I've owned my 944t for 30 years. The motor is a Jon Milledge 3.1L (I think it's actually 3088cc. The exterior appears stock except the 4" Mandrel bent exhaust, done by Jerry Woods and as was the Guard differential, as the Torsen broke, and the vented area in front of intercooler which is only 50% larger than stock. Jerry took 2 stock intercoolers and made one larger one. The car is currently over at Veracity having the old MoTeC replaced with a new M1. The engine dyno numbers from Jerry's dyno were a peak of 592HP at 6.5k RPM and torque peaked at 517lb./ft. Torque was at or above 500 from 3.5k RPM to 6k RPM, dropping to 475 at 6.5 RPM. After that the motor had dry sump installed. I do not know, and neither does Jon, the intake or ambient temps during these pulls. When Jon dyno'd these motors placed the intercooler into a large vat of 40c water. I believe the turbo is a GT3788R. I believe a Jason Lee built a new 321 header, which was not cheap, but the craftsmanship is excellent+. Thank you, Jason. B.911 injectors. 968 transmission as Jon told me the 951 stock would break. I hate the close gear ratios, but there are always compromises. Power steering pump is in back, along with the old reserve. I typically use only Sunoco GTPlus, but I've had to replace a couple of fuel tanks / bladders. 1.35 bar on high boost, but may raise it to 1.4. The engine pic shows a bar connected from motor to shock tower, to save the Ron Davis radiator. I think the bar came is used in one of Porsches more recent cars. Jon built a few of those barrel valve manifolds. One hour apart I weighed the 951 w/1/2 tank of Sunoco and less than an hours weighed my (don't hate me) 650s w/1/2 tank. It is a truck scale and I know they are not accurate but for comparison purposes I believe it's good. 951 at 2980 and fat boy at 3260. No occupants. When the 650s was stock, the 951 would pull on it to redline in 6th, except for possibly the quicker dual clutch, which when I downloaded files, from ECU, it appears that shifts were 100 milliseconds, far more than Surrey says, but still fast. I love my 951 more than 650s. The 650s is kind of loud, but the 951 vibrates my house. Take care

 

Wow! What a Gem.

 

That looks fantastic! Looks to be a well thought out build.

 

Better late than never.

What an inspirational car. Thanks for sharing.

 

I bet a lot of money went into that build.

 

Very, very nice!

 

I wonder how much power it loses, with the intercooler mounted in the front of the car?

 

Sorry, when I posted some data, not only did I make quite a few typos, some details were incorrect. I pulled out invoices, but I'll go back before this motor to my first 3.1L turbo, which Milledge built a few years after the turn of the century. That motor produced 521HP and 481-lb/ft at 1.35 bar, using a Turbonetics 60-1HiFi. I know, very outdated today. After 65k miles on the motor, I was doing a pull and only one wheel was spinning, I hade broken the Torsen. I called Jon and asked if he would rebuild motor with more contemporary equipment. The interesting aspect of the first 3.1, is that there was only minor difference, if any, between medium boost and high 1.20-1.35. I'm guessing it was the 3.5" steel exhaust, but I truly do not know.

Jon tore down motor and said wear was minimal, but most every, if not every, moving part was replaced. I mentioned that torque was above 500 from 3.5k to 6k, that is incorrect. Torque dipped to 498.8 at 4.5k and at 5k was 497.4. At 6k it was 490.9, down to 482.9 at 6,250 and 6.5k was 472.9. I apologize. The turbo that I called out is incorrect. That turbo I mentioned was on earlier paperwork, but Jon opted for a GT3586 wet, 82stainless, CNC comp, wheel. The 4" SS exhaust made a huge difference. It appears to run all the way to the very front. The first 3.1 made 520hp and 481lb/ft, but this motor "feels" far stronger than the difference shown on dyno pulls. But that's speculation.

The compromise was huge, as I wanted the car to remain stock looking, except for vents and exhaust. The AC works great with condenser coils in places under the car. I mentioned that it pulled on my 650s, and that was medium boost. I used high boost only once and that was with Jon in car with laptop on high boost pull. When we got back, I asked Jon if the clutch was slipping? He said it had 700lb/ft of clamping force, so no. I downloaded the MoTeC file saw the RPM climb 200-250 for a couple of seconds. The tires were new, so using tire rotations per mile and gearing, the car was spinning it's rear tires at 95mph. I have 888's to be mounted soon. I'm sure many of you have had similar experiences in these cars with no ABS, traction control, air bag, side door beams, and no dynamic body control. The 650s is 20% more difficult to drive than a Camry. 951 is magnitudes more difficult, as you well know.

