when will we see 1000rwhp out of these hi HP porsches?
#271
3200 lbs. with a small battery and both seats in the car...
__________________
2001 996TT 3.6L and stock ECU
9.66 seconds @ 147.76 mph 1/4 mile click to view
160 mph @ 9.77 seconds in 1/4 mile click to view
50% OFF ON PORSCHE ECU TUNING BLACK FRIDAY SPECIAL
2001 996TT 3.6L and stock ECU
9.66 seconds @ 147.76 mph 1/4 mile click to view
160 mph @ 9.77 seconds in 1/4 mile click to view
50% OFF ON PORSCHE ECU TUNING BLACK FRIDAY SPECIAL
#273
1600 Crank HP
What Markski said is absolutely true.
There are the DYNO boost-numbers and then there's the boost-number that the car actually is being run on.
There's absolutely no question that the more boost you run and the larger turbo you use, and the stacking ice on the intercoolers and etc... you can get pretty much any dyno-number that you want.
The more boost and the more fuel you run the more power you make. When the pressure limits are met (full boost) the only thing you can do AFTER this is spin the pump faster (since a gasoling engine is essentially a water pump that burns fuel and expels exhaust gasses that *in an efficient engine* are essentially water vapor).
So...... you max the boost, spin the pump faster and faster and you know.... theoretically you can keep adding fuel and larger turbos and make essentially unlimited amounts of power.
If only there weren't these pesky problems of parts breaking at these kinds of stress levels....
Next stop is going to be the guys who take a 3.8 liter Porsche engine and do their own "iron copies" at which point you may not have these HP barriers self-imposed by your choice of Porsche.
As I have said many times, Porsche make terrible drag-cars for people with only $250K to spend. And that's starting with a USED Porsche 996TT!
You could instead get the RAT motor (454 Chevrolet) with a huffer on top, all-in for around $20K to include full roller valvetrain. Stuff it into a Chevy II with a slushbox and you can print 9's all day long on pump gas. Probably cost you $50K to do the entire car and it will essentially never break. Some nice deals can be had on 572CID Long Blocks with the same roller-valvetrain for about $16-18K minus the blower.
I ask: Why not do the rat-rod for $50K and then do the 650AWHP Porsche for killing rice on the street? You save yourself $20K in annual repairs to the 800WHP Porsche? When you get the 996TT back from Tym you'll probably keep the boost turned down for daily use anyway since the dyno-number is not a streetable or continuously reliable number anyway... I'm doing a 700-ish hybrid kit on mine with internals just to be safe, and it will run daily on 92 octaine and still print 575AWHP/600AWTQ. While I could always run the boost higher, it's not practical unless I want to be rebuilding the car every 20K miles.
The 750AWHP Porsche comes at around double the expense of the 650AWHP car, which just goes to show what happens when you begin pushing the physical limits of the design. When someone decides to do the iron-block design for Porsche, you may then have your motor..... but then we'd have to fix all of the broken transmissions..... and then there's all of that chassis-flex and related handling problems that you're never going to get resolved at the HP numbers you're already trying to run.
What is being achieved here is tremendous, and limits need to be continuously pushed, but we are likely at the limit on these cars for usable power without STARTING with a different car (to begin with) in these builds.
Last edited by SpeedYellow; 06-23-2008 at 08:54 AM.
#274
Oh, I don't kow.... the 935/78 "moby dick" had a 3.2l water cooled head engine and reputedly produced between 750 and 950 crank hp in 1978!!
more power needed is the reason why they went to the water cooled head n the first place.
not that far from todays power levels, 30 years ago?!?!?
So again, how does the air cooled head produce more power than the water cooled head which was brought on to make more power than the air cooled head and in theory should make more power as lower temperatures lower your detonation potential.
more power needed is the reason why they went to the water cooled head n the first place.
not that far from todays power levels, 30 years ago?!?!?
So again, how does the air cooled head produce more power than the water cooled head which was brought on to make more power than the air cooled head and in theory should make more power as lower temperatures lower your detonation potential.
Also that car was a full race car, it produced 750bhp @8200 RPMs and had cams that would idle at close to 2k RPMs, no restrictions whatsoever, improved air intake paths that a street car cannot possibly have, and millions of dollars of Weissach engineering and R&D both on the engine dyno and track.
Nothing to do with watercooled vs aircooled IMO, if anything water is a more stable conductor of heat propagation than air.
Most importantly is that those 1000rwhp extracted from aircooled cars are nowhere near the factory numbers, substract easily 200rwhp from those and then compare.
Last edited by Jean; 06-23-2008 at 09:10 AM.
#275
i would love to see dyno numbers videos of this car , but i call BS .
#281
I have listened to what has been said about the heads lifting and not being able to hold above 1.8 bar. Yes this has been a problem in the past, however it has been successfully been addressed ............ at least with the limited hours of engine dyno testing that we have performed. Will the heads hold once they are in the car and on the road ........ I don't know yet.
I will say this, we have experienced many failures and made many changes. I tell you some of what we have done.
1) O ringed both the heads and the liners.
2) Designed and built our own special head gasket.
3) Designed and built our own special material o rings.
4) Ceramic coated our piston tops, head combustion chambers and exhaust ports which resulted in head temperatures decreasing by 800+ degrees F.
5) Designed and built our our own 12 mm head studs.
6) Designed our own head stud thread/taper and stud case depth and performed required machining.
7) Designed and built a particular head stud washer along with machine worK to accept specifically designed washer. Surprisingly, this was a critical element.
I will not show pictures of everything, but here are some. I'm not here to argue with anyone. The info is free, it's worth what it cost you
The motor develops well over 1000 hp @ 1.4 bar.
I will say this, we have experienced many failures and made many changes. I tell you some of what we have done.
1) O ringed both the heads and the liners.
2) Designed and built our own special head gasket.
3) Designed and built our own special material o rings.
4) Ceramic coated our piston tops, head combustion chambers and exhaust ports which resulted in head temperatures decreasing by 800+ degrees F.
5) Designed and built our our own 12 mm head studs.
6) Designed our own head stud thread/taper and stud case depth and performed required machining.
7) Designed and built a particular head stud washer along with machine worK to accept specifically designed washer. Surprisingly, this was a critical element.
I will not show pictures of everything, but here are some. I'm not here to argue with anyone. The info is free, it's worth what it cost you
The motor develops well over 1000 hp @ 1.4 bar.
Last edited by cjv; 10-08-2008 at 08:55 PM.
#283
Thanks, but those using nitro, top fuel and nitrous have been using this trick for some time. The motor will be buttoned up in the car in about two weeks.
The tricks on this motor are numerous. Three stage oil pumps, NASCAR oval bearings, Inconnel valves, 80.1 mm crank, 105.7 mm pistons, custom designed non vario intake and exhaust cams, titanium rods, trick heads OS GT3 heads, custom WC intake, etc.
Please, no more questions for now. When she is finished we will take her to the track and strip to answer questions as to how she performs. Anything else is a guess at this time.
Last edited by cjv; 10-02-2008 at 09:59 PM.
#285
970rwhp at 105 degree ambient temperature with no fans and cooling in the dyno room.