|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Rate Thread |
|
Moderator
|
'69 911T thows down huge dyno run and ricers run crying to their mommy...
For the princely sum of NZ$90 (less than US$40) I can report that the '69 911T spanked the dyno into submission with a massive 122 flywheel horsepower run.
Ricers had better run and hide - that is 16 valve Civic output in a similar weight car!!! I am considering changing my signature to list the power output and the mods that got me there . The PO put in 'E' cams, and I added an MSD, new plugs and wires (ran properly after that!). I also have a low drag fan (ok, so the belt is a little loose). I think I added at least 10hp from the rusty heat exchangers. Oh and the Pit Stop OEM replica exhaust surely bumped power! And I just remembered I had a sophisticated mix of Gull 96 RON and Caltex 96 RON (I think it is 91 octane in the US).The actual result is 89.025 kw measured at the flywheel, correction factor of 1.0073 (temperature and very slight air pressure related). After correction and converted to hp, this is 121.8hp (108hp at the wheels). Better than 110hp from factory and not too bad for a 30 year old, 1/4 of a million km engine on a 10 year old rebuild (and Marelli dizzy). The curve is nice and smooth from 60km/h in third to 6300 cutout, other than a minor (3-5hp) dip about 6000rpm. I don't really understand how, but basically the chassis dyno somehow measures and adjusts for transmission losses to give a flywheel figure - it is a Bosch dyno. The transmission loss implied is about 11.5%. This may be useful to some other folk (ie G-tech users). The goal was twofold. The first was to have a baseline for comparison to my new in April motor. The second was to see if the mighty 2.0 is putting out much over (or under) stock. Note that the early 911 had 130hp quoted on similar cams etc. 1969 E had 140hp quoted (but with MFI). Cam
__________________
1975 911S (in bits) 1969 911T (goes, but need fettling) 1973 BMW 2002tii (in bits, now with turbo) Last edited by CamB; 02-27-2002 at 07:34 PM.. |
||
|
|
|
|
Bird. It's the word...
|
YEAH BABY, YEAH!
__________________
John Forcier Current: 68L 2.0 Hotrod - build underway |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Linn County, Oregon
Posts: 48,577
|
Just think what it could have been with a carbon fiber gearshift knob...
|
||
|
|
|
|
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,334
|
With that kind of power, there has to be responsibility. I'm here to deliver the message that you need to soberly assess any situation out there on the highways before you unlish the chaotic fury of the T.
Before the swap, my 2.2T engine got a reading of 104 rear-wheel horsepower from a G-Tech Pro. I figured, with drivetrain loss, that meant that the engine was actually within 5 or 10 ponies of the sky-high 125-hp figure that Porsche brazenly threw out to the automotive world back in 1971. Back then, the industry thought that it was just big talk... but the T turns talk into torque, if you know what I mean. Come to think of it, I don't know what I mean.
__________________
Jack Olsen 1972 911 My new video about my garage. • A video from German TV about my 911 Last edited by Jack Olsen; 02-27-2002 at 09:04 PM.. |
||
|
|
|
|
Moderator
|
All I know is that I can proudly stake my claim as to two things:
- New Zealand 2.0T top horsepower champion (surely no-one else bothered modify a 2.0T, even if there are any other 2.0Ts in the country) - the weakest dyno verified 911 on the Board - I mean, come on - those turbo guys can't get below 250 at the wheels and various big capacity motors at nearly 300hp, forgedaboudit ![]() Jack - I have to rule out your G-tech result - a good effort but you changed the engine since then...
__________________
1975 911S (in bits) 1969 911T (goes, but need fettling) 1973 BMW 2002tii (in bits, now with turbo) Last edited by CamB; 02-27-2002 at 08:49 PM.. |
||
|
|
|
|
Bird. It's the word...
|
I reckon I might be able to give you a run dude....my 69 has Sportomatic Power! Surely with a torque sapping slush box, I may well be able to put less HP to the road!!??
Oh this is so sad Hey what are you doing with the 901 when the new donk arrives?
__________________
John Forcier Current: 68L 2.0 Hotrod - build underway |
||
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
|
Arrrgh - Sporto. You might take the title - I better keep you away from the dyno!
I will let you know about the 901 when it is available. It will be surplus to requirements and I should probably sell it so I don't dream up a way to use it (in other words buy another car). I was planning on selling the 2.0T off in bits (I need the oil cooler and fan/alternator in particular and I could easily sell the excellent Webers), but now I have a verified 122hp I could sell it complete !!I assume the 901 for sporto swap would be pretty easy for you... anyone ever do it??? Cam
__________________
1975 911S (in bits) 1969 911T (goes, but need fettling) 1973 BMW 2002tii (in bits, now with turbo) Last edited by CamB; 02-27-2002 at 09:24 PM.. |
||
|
|
|
|
Bird. It's the word...
|
From what I'm told, It's relatively easy. I know I'll need another pedal cluster (clutch), clutch cable, new clutch, bla bla....
I will admit that now the car is cosmetically great, I'm seriously thinking of an engine/gearbox transplant like yourself. Maybe a 3.0 or 3.2 and 915. But as you are well aware the cost here in the Banana Hemisphere makes the cost a touch prohibitive for me at the moment.
__________________
John Forcier Current: 68L 2.0 Hotrod - build underway |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
|
Wow, CamB, how many halfshafts have you gone through?
Okay, 2.0 T motors might not shake the world, but I've always been amazed at how much power Porsche got out of these motors when they really tried. How about the 911R: 210hp (I think) out of 2.0 l, single cams, two valves, carbs, points & rotors. Amazing, almost nobody beats that kind of output today, even with water cooling, variable timing twin cam four/five valve EFI/electronic ignition techno monsters. Those boys could be really something when they wanted to, they just didn't always choose to...
__________________
David Schultz 1973 911T 2.7 |
||
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: los angeles, CA.
Posts: 41,306
|
What is a G-tech pro, and how does it work? What do they cost? TIA.
|
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
|
So i have to bring the bad news here again,You are running those RICE BOYS WANNA BE! To be able to really beat the Real Rice Boys you will need a lot more hp than that A LOT, if you consider that the RICE BOYS THAT WE RACE,are running 30 psi of boost running 11s in the 1/4 mile and dyno the cars on the 400+ hp range,Im not a RICE BOY at ALL but have race many of them and even with a 3.2 Turbo at 320 Hp im not even close,I will be in two months with the expected 500hp+ up grade,but if you can beat the Rice Boys Wanna be GO FOR!!
Regards Juan 3.2 Undercover http://MY88911.homestead.com/newwebpage.html |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Marlboro NJ USA
Posts: 168
|
stickers!!
Did ya have any stickers??? Ya NEED some stickers! Yellow ones...yeah...yellow ones. You'll never get the performance outta the car with crappy mods like E' cams, an MSD, new plugs and wires etc.... ya GOTTA have STICKERS!!!!!! I'm done |
||
|
|
|
|
|
Light,Nimble,Uncivilized
|
Stop the madness!
Are you implying that my lowly '86 944 water humper might actually have a chance?!?!? Oh...uh, nevermind. I forgot about the mass (weight) delta. Back to flogging the commuting public of the Puget Sound...with glee I might add.....
__________________
Drago '69 Coupe R #464 |
||
|
|
|