The turbo in on-off. At 3.9k it's pulling ok, at 4k, it spins tires in first 3 gears and even in 4th, it needs not pointed straight ahead. The new M1 MoTeC, at 200hz will have traction control and knock sensing and boost in 1st and 2nd will be limited. They were useless before.

You may already know this, when shifting from 5th to 6th at high RPM, I was trained to place my R-hand on the inside, close to me, of the shifter, as when one pulls the shifter straight down, one can get fourth. An updated photo as blow off valves were updated and the small vents up front and a completely stock, I need to have seats recovered, but I haven't found qualified help up here.




nd qualified help where I live.

 

Fascinating build! May I ask if you retained balance shafts and hydraulic lifters?

 

Jon Milledge only builds race motors, however he built my motors while keeping in mind, this is not a race motor. So different clearances, etc. He's probably built 100+ of the 944, 951, 3+ liter, etc. He considered a stoker crank, but Jon knows I'll sacrifice some hp for longevity. When he was going to rebuild this motor, he asked, "Tell me what you want and I'll tell you why you can't have it".

For my motor he kept the balance shaft, and the hydraulic lifters, which he made some adjustments, I think it was a hole in the side, for better oiling. I dont know exactly where that hole is located. He mentioned to me that he had built a 750hp motor, but we didn't have time to get into details.

I was with him, while he was tightening the head. He torqued all bolts to a certain torque limit, then repeated this with a higher torque level and the third time he tightened the bolts, he held the torque wrench in place for one minute, for each bolt.

This may sound ridiculous, but it's true. On medium boost, I can go flat in 3rd-6th, and the acceleration is without any peaks or valleys. The pull feels exactly the same, although it's not, as speed builds. My Camry doesn't pull as linear, and nether has any car I've driven. He's careful at sizing turbo, hot and cold sides, camshaft, etc.

I made an error on the turbo. I missed the R, so gt3586r wet, .82 Stainless CNC comp. wheel. Speed Force built header.

I hope this helps, and thank you.

 

Love the contrast between the engine and the "rest of the car."

The body looks, for lack of a better word... "civilized." Purposeful and powerful... but civilized.

That engine looks like something right out of Mad Max. Absolutely savage!

 

Magnificent build!
Do you have any pictures of your dry sump installation?
Being a LHD car, I assume your oil tank in under the bonnet in the scuttle.
For the 952 (RHD) road cars which have the battery in the boot (trunk) we locate the dry sump tank (and breather tank, fuel system pumps & fuel swirl pot) in the spare wheel well under a sealed cover.
Race cars are obviously different.

 

I just noticed your dry sump doesn't appear to be in the scuttle.
I'm assuming this a JME closed deck, wet liner build.
What bore & stroke are your running - I assume you're running the 88mm stroke with bore increased to 106mm?
Do you know what sort of mains & big end bearings Jon used?
It's definitely a beautiful, indeed aspiration build.

 

Dyno pull

I didn't want dry sump, but it's Jon's motor, I'm just the keeper. Both the oil reserve as well as the power steering reserve are in the spare tire well. The bore is 4.165". The dyno pull was done prior to adding the dry sump and the temperature of intake air was not controlled. The car is having an M1 MoTeC installed so I cannot take photos now. I used to use a distilled water spray for the intercooler, which was thermostat controlled, but that was in the tire well, so something had to go. I was fond of the Accusump as I would see 3 bars of oil pressure, prior to starting, but Jon preferred dry sump and I cannot disagree. In sealing the deck, years ago Jon had used a receiving ring, but I don't believe he used that, as gaskets have improved dramatically. I see that he used a MLS 106MM gasket, which go on dry. I do not know what what was used in the bottom, mains or bearings, he keeps some areas close to his vest. I know he does his own work on "JME support" on cylinder 4. He did not use a 94MM stroke crank shaft, basically to remain conservative, I believe.

 

OK - it looks like a 102.25mm bore with a 94mm stroke to arrive at 3088cc.

When I bought a cam off him & he advised about refurbishing the OPRV in an N/A cylinder head I bought, Jon described the painstaking lengths he goes to to fit his closed deck wet liners to a block - he's truly a master craftsman.
Did he he fit his large diameter head stud kit?
I love the sleeper look, IMHO it 's subtle and shows a maturity of approach.
You've described the transmission & engine - I assume there are also modifications to the suspension & brakes?
Have you done much with the oil cooling for both the engine & the transmission?

Those power & torques figures show how much is left in the 8 valve head with a meticulously planned & executed build.
I mean 592 bhp at 1.35 Bar & 517 lb/ft from a street drivable 8 valve is truly impressive - superb.
Tim