Quote:
Originally posted by 2002M3Drew
A stock 3.2 is a much different animal than a modified, bored-out 3.0 to 3.2 motor. Look at the Porsche 911 Performance Handbook (Anderson) HP charts on modded 3.0s. A bone-stock 81-83 Euro SC put out 204HP, and that wasn't with the non-cat SSIs. With the SSIs, and bored out, that engine should produce 220 at the wheels (at least).
|
I apparently haven't read as many books as you (and I certainly don't believe everything I read as I've often witnessed the opposite) so I guess I'll agree to disagree, but I have seen/built/driven many of these same engines and on the dyno these popular and smoggable 3.2L CIS spec engines didn't make 220+ at the wheels (Andial used engine dynos because chassis dynos didn't exist back than but I'll even assume 15% driveline loss for argument sake and convert back to whp). I've also been fortunate to have driven many of these combos in the cars in those years, from 3.2L conversions just like Gunters all the way to a 3.0L>3.6L CIS w/ 964 cams that was done in 1990 when the 76.4mm crank first became available.
At least Jerry Kroeger and a couple of others appear sane and have a voice of reason...
Gunter, many chassis dyno operators charge extra for a/f monitoring and graph (some don't) but many also won't touch your car for liability reasons unless you specifically hire them to do so. If you envision yourself tweaking while strapped down on the dyno, I would suggest getting a flat rate so you can do multiple pulls as needed rather than paying for 2 or 3 pulls and than having to pay again if you're not happy with the results and want to tinker. Depending on the dyno operator, some are willing to work with you on price and some aren't.
My comments (whether in this post or in previous ones) also shouldn't be taken as a slight against you or against your motor, I hope that you find the horsepower you are seeking and expecting, it's just my experience (and take that with a grain of salt if you wish) I don't see 220+ at the wheels with a small displacement increase, "normal" CR, CIS and a mild camshaft profile...I can say that it will make a significant difference over what you have now and hopefully you will be happy with the end result.
200 SAE at the wheels on a Dynojet (or approx. 235 crank for those dyno or mathmatically challenged) with a nice flat torque curve is realistic and something I'm sure you would be pleased with.
Ralph