Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> 914-6 finally gets it's dyno runs, The dyno raises more questions
RogerPihlaja
post Dec 8 2024, 02:45 PM
Post #1


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 23-December 20
From: Sanford, Michigan, USA 48657
Member No.: 25,013
Region Association: Upper MidWest



So, I finally found a chassis dyno that was willing to run my 1970 914-6. The 3.0 liter 911 SC engine had about 1000 break-in miles on it. The attached file has 3 hp & torque curves from 3 dyno pulls superimposed. A 6300 rpm redline was observed. As you can see, the engine is still pulling hard at 6300 rpm and would produce more power if it were spun faster. I have heard 3.0 liter 911 SC engines are safe to rev to 7000 rpm; but, I wanted to get confirmation before I tried it. The engine has a Clewett Engineering engine management system with MAP fuel injection, coil at plug electronic ignition, wide range oxygen sensor closed loop, 1-5/8" ID Billy Boat headers, and a twin outlet sport muffler. The valves, springs, pistons, connecting rods, and crankshaft are stock. There is a mild cam from WEBCAM (Grind #40) in it.

I was somewhat surprised at the shape of the torque vs rpm curve. The dip in the torque curve between about 2600 - 3600 rpm reminds me of the bad old days of emission controls with carburetors. The [Air]/[Fuel] ratio would often go lean just off idle resulting in a flat spot in engine response and driveability around town. Do I need to remap the fuel flow for more fuel in that rpm region? Or, what else might be causing this dip in torque? Also, the flat shape of the torque "curve" surprised me. Isn't there supposed to be more of a peak? This isn't some "tractor" engine?

By the way, the engine sounds great on the dyno! I have a video file with audio; but, it's ~31 mbytes. If someone has a way to deal with a big file on the website, please let me know and I'd be glad to share it.Attached File  TooSlo86_Racing_Dyno_Chart.pdf ( 599.22k ) Number of downloads: 96
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cfletch
post Dec 8 2024, 03:39 PM
Post #2


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 30-January 14
From: Santa Barbara
Member No.: 16,941
Region Association: Southern California



You could always just post to youtube and drop the link in this thread!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mb911
post Dec 8 2024, 04:01 PM
Post #3


914 Guru
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 7,369
Joined: 2-January 09
From: Burlington wi
Member No.: 9,892
Region Association: Upper MidWest



160ish hp? That seems low
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
brant
post Dec 8 2024, 04:16 PM
Post #4


914 Wizard
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,824
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Colorado
Member No.: 47
Region Association: Rocky Mountains



Too bad they didn’t have an AFR on the chart
We use a dyno with AFR to know how to jet
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirAndy
post Dec 8 2024, 04:25 PM
Post #5


Resident German
*************************

Group: Admin
Posts: 41,943
Joined: 21-January 03
From: Oakland, Kalifornia
Member No.: 179
Region Association: Northern California



QUOTE(mb911 @ Dec 8 2024, 02:01 PM) *

160ish hp? That seems low

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

Both the HP and torque seem low when compared to the stock 3.0L specs.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mepstein
post Dec 8 2024, 04:32 PM
Post #6


914-6 GT in waiting
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 19,647
Joined: 19-September 09
From: Landenberg, PA/Wilmington, DE
Member No.: 10,825
Region Association: MidAtlantic Region



If you aren’t running a hot rod 3.0 to 7k, you are leaving a lot on the table.

Edit - Sounds like you need to find someone that can tune the FI/engine management system. The stock file is usually just to get the engine running and set a baseline. It's never going to run to it's potential with a stock tune. You mention a mild cam. Why? One big reason to use modern engine management is to tune for a non stock/hot rod cam. I'm not suggesting 906 style, no power under 6K but something that will make the engine come alive. With COP, one of the goals is managing higher than stock compression without having to go twin plug. So from what you described, I'm wondering what the goal was for this engine. Get rid of cis, get more power, make it look pretty, something else?



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
RogerPihlaja
post Dec 9 2024, 10:14 AM
Post #7


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 23-December 20
From: Sanford, Michigan, USA 48657
Member No.: 25,013
Region Association: Upper MidWest



Hi All,

Yes ~160 hp at the rear wheels is somewhat less than I had hoped for. That's why I started this thread.

I was hoping for about 200 bhp at the crank running on unleaded regular pump gas. Extrapolating the hp curves to 7000 rpm would pretty much get me to that goal, allowing for 10-15% loss from the crank to the rear wheels. Can the 3.0 liter 911 SC engine be safely revved to 7000 rpm? If not, what needs to be upgraded?

Can you suggest a dyno shop that has an [Air]/[Fuel] instrument on their dyno? Can you suggest someone to consult re tuning the Clewett Engineering engine management system?

