Real Fiero Tech

The Dark Side of Will wrote:

Atilla the Fun wrote: and assuming a 40 hp loss thru the Getrag or Muncie,

Thats WAY too high. I don't think you'll get to that much parasitic loss until you're pushing significantly over 400 HP.

Yeah it's probably more like 20. Otherwise I'd be putting out like 260 crank from an intake manifold on a DOHC

To answer Series8217, I'm in Logan, UT. And if the emissions issue gets too tight, I would register the car somewhere else, but eventually, they'll be testing everywhere, exactly like Cali.

So, Aaron sent me an Excel spreadsheet on 3 turbos on this engine, and I gotta agree, the GT35R seems best. I found that the T66 would be a better choice only between 2000 and 3000 rpm and that at 1.8 bar. The T4E60 would be better at 2000-3000 at any bar, but would be inadequate above 4500. For those with a non-supercharged 3800 Series 2, mostly stock, the T4E60 as mapped by www.innovativeturbo.com, would be best. If doing a full build on that, then the GT35R. That being the case, where do I go for a new GT35R? Turbonetics?

http://www.atpturbo.com

However, I highly suggest you look through eBay first. Find someone who bought one, but never used it and it sat around while he dreamed. Because buying it new from ATP Turbo will cost more than your car did. Also, you want a V-band discharge, and if possible, go with a T04 turbine (That's what mine has).

I just cruised around eBay a bit, didn't really see any that I liked.

thanks again, Aaron! And $40 for the chip sounds too good to be true.

Well, Ryan only charges $50 to reprogram them, and he can do any chip from any 91-93 3.4 DOHC, whether it be a Lumina, Cutlass, auto, or manual. So this is just a generic 3.4 DOHC chip that he reprogrammed at some point. So he'll just need to reburn it with your specs before you use it, which he does at no charge. So you're saving $10 on the programming, and s/h charges as well.

Just send $40 to my paypal when you're ready, but I won't be able to ship it out for about a week. I won't be back in CO until then, and I'd rather send it out personally than have my Dad do it, as I want to make sure you get the right chip. Also, let me know if you want me to send it to you, or to Ryan directly.

Thanks!

Never used paypal before. How? I don't have a credit card. Thanks!

Oh, my A.D.D. again. Would anyone say a 10% loss thru the gearbox is in the ballpark, then?

Atilla the Fun wrote:Never used paypal before. How? I don't have a credit card. Thanks!

Weird...It will work with just a bank account, but it will take you too long to figure that out honestly. It took me like a week to set it all up and stuff. You can just send me a check, that's fine. I'm going to send you a PM with my address when you're ready. By the time I get the check, I'll be in CO and able to send the chip right out.

Atilla the Fun wrote:Oh, my A.D.D. again. Would anyone say a 10% loss thru the gearbox is in the ballpark, then?

More like 15-20 IIRC for a manual. Everyone says something different. But crank horsepower doesn't matter anyways

Aaron wrote:Everyone says something different.

That's because there is no set number... just SWAG's. RWHP can be increased by lightening the flywheel/clutch assembly... Which effectively reduces drivetrain loss because the engine obviously didn't make any more power from that mod. The rate of acceleration affects the power reading of a measurement with dynamic RPM, etc. RWHP is still as much black magic as science.

The DI ecotec just makes me wonder about the torque curve/powerband, I know the turbo will help loads, but it's still small displacement/4cyl...


Aluminum head 60*V6 are a pretty decent platform for turbo, forget that iron head 2.8-3.4 junk, they wont make nearly as much power even with turbo/blowers or all the bolt ons money can buy you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ibU1k8UZoo Cavalier Z24 + 3400 + 10PSI + ? = 358WHP

Naturally aspirated parts have been pushed to 300+HP (270WHP) on Superdaves Cavalier with the 3500, mind you the heads are hogged exquisitely and he's running over .570 lift with decent headers.

The V6s are great choices for power, naturally aspirated bolt-on 3400/3500s and DOHCs are all strong engines. Add a turbo or start with an L67 and any of them can peform. However, the 3400/3500 should be the lightest V6 choices, the blower adds weight on the L67, and the DOHC is heavy ish by nature.

nfswift wrote:The DI ecotec just makes me wonder about the torque curve/powerband, I know the turbo will help loads, but it's still small displacement/4cyl...

DI Ecotec turbo powerband:

(from http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/pr ... /08car.htm)

Fake.

It's not an electric motor.

j/k :salute:

Ojeez...

That's a lot of torque all the time.

Kinda makes you feel inadequate with a bigger engine making less eh??

Powerband wider than half the rev range... Gotta love turbo+DI+variable cam phasing+ECU boost control.

That would be a beautiful setup for racing. Such flat torque delivery, would make a car much more predictable.

Wow, we've sure digressed. On Friday, June 6, I'm going to Pick N Pull, to look for a TDC, a.k.a. 3.4DOHC, but I'm also getting a 6.0 from an 01 truck for my 84 trans am. I'm seriously thinking a 5.3 with an aluminum flywheel might not kill my trans. at my elevation, the N/A (non-turbo) correction factor is 83 percent, so that's 270 torque from the truck's rating of 325. Actually, the ratings on this are similar to my old 95 z28 that got stolen. z was 275@5000, 325@2400. It had a broad, flat, predictable but boring torque curve. The 5.3 is 285@5200 and 325@4000, bot with 90 percent of that from 2000 rpm. I'd go with a cam, intake and oilpan from a 2000 vette. I think my truck can haul 2 LS engines home at the same time.

I really hate those GM dyno graphs. I wish they were a bit more realistic looking. It causes me to distrust their accuracy, where I know they are accurate.

I also bet that engine is underrated, just like the S?C Cobalts. How they underrated them was pretty clever really, they just stopped the dyno early. I bet that engine makes max power higher than 5300. I bet it has no problem pulling right to 6500 either.

Aaron wrote: I also bet that engine is underrated, just like the S?C Cobalts. How they underrated them was pretty clever really, they just stopped the dyno early. I bet that engine makes max power higher than 5300. I bet it has no problem pulling right to 6500 either.

Maybe you should look at a dyno graph before you place your bets.. you're not correct.
Torque drops rapidly after 5000 RPM. With the peak power its making it's definitely not underrated; it looks pretty much dead on.

Full size

You can also see they changed the boost control settings after doing the SAE dyno test, since there's obviously 25 ft-lbs more from 2500 to 3500 RPM than there are in the SAE certified power graph.

Peak power is somewhere between 5200 and 6000 RPM. The graph is noisy up top so its hard to tell exactly where. It certainly isn't above 6000 RPM. If you fit a curve to it, it looks like 5600 RPM or so..

Even if it is not underrated, GM definitely stopped the graph early.

My point stands, I hate those GM/SAE dyno graphs. They don't tell you a whole lot.