the connecting rod bearings in the crankshaft has been changed from 4 mm to 5 mm to improve the supply of lubricating oil.
To avoid leakage around the front crankshaft seal, a relief groove has been machined in the bearing sea’t near crankshaft bearing no. 1 in lower section of the crankcase."
Hope this clears up what changed for '84.[/QUOT
it sure looks good now, and cant wait to lite it up!!
MK
[QUOTE=Vilhuer]My misundestanding. Thrust bearing collar is taller from '84 forward. Bearing is still same width it seems.
From "Service Info Tech 1984.pdf", page #4 on Jim's CD's.
"Important Modifications on Crankcase and Crankshaft
Crankshaft / Crankcase
The crankshaft thrust bearing has a wider contact collar. This increases the area of the bearing surfaces and reduces wearn.
The bearing seats in the upper and lower sections of the crankcase as well as the bearing surfaces on the crankshaft have been changed accordingly because of the modified thrust bearing.
The diameter of the lubricating oil bores for the connecting rod bearings in the crankshaft has been changed from 4 mm to 5 mm to improve the supply of lubricating oil.
To avoid leakage around the front crankshaft seal, a relief groove has been machined in the bearing sea’t near crankshaft bearing no. 1 in lower section of the crankcase."
Hope this clears up what changed for '84.[/QUOT
06-21-2005, 12:09 PM
#85
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stan,
Good to know mine is a representive example of the early 928 S Euro cars. I have been very pleased with how much a free flowing exhaust waskes up the 4.7 Euro motor. It simply screams once you get it past 3K rpm. It is a bit noisy but the responsiveness is well worth it. I hope to get it back on the dyno this summer, really want to get a firm idea of how much the hp has increased.
Paul
1980 EuroS Red/Blk Lea
Good to know mine is a representive example of the early 928 S Euro cars. I have been very pleased with how much a free flowing exhaust waskes up the 4.7 Euro motor. It simply screams once you get it past 3K rpm. It is a bit noisy but the responsiveness is well worth it. I hope to get it back on the dyno this summer, really want to get a firm idea of how much the hp has increased.
Paul
1980 EuroS Red/Blk Lea
06-29-2005, 03:25 AM
#86
928 Collector
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Someone said I should beware air leaks. Well ...
Today I returned the original MAF, and in doing so realised that the MAF didn't seat very tightly at the bottom. The top has two clamps and a fat rubber seal, but the bottom just sits there, with a flimsy gasket that looks dried-out. And ... since I had nicely tightened the MAF upstairs, I realised that it was "hanging" a bit above seated position, so I disconnected the top clamp; dropped the MAF a lot lower and tightened, thereby forcing the MAF to seat as I bolted the airbox in.
WHAT A DIFFERENCE!!!!!!!!!!!! She's running like a raped ape. However ... I still think the US '85 will rip 'er a new one
Today I returned the original MAF, and in doing so realised that the MAF didn't seat very tightly at the bottom. The top has two clamps and a fat rubber seal, but the bottom just sits there, with a flimsy gasket that looks dried-out. And ... since I had nicely tightened the MAF upstairs, I realised that it was "hanging" a bit above seated position, so I disconnected the top clamp; dropped the MAF a lot lower and tightened, thereby forcing the MAF to seat as I bolted the airbox in.
WHAT A DIFFERENCE!!!!!!!!!!!! She's running like a raped ape. However ... I still think the US '85 will rip 'er a new one
