|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by bnoon:
1. Demon, most of the people running higher numbers on a 2.5L, turbo or SC, are tuned to the MAX to obtain those numbers and trying every time to recreate those numbers for the street using racing gas mixed with 93 octane, or running some track only water injection device.
That's exactly why I took averages of regularly tuned FI'd cars!
Otherwise I would have used the 295HP Turbo 2.5L & S/C 2.5L dynos as a comparison. However I know those were maxed out tunes and not a true representation of a normal tune running on 91 octane tractor fuel.
In some locations the high tune numbers would be valid because better fuel is available right at any pump!
So those numbers are VERY VALID for a true comparison.
Also the SHOShop 3L is a very valid comparison considering it was tuned on Kalifornia reformulated 91 octane POS fuel. The fact that it's overall power numbers averaged only down about 6% on HP & TQ show how well a well tuned 3L (even with the small valves) compares.
Then factor in one with larger valves, better head porting, ~11.5 CR and with 92-93 octane available at the pump and the overall numbers would be Very close for comparison! No waiting for boost required either!
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 972
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 972 |
I don't think it is bad at all. I remember Po-Jay got 240FWHP/185Tq after the initial install on his 2.5. If it is truely detuned that much I would be happy to have those numbers.
95 SE Modded - Gone
98 E0 Black SVT - Gone
98 se sport - Broken
00 T-Red SVT - Nice
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,506
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,506 |
I think the numbers are great, considering that it was detuned for relaiability!
I also understand what Demon is also saying too.
On his comparison, he used averages , not top numbers.
So he was merly saying (from what i gathered) that for other average numbers of 2.5 and 3 liters, both F/I and N/A, he expected more of a better adverage form a 3 liter w/ super charger. But also there are not eough dynos out there (atleast form what i Have looked for) of 3 liters with a supercharger to come up with an exact average, unless im looking in the wrong spot.
Good job on the 3 liter...hope you enjoy many years of spirited driving!!!
Roz
Last edited by Roz 1999 SVT-C; 03/25/03 08:47 PM.
3.0 SVT hybrid...all the fixens...Track/Race ready very soon!!!!!! 20,000 + miles
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 976
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 976 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Then factor in one with larger valves, better head porting, ~11.5 CR and with 92-93 octane available at the pump and the overall numbers would be Very close for comparison! No waiting for boost required either!
No way you will get those #'s out of a 3L NA on 91, guranteed. So your argument means nothing. I don't wait long for boost either.
I offer PnP Heads for all durtec's details at PnPheads.com or jesse@pnpheads.com for details.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by kinger:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Then factor in one with larger valves, better head porting, ~11.5 CR and with 92-93 octane available at the pump and the overall numbers would be Very close for comparison! No waiting for boost required either!
No way you will get those #'s out of a 3L NA on 91, guranteed. So your argument means nothing. I don't wait long for boost either.
My comparison is very valid. I am sorry you just do NOT want to hear it.
My main comparison was against an average S/C 2.5 because we all know the average turbo charged 2.5L crushes your numbers.
In this case alone I was very surprised at how little HP gain there was through the entire power band (the average tells the story!) for an engine 20% larger. As I have stated before the expected TQ increase was most definitely present!
I threw in the SHOShop numbers as a representation of a well tuned 3L (which AGAIN I specifically stated) and pointed out how well it compared up until 5000rpm. (I was actually quite shocked myself)
Also if you re-read my posts you will see I based all this off of POS 91 octane tractor gas. Lots of folks can get high quality 92-95 octane at any pump the come across but I only mentioned that as a footnote. I did not use those numbers for a comparison.
Also the part of my post you DID quote specifically stated 92-93 octane fuel. I am quite confident a well built and tuned high CR 3L with large valves can make 240-250 FWHP & 220-230FWTQ with out resorting to race fuel. Again I only added it as an example footnote.
Also an engine built like that would most definitely surpass your numbers up to 5000-5500rpm and only start to trail after that. But I bet the overall power averages (not just PEAK numbers) would be very close.
For example the SHOShop 3L's "average" power numbers are only 6-7% lower.
I will say that probably a better example of "average power" would have been after the IMRC point and in the true powerband. Say from 4500rpm on up. Especially for comparison against a NA car.
However using the numbers below that showed how strong a hot NA 3L or more specifically any turbo can be.
I originally started the chart with just the average turbo & S/C 2.5L's numbers. I then threw in the NA car's for a better overall feel of the engine's numbers verses other combonations out there.
Afterall that's exactly what we are all comparing our's to. Each other's cars.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,279
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,279 |
I will say this, the SC shows consistant numbers regardless of engine. The 2.5L installs show 100+ hp and 50ft/lb increase. He has pretty much that on the 3L. The engine is 20% larger, but the SC is still the same, pushing the same CFM.
