Notices
944 Turbo and Turbo-S Forum 1982-1991
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Clore Automotive

my 3L dyno

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-10-2015, 10:43 PM
  #31  
e34nication
Rennlist Member
 
e34nication's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 239
Received 34 Likes on 19 Posts
Default

It's in the 80's down here, so not too hot.
Old 12-10-2015, 10:50 PM
  #32  
JBrown
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
JBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by e34nication
It's in the 80's down here, so not too hot.
man it takes that much work to get 400 wheel holy **** lol
Old 12-10-2015, 11:25 PM
  #33  
Humboldtgrin
Drifting
 
Humboldtgrin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
Posts: 2,268
Received 18 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

I don't know about your cylinder head but Lindsey racing stage 3 2.5L 8v head will flow just over 250cfm intake. A 2.7 head flows 263 stock and a ported 16v head can reach 350 cfm intake. Your cylinder head is the weak link is what I'm saying if you want more power, regardless of the porting and big valves. Your head will probably produce near the same power on a 2.5L with a matched turbo but not as nice of a power curve as you have. But you have a 3.0 with a ported/big valve 2.5 8v head which I would say you maxed out with 91 octane fuel. A smaller turbo would move that power curve down a bit. I would find a 2.7 head and send it to LR to work it over. You need more CFM flow in the cylinder head if you want more power and you could bring that boost down some. The 968 turbo rs has about the same power that you have and they use a stock 2.7 head. If you port a 2.7 head the flow will dramatically increase because it's already a big intake port head. You would need to modify the water port (LR could probably do that) and use 951 exaust valves or have LR work that side over too. George D I believe said he used white lighting ceramic coating on the inside of the exhaust ports on his 2.7 head to help aid with the heat so that maybe something to look into or ask him. Also did you get Alberts 2.5" header/crossover? That helps with exhaust back pressure if you already have a big turbo and exhaust from the turbo out. That's just what I see. It's an air pump and the head CFM flow is the major factor. I bet with a 2.7 head with a port and polish with modified water port would realy show what that 3.0 could put down. But with your ported/big valve 2.5 head your about maxed out IMO.
Old 12-10-2015, 11:37 PM
  #34  
V2Rocket
Rainman
Rennlist Member
 
V2Rocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 45,498
Received 633 Likes on 490 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Humboldtgrin
I don't know about your cylinder head but Lindsey racing stage 3 2.5L 8v head will flow just over 250cfm intake. A 2.7 head flows 263 stock and a ported 16v head can reach 350 cfm intake. Your cylinder head is the weak link is what I'm saying if you want more power, regardless of the porting and big valves. Your head will probably produce near the same power on a 2.5L with a matched turbo but not as nice of a power curve as you have. But you have a 3.0 with a ported/big valve 2.5 8v head which I would say you maxed out with 91 octane fuel. A smaller turbo would move that power curve down a bit. I would find a 2.7 head and send it to LR to work it over. You need more CFM flow in the cylinder head if you want more power and you could bring that boost down some. The 968 turbo rs has about the same power that you have and they use a stock 2.7 head. If you port a 2.7 head the flow will dramatically increase because it's already a big intake port head. You would need to modify the water port (LR could probably do that) and use 951 exaust valves or have LR work that side over too. George D I believe said he used white lighting ceramic coating on the inside of the exhaust ports on his 2.7 head to help aid with the heat so that maybe something to look into or ask him. Also did you get Alberts 2.5" header/crossover? That helps with exhaust back pressure if you already have a big turbo and exhaust from the turbo out. That's just what I see. It's an air pump and the head CFM flow is the major factor. I bet with a 2.7 head with a port and polish with modified water port would realy show what that 3.0 could put down. But with your ported/big valve 2.5 head your about maxed out IMO.
I think those quoted flow numbers are pretty optimistic, based on other people's projects shared on here not getting those results on heavily worked heads.

Also, the 968 turbo used what was essentially a 944T head made to fit the 3.0 block (like what Lindsey does)...968T head had 944T-size intake ports and small exhaust ports.

Surely user 968TurboS (Raj) will be along soon, as he has some Rennlist alarm that goes off when people talk about the 968T, and he can set us all straight.


