Digsy Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Lucifer @ MKIVStore have a rebuilt engine that is 300bhp at the fly, completely NA, he wants about £4000 for it. Don't know what spec the MKIVStore engine is, but assuming it's just a normal NA without NOS or anything like that then 300hp at 7900 / 8000RPM should be feasible from a 3.4 litre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_supra Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Don't know what spec the MKIVStore engine is, but assuming it's just a normal NA without NOS or anything like that then 300hp at 7900 / 8000RPM should be feasible from a 3.4 litre. I'm pretty sure it wasn't a 3.4ltr when he mentioned it to me, if it was surely the engine would cost more than 4k wouldn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bromy Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/showthread.php?t=74187&highlight=3.4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Mine come out at 374 bhp @ the wheels with the turbo conversion Very pleased. ... and you only run 14 sec 1/4 mile times? You sure thats accurate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bromy Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 ... and you only run 14 sec 1/4 mile times? You sure thats accurate? Read thread 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 My point was, Supras with 100WHP less than that run faster times. I'm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GazzaGSi Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 ... and you only run 14 sec 1/4 mile times? You sure thats accurate? It is accurate, well, as accurate as the r/r they use I guess. As for the time, i personally think i can see low 13's, high 12's if I start right and correct gear changes etc. The 14 run was my first and if I hadnt of been spinning in 1st and 2nd it may of been abit quicker. (Just thought i would add to, as I have not made it clear. I ran the 14 when I was running 0.4bar of boost as I was still running 330cc injectors.) Bromy, what am I looking at in that link? Could you explain yourself abit rather than just posting a link...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bromy Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 It is accurate, well, as accurate as the r/r they use I guess. As for the time, i personally think i can see low 13's, high 12's if I start right and correct gear changes etc. The 14 run was my first and if I hadnt of been spinning in 1st and 2nd it may of been abit quicker. Bromy, what am I looking at in that link? Could you explain yourself abit rather than just posting a link...? Basically they say that all the na-t that turbo fit have done are running 473 at the wheels at 12 psi... impossible and even running one at 561rwhp at 1.15 bar... not right IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GazzaGSi Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 All I know is Im running at 0.75 bar on 440cc injectors and it made 374 at the wheels. I dont know about the other NA/T's they have done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GazzaGSi Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Tbh, im not even all that bothered about the bhp figure as I know its bloody quick and frightning! I've had enough spirited drives now to realise how quick it is when your sailing past cars you'd think would blow you away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bromy Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 All I know is Im running at 0.75 bar on 440cc injectors and it made 374 at the wheels. I dont know about the other NA/T's they have done. Your injectors must be right on the ragged edge, I can only run my 525's at .8bar and the datalogs for the injectors were at nearly 90% duty, how do you know what duty cylce they are at with a safc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 What were your terminal speeds? I thought they were around 103mph? To me, that doesnt sound like a car with 375rwhp.. thats all. I'm sure you can get that sort of power and more depending on the setup, but you know how some rolling roads report things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsy Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 So anyway. About this highest tuned NA? Like an NA without a turbo??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GazzaGSi Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 What were your terminal speeds? I thought they were around 103mph? To me, that doesnt sound like a car with 375rwhp.. thats all. I'm sure you can get that sort of power and more depending on the setup, but you know how some rolling roads report things. The car wasnt running that on the day, I was still on standard injectors and at .4bar. I do not know what bhp it was then. At the next rwyb i'll see what it is capable of now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 So anyway. About this highest tuned NA? Like an NA without a turbo??? Look to the US, they're running 9s over there with them. (Thats an NA-T) But to answer your question.. I dont know - it would be interesting to see what anyone has got out of the NA without the Tubbie Gaz, ah, that explains it No worries! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucifer Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 Don't know what spec the MKIVStore engine is, but assuming it's just a normal NA without NOS or anything like that then 300hp at 7900 / 8000RPM should be feasible from a 3.4 litre. Its not a 3.4 its a stright 3.0 We are now on the second revision of this build process and am confident for 300 at 7500RPM and 350 @ 8200. And no it did not blow up its in my NA right now pulling 5.4 0-60 (Drifbox timed) Im sure someone here will shoot me down and tell me its not possible, but Well let the rollign road speak for itself in a month or two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve W Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 Surely if an engine is 'conservatively' built to put out ~220 (ie. 100,000miles plus reliable) then it MUST be possible to tune it for ~300 ?? (albeit at the expense of longevity) Most 'standard' 3.0 engines put out ~200/220 now in RELIABLE tune. (Omegas/Mondeos etc etc ??) although i realise their figures are probably optimistic (and Flywheel ??) OR is the Soop unit an inherently poor (old?) design which can't be tuned ? (compression/cams/manifolds/timing) Isn't it JUST a question of money ???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucifer Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 Surely if an engine is 'conservatively' built to put out ~220 (ie. 100,000miles plus reliable) then it MUST be possible to tune it for ~300 ?? (albeit at the expense of longevity) Most 'standard' 3.0 engines put out ~200/220 now in RELIABLE tune. (Omegas/Mondeos etc etc ??) although i realise their figures are probably optimistic (and Flywheel ??) OR is the Soop unit an inherently poor (old?) design which can't be tuned ? (compression/cams/manifolds/timing) Isn't it JUST a question of money ???? As you say Its jut money. I should be offering 3 builds / stages. 1. 280 BHP about £1.7k 2. 310 BHP about £2.5k 3. 350bhp about £5K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.