View Single Post
jluetjen jluetjen is offline
Registered User
jluetjen's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Westford, MA USA
Posts: 8,595
200 at the wheels makes it 235 at the crank. Interesting Bruce Anderson shows a similar carbed 3.0 SC engine on page 151 that is on an engine dyno showing 210hp and 200# of torque.
RDane, you and I are in complete agreement! When I was logging the results into my spreadsheet I was copying the numbers over some 3.0 data and they were almost exactly the same! The only difference is that I then adjusted TonyG's data by 15%. BTW, The BA data that you mentioned is in my database also and I too am scratching my head about how TonyG's engine can perform soooo much better.

John, why so far off from your original estimate?
I dunno!

As I mentioned earlier, TonyG's engine is pulling a lot more air though his intakes then I anticipated. I was pretty close to nuts on for the torque engine speed, but underestimated the BMEP's generated by the 20/21 cams. I only had your engine (RDane) for a comparison -- and I don't know how to tell you this -- but this carb'd motor is far better at generating torque for it's capacity then your CIS motor .

I was wrong.

Now that I've got some data points for the 3.0 and 3.2 liter engine sizes I should be closer next time.

I am still scratching my head though about how TonyG's engine's stock heads can outperform almost all of the other 75 configurations in my database. The other exception is Grady's 2.8. I'm still thinking about what is in common with both of those configurations that allows them to flow the extra 4%.
'69 911E

"It's a poor craftsman who blames their tools" -- Unknown
"Any suspension -- no matter how poorly designed -- can be made to work reasonably well if you just stop it from moving." -- Colin Chapman

Last edited by jluetjen; 12-10-2004 at 11:26 AM..
Old 12-10-2004, 11:23 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #131 (permalink)