|
|
|
Support Our Vendors
|
|||||
|
||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/S...g72_197806.htm
Have you ever been so embarrassed/shocked by a race that you have your friend open up the dyno shop to test the car you just lost to? I messed up the shift on the first run. The last two runs I brake boosted and the last one I was running 10 psi on the hit (boiled the brakes too). I dont think there is any way he could keep up when I have 10psi on the hit he kept increasing his boost but it didn't help cause I kept driving better. We were tuned for 17psi boost on 12.1:1 fuel ratio but the fuel pump wiring seems to have crapped out on the way to the race and we had to turn the boost down. It was still lean!!! 14+ air fuel ratios! He was so emasculated that he called his buddy to open the dyno shop cause he thought i was cheating and running more boost. Remember these are with lack of fuel and cam gears advanced 4 degrees because I thought that would help my powerband until I can rev past 6200. The dyno proved I was out of fuel!!!!!! 13psi pull Look how power hurts when it leans out. I dont think the HP peak is real, but its because there is just no more fuel! ![]() 15psi OH DANG! Lost power! ![]() These are corrected numbers so I dont take them seriously. I think I can do 384 real HP easy if I fix the fuel, take the cams back to stock, and rev over 7. All on super low boost. The real number is only 332hp and 325hp. Stupid altitude. I would like to build nicer tubular manifolds and fix the top runner size on my intake manifold but these numbers make me care a lot less about that at low boost. 2 valve heads for teh loss! Last edited by Ondonti; 11-10-2008 at 06:47 AM. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
Video URL doesn't work. Based on your posed, I think you are fighting the port design if I had to guess. Are you peaking around 5400?? I would expect that you would probably keep it from falling on it's face by fixing fuel, but I would expect it to move the peak that much with cam adjustments - don't get me wrong though, it will help.
__________________
Frank KatzenbergerSquirrel Performance - Home of the best turbo calc!!! http://www.squirrelpf.com 91 Daytona Shelby - It is getting there 87 Shelby CSX #418 - Near stock is a good thing! 94 Bronco 302 XLT - Shorty Headers, 3" exhaust, cold air intake, & Soft top "... to get the best out of it, you have to go beyond the line. Where bravery becomes insanity. Shall I turn into this hairpin bend at a 100mph? Why not!" Visit the new Knowledge Center today! Check out the one and only Shelby Dodge Registry! |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
fixed. The dyno sheets were messed up too. I copied it from the 3.0 section and forgot to copy the code instead of just the text.
I dont see it falling on its face if the fuel is right...even with the messed up fuel it doesnt drop much. It goes crazy lean around the peak. I dont know what that dip @ 4650 rpms is. it happens on both, even though the a/f is consisten in that area (lean but consistent). My guess is the HP would have flatlined once the fuel stabilized if I kept reving higher until I let off or it blew up :P Thats what it does in the 15psi pull where the extra 2 pounds of boost totally overcomes the pump. I think its interesting to see how this dyno sheet compares with a bolt on 3.0 dyno. ![]() ![]() I do think advancing the cam timing 4 degrees makes a difference for the low end. Nice thing is that I pretty much have n/a 3.0 torque before boost builds so its not a dog out of boost. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
Man your car is ugly!!!!! But the "business" part is making up for it. I had a dip like that in my dyno from KR, car never leaned out but the stupid knock sensor kept pulling timing. Do you data log to read KR? NICE KILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
Looks Good, I assume those SR20 numbers are corrected also.
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
gads man that afr is scary! Looks like if you fixed the fuel and get your rev limiter and cam timing figured out you will be deep into the 400s on the same or less boost.
glad to finally see it all coming together. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
Quote:
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
Quote:
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
Quote:
We had nothing to hide, and he was not a happy guy that night. I love how they are all talking like your done making power. lol riiiight. You will solve the fuel thing just like you did everything else.
|
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
I already put together a hotwire kit, I just need to solder the 10 gauge wire onto the stock pump connector (sucky).
|
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
Very nice, now quit patching it together, and get it fixed up properly,
__________________
1989 Turbo Caravan-2.5 TIII, GT35R, auto, a/c, cruise, pwr windows/locks, fully loaded with interior and ran with full exhaust. 12.57@104 :O) 1991 Spirit R/T-FOR SALE!!! 1987 GLHS Charger, #58 Aurora ignition wires for sale. Link to info Super60 roller cams. Link to info TIII adapter plates for a dizzy.Link to info. Quote:
|
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
haha, I am building the fuel pump connector ends (cant use the stock connector cause the 10awg is too fat) and I actually shrinkwrapped them. It makes me feel snobby doing things right lol.
I should be doing other non car things though :P |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
Woot, the hotwire is working.
Anyone have an idea what the 4700 rpms torque drop is? |
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
well since its there at different boost levels id guess its not a weird airflow related problem... torque starts dropping near 4700 on the n/a too.. it just keeps going
|
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
thats an interesting point. That would make me think the stock calibration does something stupid around that point.
|
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
OMG it's so ugly but so fawking cool!! BIG
__________________
01 VW GTI - 2.8 12v VR6 - 60-1, FMIC, 38mm WG, 3" exh, 42pph inj's, moddest plenum, 10psi boost, 4" intake, C2 Flashload 333WHP/296WTQ - FOR SALE - $10,000 OBO 1990 Caravan - Lots of boost and a lot of chemicals - Rolling Science Box 13.2 at 104 |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
love every vid i see this thing in
|
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
I will look for some pics of the manifold. Closeups are mostly only gonna be from the days I was building it. Not sure what kind of pictures you want. Might possibly rebuild it in aluminum with big trumpets or just add larger runners (bought the wrong size and never measured).
Its a T67 with P trim t4 wheel stuffed into a t3 housing (so it fits the old manifold stolen from my turbo Spirit that had an divided t3 ebay turbo). Heads/cams etc. Interested to see how high the motor will rev and still make good power when the fuel doesn't disappear and I have the cams unadvanced next year (i hope). Its uncharted territory. I hope I can at least get the torque to flatline to 6000 with just proper fuel. flat torque makes me happy in regards to putting the most power to the ground possible. I dream of reving to 7500 but my dream may prove pointless if I cant make power up there. The intake runner size being fixed on my upper plenum might help but I dont know if its that big of a deal. |
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets
Why does the N/A 3.0 with bolt-ons chart look like my old daytona's chart.
![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 442whp SR20vet vs 3.0 +dyno sheets | Ondonti | 3.0L V6 Turbo Engines! | 0 | 11-10-2008 12:39 AM |