Max Power from a 3.0ltr
Max Power from a 3.0ltr
Author
Discussion

MadMacMcMad

Original Poster:

1,267 posts

283 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Gents, this is just a topic for info purpose only.
What would be a the max you could expect out of a 3.oltr without modifying turbos or internals?

Lets say we have done the essentials. Ie. Roush exhaust, decated, dump valve, upgraded intercooler and to make sure it can get on the road, a LSD also.

I am thinking realistic cheap power.

RobP

2,097 posts

270 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
MadMacMcMad said:
I am thinking realistic cheap power.
Probably quite alot, but the engine would soon go bang.
If you're talking GTO/3R rather than M400 (with different internals), I'd hazard a guess that around 410-415bhp would be doable and sustainable. But I expect there are cars out there with considerably more power, so I wait to be contradicted!

hollowpockets

5,910 posts

245 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
With the roush exhaust, intercooler, hard-pipes, dump valve and re-map my M400 is now 475bhp, as are a few others i believe. Not sure about the gto-3's/r's

ThatPhilBrettGuy

11,810 posts

269 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
RobP said:
...I'd hazard a guess that around 410-415bhp would be doable and sustainable....
Maybe, but then that's very close to the valve limit as we've seen in M400's. It's really going to depend on how they were feeling when they nailed that engine together. They were not all created equal by an means.

Mike Tuckwood

1,261 posts

228 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Well, on the 3.0L (GTO 3+R) T25 Turbos there are at least 4 different compressor wheels available. The one that we think it is most likely to be is rated at circa 250HP capable, so in theory, the T25's on a 3.0L are capable of "up to" 500HP as a pair. I have to take off my rear manifold soon so we'll pull the Turbo apart and measure everything so we know exactly which one it is.

The T28 (M400 fitment) is a little more difficult as I have no details on exactly which one is fitted as OEM, (as far as spec) yet, but at least 600 HP should be achievable with ease. There are many more variations on this Turbo available, but dependant upon configuration, the figure stated should be in the right target area.

This is of course with all parameters being adequately supported, as suggested; I'm unsure yet exactly what flow rate the OEM fuel injectors are, so unless someone knows, I can't say for sure what their limiting factor will be.
We won't know that until we either max the duty cycle out on my car, or we run the in our injector flow test rig at some later stage.


Mike

peterguk V6 KWK

2,622 posts

246 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
My T28s are being "worked on" wink by Universal Turbos right now...

Duke Thrust

1,680 posts

268 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Interesting topic smile

What sort of power has been seen from a tuned 2.5?


daddysumo

2,545 posts

242 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
I had all the usual mods done (3R on 25's) and it made 449 and 400 on the JNM rollers with a very cold charge additional cooler at 0.95.
In real life its made 420/420 I think on a DD rolling road but as with all things this is a relative guess at the flywheel power (sorry gadge)with the intake temps raising rapidly from 19 degs to 30ish I think at the same boost level.

Steve

Gadgeroonie

5,362 posts

265 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
best to stick to wheel power if you are going to compare power between different dyno's

at the end of the day that is what propels you up the road

my guess is there is an extra 100 hp at the wheels to be found in the 3.0 / t25 set up

Mike Tuckwood

1,261 posts

228 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
daddysumo said:
I had all the usual mods done (3R on 25's) and it made 449 and 400 on the JNM rollers with a very cold charge additional cooler at 0.95.
In real life its made 420/420 I think on a DD rolling road but as with all things this is a relative guess at the flywheel power (sorry gadge)with the intake temps raising rapidly from 19 degs to 30ish I think at the same boost level.
Haha, I'd argue (as I know Gadge will also) it's a little more than a "relative guess". whistle
Can't wait to see what we can nudge it up to as a "standard" car, just by mapping when the manifold is repaired. sonar

I also suspect there is more to come with a standard car (factory intercooler exhaust Etc) on T25's, we already ran a cautious 416bhp and 425lb/ft, (Dyno Dynamics) running only .82 bar on 95 RON fuel...... (only halted due to severly blowing exh manifold). curse

(ATW figure was 352)


Mike. woohoo

Edited by Mike Tuckwood on Tuesday 3rd February 17:31

ThatPhilBrettGuy

11,810 posts

269 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Mike Tuckwood said:
425lb/ft
You don't really want much more torque than that.

Mike Tuckwood

1,261 posts

228 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
ThatPhilBrettGuy said:
Mike Tuckwood said:
425lb/ft
You don't really want much more torque than that.
Wrong! <snigger> party

mgbond

6,749 posts

261 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Duke Thrust said:
Interesting topic smile

What sort of power has been seen from a tuned 2.5?
I think Owens was the most. A complete engine build with stronger internals and I think was 400+. Some on here will testify to its speed against M400's on the track!

Bondy

node

732 posts

229 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Mike Tuckwood said:
ThatPhilBrettGuy said:
Mike Tuckwood said:
425lb/ft
You don't really want much more torque than that.
Wrong! <snigger> party
That is a hell of a lot of power smile

How is the gearbox holding up to this? will you be upgrading this or leaving it standard?

Edited by node on Tuesday 3rd February 18:35

RobP

2,097 posts

270 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
I think Mad was wanting estimates for a standard 3.0l engine...

MadMacMcMad

Original Poster:

1,267 posts

283 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Cheers Rob. Interesting as it is!

Adrian W

15,493 posts

257 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Mike Tuckwood said:
ThatPhilBrettGuy said:
Mike Tuckwood said:
425lb/ft
You don't really want much more torque than that.
Wrong! <snigger> party
I think you will need to explain that Mike

TIGERSIX

969 posts

260 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Adrian W said:


I think you will need to explain that Mike
Hows the off road conversion coming along Adrian got enough clearance yet ,had a thought today whilst sittin on me tractor my 3R now has the potential to pull a 6 furrow plough and press if only I could get some traction on the headlands when setting the plough in the ground ,cant get cleated tyres under the archs so might have to go for a 4wd conversion laugh

Mike Tuckwood

1,261 posts

228 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Adrian W said:
I think you will need to explain that Mike
What I meant was, I DO want more than 425lb/ft Torque.
Come to think of it...... who doesn't!


Mike.

Edited by Mike Tuckwood on Tuesday 3rd February 21:04

daddysumo

2,545 posts

242 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2009
quotequote all
Mike Tuckwood said:
Adrian W said:


I think you will need to explain that Mike

What I meant was, I DO want more than 425lb/ft Torque.
Come to think of it...... who doesn't!


Mike.



I think what is meant is that's the sort of torque where previous standard gearboxes have cried enough !!

Steve