Wayne's High Performance 3.0L
 

I have a early 3.0 SC engine and i am about to contact either Walt or Ollie's. Instead of building a 3.2 SS, I might just build "3.0 SC High Performance 3.0L".

I have the Mahle Nikasil cylinders. So, am I correct to assume that all I need would be:

1. Buying 95mm JE Pistons
2. Buy the carburetors. The book does not mention carb size, so what size do I need?
3. Machine the heads to increase the ports to 36mm.
4. Regrind the cams to "S".

This is my first engine rebuild so go easy on me.:) :)

For those of you who went from 3.0 High Performance to 3.2 SS (or vice versa) out of a 3.0 case:

1. What is the price difference?
2. Is it worth the extra expense (or extra savings)? I am talking fun to $$ ratio.

My car would probably never see the tract.

Thanks.

carb size depends on cams, they depend on street or race... and which track

big carbs are the downfall of many

you could maybe go with 40s depending on your use

I'm interested to learn more as well since a tear down is in my 3.0's future.

Christian,

heh! heh! heh! I am a little bit ahead of you as I already have the engine in pieces! It was a blast.


Randy,

As stated, the car probably would never see the track. However, Wayne's description for the high perf 3.0 is like '......and you'll have an engine that's good for the street and great for the track." That is why I am trying to dig up exact specifications of this 'Top Engine Picks'.

I see you live in California. If the car is 76' or newer you can't use carbs and pass smog tests. You'll have to go with CIS or Motronic and this will limit your cam selection. If that is the case then go with bigger is better and get 98mm P+Cs' and something like 964 cams.

What year is the car and is the motor original?

Car is a '74!!!!! So I am smog exempt and the engine is not the original. The tranny, I think might be the original.


I was going to go with the 'bigger is better'. But going with the 98mm would require that I toss my cylinders. Correct?

Also, we already have a poster who reminds us of possible pitfalls with bigger carbs.

Re: Wayne's High Performance 3.0L
 

I have heard the gain in hp. between the 3.0 and the 3.2 SS is only five percent. Torque, however is a different story, and that could be significant depending on how the engine is set up.

So much more is involved within that bump in engine size, like compression, cams, carburetors that to some, it could easily be worth it.

Re: Re: Wayne's High Performance 3.0L
 

Wow! Just 5%! :eek:As you said, torque would depend on the setup; however, there must be a rough estimate. Anyone? :confused:

5% seems low given that the 3.2 heads flow so much better -- maybe that was based on a street cam (?)

A 3.2SS is based on a 3.0 motor so it doesn't have the benefit of the 3.2L heads.
-Chris

Using "Early S" cams, and taking the ports out to 39 mm will very likely achieve about 240 HP, versus a well built and chipped 3.2 (Like jpachard's) which puts out 253. The 3.2's will almost always make more torque across their rev range as a result of their extra capacity. RDane took his 3.0 out to 3.4 using the stock injection system (CIS?) and got up to about 258 HP with 20/21's and the early SC intake ports (39 mms) if I remember correctly.

Either way, I think that 36 mm intake ports will be too small for you. 40 mm Webers will most likely also be too small to take full affect of the S cams also.

A 3.2SS is based on a 3.0 motor so it doesn't have the benefit of the 3.2L heads.

That's a definitional matter - some have used the 3.2L heads on the 3L motor to get better flow.


For a pure street car I'd use 40's -- in fact I did (on a 3.2L). The best thing to do is to fax Richard Parr once you get settled on injection & cams.

Okay........ I am all confused. So I have an early 3.0 and if I want to make a 3.2ss, what parts do I need machined? This was the original plan but I can't seem to find specifics in Wayne's book. That the reason why I thought I would just build the 3.0 HiPo.

Thanks.

If you have an early 3.0 then you very likely have the 39mm intake ports on the heads, but you should measure them to confirm. The case does not need to be modified to accept the 98mm Pistons and Cylinders for a 3.2.

You say you have an early 3.0, I assume that is a 78-79 with the larger heads. If you have the later 3.0 80-83 then port those heads, Walt can do this and do it well. If you are on a budget then going with 95mm pistons and retaining the 3.0 displacement will help. This should save you at least $1500.00 I would think but probably more.

I would go with something like Elgin's Mod S cam but make sure your engine builder times them properly, I was told this is important by the guys that did my motor.

I have a similar motor to this and it pulls about 215 or so at the wheels. I'd like a bit more h.p. and some more torque but it is a fun motor. ...carbs are a bit of a pain in the ass for a street car but they help make good power and they sound great.

Good Luck

forgot to say, if your trans is original to the '74 then this is a very good thing. the 7:31 r/p will help make the car feel peppy.

What port size do the 80-83 SC's have? I just measured mine and they are roughly 1.52 inside diameter (38.6mm roughly). So am I good to go with 3.2 SS? Do I just buy new 98MM P&C's and sell my 95mm cylinders?

The tranny's serial # is 915 12 7230300. Can anyone deciper what year this is? Do I have this 7:31 RP.? BTW, the engine serial # is #6292115


Thanks a lot guys.

I think those are the smaller ports.

Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned the heads... but you can get the motor to 3.2L and still use the 3L heads. BUT you can also put 3.2 heds on it and since they already flow a whole lot better, you can make more power up high in the revs.

A whole 'nother thing is that you don't want to build a screamer for the street -- you want a nice progressive roll on of torque.

I drove a customers 3.0 car the other day. It has S cams and 46 webers. NO flat spots and near perfect driveablility. It is all in the tunning. I am on not sure of the specs on his carbs but after driving this car I was impressed.

Cheers

calif smog law is set at 1973 and older...asked that question last week at dmv...