Dear Mr. Brown...I wonder what the graph would look like with the stock intake manifold back on it.
Old 12-11-2015, 12:01 AM
  #35  
jmj951
Pro
 
jmj951's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: This changes a lot.
Posts: 726
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JBrown
here are the mods..
flanged steel sleeved block w/ negative o-ring
88mm crank
104mm bore
forged pistions and rods
alberts "RACE" Cam
6262 with billet wheel
ported head and bigger intake valves
tial 44mm wg
lindsey 3 inch all the way back
race springs and reatainers
Intake manifold made by albert
SPR front mount
EBC
Electromotive tec s
1600cc injectors for e 85 later on
Are you running a completely stock intercooler? If so, that's your bottleneck. A stock IC flows in the low 200cfm's.
Old 12-11-2015, 12:04 AM
  #36  
JBrown
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
JBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jmj951
Are you running a completely stock intercooler? If so, that's your bottleneck. A stock IC flows in the low 200cfm's.

i have speed force racings front mount intercooler
Old 12-11-2015, 12:16 AM
  #37  
Humboldtgrin
Drifting
 
Humboldtgrin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
Posts: 2,268
Received 18 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by V2Rocket_aka944
I think those quoted flow numbers are pretty optimistic, based on other people's projects shared on here not getting those results on heavily worked heads.

Also, the 968 turbo used what was essentially a 944T head made to fit the 3.0 block (like what Lindsey does)...968T head had 944T-size intake ports and small exhaust ports.

Surely user 968TurboS (Raj) will be along soon, as he has some Rennlist alarm that goes off when people talk about the 968T, and he can set us all straight.


Dear Mr. Brown...I wonder what the graph would look like with the stock intake manifold back on it.
Realy? I thought the 968 turbo rs used the 2.7 head just like everyone else that wants to biuld a 3.0 8v turbo using the 104mm block. Isn't that the reason for using the 2.7 head on a big block turbo setup? I like to be set strait when I'm wrong thou. I didn't think Porsche altered the water port from a 2.5 8v turbo head to fit the 104mm bore big block. We can also ask Jason since he has one of the four 968 turbo rs cars.

And I totally forgot about the intercooler, that is very true. I was focused on the long block, exhaust and turbo. And I was thinking if the intake manifold was custom then the intercooler would have been addressed with an updated unit as well.
He beat me to my post, he does have a FMIC.
Old 12-11-2015, 12:24 AM
  #38  
JBrown
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
JBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Here are some photos
Attached Images       
Old 12-11-2015, 12:25 AM
  #39  
JBrown
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
JBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

And more
Old 12-11-2015, 12:42 AM
  #40  
V2Rocket
Rainman
Rennlist Member
 
V2Rocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 45,498
Received 633 Likes on 490 Posts
Default

Devon are you using the stock 951 throttle body?
Old 12-11-2015, 12:46 AM
  #41  
JBrown
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
JBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by V2Rocket_aka944
Devon are you using the stock 951 throttle body?
That is correct
Old 12-11-2015, 12:51 AM
  #42  
Dave W.
Burning Brakes
 
Dave W.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 850
Received 9 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Which fuel are you using?
Old 12-11-2015, 01:06 AM
  #43  
jmj951
Pro
 
jmj951's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: This changes a lot.
Posts: 726
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Not a fan of the intake manifold design. It doesn't take into account the pressure waves bouncing back and forth. In this design, the pressure waves basically go off in different directions instead of traveling back down the runners.

Edit: And, the plenum is enormous. Great for top end, but I'm really curious about how that would affect throttle response in normal driving situations.

Last edited by jmj951; 12-11-2015 at 01:26 AM.
Old 12-11-2015, 02:57 AM
  #44  
333pg333
Rennlist Member
 
333pg333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,902
Received 93 Likes on 76 Posts
Default

Nor of the air filter position. Be an idea to check out that vented LH light cover if you're going to leave it there. And/or some hood vents to encourage some underhood flow.
Old 12-11-2015, 05:46 AM
  #45  
JBrown
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
JBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Dave W.
Which fuel are you using?
93 Right now but going to add a meth kit in the spring


Quick Reply: my 3L dyno



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 05:42 AM.