Those who were expecting higher were just being optimistic. The Turbo will obviously be higher output, the kit has an intercooler and a real set of headers. Take in consideration that it does not rob the engine for power like an SC does and there is even more HP/TQ right there. Also the turbo reaches full boost at ~3000rpm, the SC is just starting to make it.
As for the SHOshop 3L, they have one car doing those numbers (Vadim's) I have not seen another SHOShop car put out those kind of numbers regardless of gas octane.
Previous Owner of 00 SVT Contour #1077/2150 
95 Contour SE '01 3L 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,621
Redneck Troll
|
|
Redneck Troll
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,621 |
Demon, you're missing the ENTIRE point! The well tuned comparisons that you are averaging together are all just that, well tuned!!! This is a SAFE tuned car, that when WELL TUNED on 91 octane gas made over 300 at the wheels. With the minimal amount of mods, running 91 octane, that's very respectable. There's a lot more to be had with the 3L combination, but at a major expense of reliability of the bottom end of the engine. With the reflashed ECU, there's nothing stopping him from adding a chip to be able to run more timing on race gas to add even more on top of the 300+ tune. O.K.... maybe one thing, but his wife aside, there's nothing stopping him...
Average those numbers together with Rick's dyno when he gets it, maybe add in a few others willing to add rods/cryo treating/headers/etc to surpass those nubers reliably, then you'll have something to compare to.
Quote:
Posted by DemonSVT:
Also the part of my post you DID quote specifically stated 92-93 octane fuel. I am quite confident a well built and tuned high CR 3L with large valves can make 240-250 FWHP & 220-230FWTQ with out resorting to race fuel.
Yes, that is possible with a NA 3L and custom cams. Just ask Jennings. He has David Z's old engine that has put down numbers similar to those. The rest of the 3L hybrid NA crowd is stuck in the 220's it seems. Vadims car has extensive porting on the stock SVT heads, very high state of tune, and almost every available bolt on (as well as some not available yet) and he's still not there. The larger valves are a cheaper way to add more flow than Extrude Honing the heads with the stock valves... but, due to valve shrouding with the larger valves, especially at high lift/high RPM, there's still a debate amoung engine builders/head flow experts which combination is better once both versions are ported in similar fashion. Hummmmmm... engine dyno in Cedar Rapids... hummmmm...
Quote:
posted by Knu:
The engine is 20% larger, but the SC is still the same, pushing the same CFM.
No, the SC is over-driven by a smaller pully here to maintain boost on the larger engine, hence more CFM.
http://www.bnmotorsports.com
"And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my CEG brothers. And you will know I am the Moderator when I lay my vengeance upon you."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 976
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 976 |
I offer PnP Heads for all durtec's details at PnPheads.com or jesse@pnpheads.com for details.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,506
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,506 |
I have been a third party that has been following this forum.
And i have to say, Demons original Post i did not find threating, or insulting in anyway. Im not sure where the falling out was on the converstion, but there definatly was one!
Too me I understood both sides of your guys story...Kinger, you were looking for THE SAFEST bost to run and your are very happy with your numbers....I applaud your effort and accomplishments...not many can say they have a SC 3 liter.
And Demon was trying to explain that he felt that even average (and I will asume "safe" averages, aswell) should have produced more power. And demon gave a compliment to your car by stateing it would walk over him any day.
To me I think this has gone to an informative thread, to a battle of egos or Ego.
Look form an outside persective ( and coming form someone who never got a long with demon in the begining) I felt he was only giving valid points and that he was just trying to explain why he felt you should see more power, even in a detuned 3 liter.
I think we all need to take our own advise and grow up and be adults about the matter...or else were just as bad as the Newbies that shove there thumbs in there ass and ask the same questions over and over.
Roz
3.0 SVT hybrid...all the fixens...Track/Race ready very soon!!!!!! 20,000 + miles
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,621
Redneck Troll
|
|
Redneck Troll
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,621 |
Roz, there has been no name calling, no unbacked statements made, nor any openly harmful threats made. Nobody needs to grow up here or heed any of their own advice. It's a technical argument going on here, nothing else. Demon didn't make any insulting statements in his opening remarks, just wrong ones. 
For one, knowing that Po Jay claims to mix racing gas in with high octane pump gas shows that he's avoiding a dangerous ping like the plague... because he's not on a safe tune like Jesse is.
http://www.bnmotorsports.com
"And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my CEG brothers. And you will know I am the Moderator when I lay my vengeance upon you."
|
|
|
|
|
