944crazy

Maybe you need to do a coin toss?

disasterman

Looks bad to the bone.

V2Rocket

what's the deal with that front motor plate for the EWP etc?
looks cool

Paulyy

Will it be going on a dyno once installed? If so you'll be able to make a very quick decision once you see the spool up.
Find the logs from the previous WTAC with cornering speeds ect and do the math.

ehall

Glad to see it coming along, brother!

333pg333

Thanks guys. Last little bits being finished off today. Maybe in crate tomorrow. Once I have the engine build sheet I'll post info.

Won't be quite bolt in but not too many surprises I hope. Having said that, there's always something that comes up. Then run the cams in for 20 mins and off to dyno not much after that. I don't think it's very practical to try and swap over the housings on the dyno but that may be an option. I'm not totally thrilled with a 3" exhaust either.

mikey_audiogeek

1.06 because racecar.

Thom

I have understood from talking with different tuners/people that the GTX3582R was a slightly mismatched turbo, as the compressor apparently flows more than what the GT35 turbine wheel, even when used with the largest 1.06 A/R turbine housing, can ultimately flow when pushed to its limits. Similar symptoms as the mismatched GTX3076R, but less visible.
(In fact if we consider all the billet compressors from the Garrett X-series, it seems the GT35 turbine seems to offer the widest efficiency with the 76mm X-series compressor wheel in the form of the GTX3576R, but let's keep this for another topic).

With that said the GTX3582R seems to work well enough for most applications (and I'll give you a tenner if you wish to get rid of yours ), but considering the mismatch characteristic of that turbo and your "high flow" 16V top end on a 3.xL short block, using the 1.06 housing as a start is a no-brainer to me.
If the engine feels lively enough on a relatively wide high-ish rpm band and if you can slow down how fast revs drop between gearchanges without going too light on the flywheel in order to keep the gearbox usable, you should not be bothered too much if you have peak torque at say 5k, which to me sounds reasonably "good mid range" for a race engine.

Duke

100% agree with you Thom. I used the 1.06 housing on my 3.1l 16v when I still had the manual 6 speed gearbox and at the time the top end of the engine was less flowing than Patricks new engine. I never felt lag was an issue. In fact it was very driveable even on the tightest tracks.

I'd (almost) bet my car on that putting the smaller housing on Patrick's new engine will once again create a mismatched engine that will not shine in the way it could. Low end will not be that impressive and top end will be a disapointment compared to what it could do.

The smaller housing could make sense on a 8v head with limited headwork where you want to use the low end of the rpm range.

gruhsy

..

333pg333

The 1.06 will definitely be on there at the dyno. My gut is telling me the 3" exhaust isn't ideal however this is what we'll have for the moment. If I had another $100k to dump into it, there'd be SQ box, improved Aero and EFR twin scroll setup. But it is what it is and we shall do our best with what we have.

Duke

Does this mean you haven't ruled out this year's WTAC just yet?

333pg333

Stupidly no. We are still going to try and make it even though it's really late and of course there will be virtually no time for testing and the inevitable thing/s that go wrong. It's going to go right down to the wire and somehow I knew that this would happen. We'll need all the Planets to line up perfectly to put up a decent fight.

michaelmount123

Patrick,
You've probably got some long range help via RL when it may be helpful. You can count me in for sure.
MM

333pg333

Thanks Michael and others. You have all been very obliging and helpful along the way.

I think a lot of what has taken time on this motor is trying to build in reliability as well as performance.