Does anyone have any comments re why the torque curve is so flat and what is causing the low rpm dip?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mb911
post Dec 9 2024, 12:00 PM
Post #8


914 Guru
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 7,369
Joined: 2-January 09
From: Burlington wi
Member No.: 9,892
Region Association: Upper MidWest



Ok cam timing also confirmed correct? I have seen that many times
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
targa72e
post Dec 9 2024, 11:06 PM
Post #9


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 278
Joined: 11-September 16
From: colorado
Member No.: 20,392
Region Association: None



Can you give us a little more detail on your engine and intake configuration. For reference having dynoed many stock or close to stock 3.0L I have an idea what to expect. A 3.0 L with big ports and 9.3 pistons with stock CIS and cams with headers and good muffler will put out 185HP +/- and 175 +/- torque at the wheels on a Dynojet. 9.8 pistons will get you a little more. If you ditch the CIS and go with better induction the torque stays about the same but you can get another 15-20HP on the top end. When I tracked my SC I shifted at 7K all the time, for years, Stock bottom end and springs.

john
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
PlaysWithCars
post Dec 10 2024, 01:27 AM
Post #10


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 531
Joined: 9-November 03
From: Southeast of Seattle
Member No.: 1,323
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



QUOTE(mepstein @ Dec 8 2024, 03:32 PM) *

Sounds like you need to find someone that can tune the FI/engine management system. The stock file is usually just to get the engine running and set a baseline. It's never going to run to it's potential with a stock tune.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) I'm suspicious that you have too rich AFR and too conservative ignition timing. I'd be looking real close at ignition timing curve as the biggest culprit. Even if the dyno doesn't have AFR capability, you should be able to monitor and log most of this through your engine management system(s).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
flyer86d
post Dec 10 2024, 03:32 PM
Post #11


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 453
Joined: 12-January 11
From: Corea, Maine
Member No.: 12,585
Region Association: North East States



It looks like you are leaving a bunch of power on the table. As everyone said before, recheck the cam timing and ignition timing. It should be stronger. My old short stroke 3.2 with GE-80 cams made 320hp at 7500 rpm. We shifted it at 7500 and would take it to 8200 in a short burst if we had to get by someone. Stock rods…. Sue once mistakenly got 3rd gear instead of 5th on the back straight at Watkins Glen shifting out of 4th at 7000 rpm. Don’t know what it revved to but it wasn’t hurt and we did a lot of track events after that….. SC’s are very stout! Perhaps the best that Porsche produced.

Charlie
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jd74914
post Dec 13 2024, 08:00 AM
Post #12


Its alive
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,818
Joined: 16-February 04
From: CT
Member No.: 1,659
Region Association: North East States



Interested in more details as well. Did you just put the Clewit kit on and hit a dyno with it's base map? This looks like the results of a super conservative base tune, ie: the kind provided by the manufacturer to get your car to start and drive on the road or to a dyno. Usually these have very conservative ignition timing and are quite rich. The expectation from the manufacturer is that you're going to tune it, though Clewit doesn't make that too clear on their website.

Is this the kit you're using?
https://www.clewett.com/index.php?main_page...products_id=491

It has the O2 sensor shown, was this installed? With an Elite ECU you have the ability to data log so you can record what's actually going in.

Note: You don't really need a 911 guy to tune, most competent tuners familiar with Haltech software/peculiarities would be fine. With data logging you might even have good luck with driving around and a remote tuner analyzing the data and sending you updated files.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
VaccaRabite
post Dec 13 2024, 08:51 AM
Post #13


En Garde!
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,616
Joined: 15-December 03
From: Dallastown, PA
Member No.: 1,435
Region Association: MidAtlantic Region



A stock 3.0 only made 180HP at the crank.
I don't know the specs on yours, but if you are making 160 at the wheels, that may be an indication of a healthy stock rebuild. Assuming 15% drive train losses, your 160hp would be 184 at the crank, which is on the nose for a stock build.

It does look like there is better tuning to be done.

If its hot rodded - there is clearly tuning to be done. But not knowing the build, its putting out RWHP in line with a stock build.

I'd be interested in seeing your fuel and spark maps.

Zach
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Root_Werks
post Dec 13 2024, 12:33 PM
Post #14


Village Idiot
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 8,506
Joined: 25-May 04
From: About 5NM from Canada
Member No.: 2,105
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



QUOTE(VaccaRabite @ Dec 13 2024, 06:51 AM) *

A stock 3.0 only made 180HP at the crank.
I don't know the specs on yours, but if you are making 160 at the wheels, that may be an indication of a healthy stock rebuild. Assuming 15% drive train losses, your 160hp would be 184 at the crank, which is on the nose for a stock build.

It does look like there is better tuning to be done.

If its hot rodded - there is clearly tuning to be done. But not knowing the build, its putting out RWHP in line with a stock build.

I'd be interested in seeing your fuel and spark maps.

Zach


(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

Was thinking the same.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Chris914n6
post Dec 13 2024, 05:10 PM
Post #15


Jackstands are my life.
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3,423
Joined: 14-March 03
From: Las Vegas, NV
Member No.: 431
Region Association: Southwest Region



Looks like they use a Haltech 750 ECU. You just need to find a Porsche tuner that knows Haltech.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th December 2024 - 05:44 AM