240bhp !

[IanHighfield]

Great day at Weltmeister, and the old 135,000 mile 3.2 managed 239.6bhp on the dyno - see revised signature !

Purpose of the day was to assess engine fitness - answer is it is just great and nicely run in.

Good to see all those lovely RS cars etc, and exhaust of the day goes to Richard Bernau whom I followed down the A43 - it sounds great.

Great day out if you are thinking of ever doing it - well recommended at Weltmeister.

 

[Guest]

...and the great exhaust and cams on a newly rebuilt engine only made another 4hp [&:]

Still I am confident there is more to come once its properly mapped. At least it sounds fast...

 

[Jacob]

Richard,

It's a shame you can't post a soundbite on the forum so we can hear it - would be interesting to compare it with Phils SSI's to hear the difference

 

[Guest]

Well, Johndglynn taped it on the dyno and is going to burn me a disc of it so it may be more possible than you think. Watch this space.

 

[Jacob]

Excellent - keep us posted

 

[Guest]

I only just saw the table on the 964RS forum with the torque numbers. Interesting to see my peak torque rpm - 5550rpm - is higher in the rev range than any other car, GT3RS included. But peak hp was at "only" 6050rpm. What does this mean? Should the car have been run to higher revs on the dyno? I was told that the 3.8 Supercup cams should pull strongly thru to 7000rpm. Still a lot of unanswered questions...

 

[Richard Savage]

ORIGINAL: Richard Bernau

I only just saw the table on the 964RS forum with the torque numbers.  Interesting to see my peak torque rpm - 5550rpm - is higher in the rev range than any other car, GT3RS included.  But peak hp was at "only" 6050rpm.  What does this mean?  Should the car have been run to higher revs on the dyno?  I was told that the 3.8 Supercup cams should pull strongly thru to 7000rpm.  Still a lot of unanswered questions...

Richard - You also need to consider, amongst numerous other things, the bore and the stroke. Are they the same in both engines?

The Bore dimension will effect the Force, generated by combustion, applied to the connecting rod, and this, combined with the Stroke [Distance] will effect the Torque generated - Torque = Force x Distance.

In turn, Power is generated from the combination of Torque and RPM. Increase the Torque and / or RPM and the Power is increased. Power = 2 x Pi x RPM x Torque.

If the figures are being generated from a Rolling Road, and not directly at the flywheel [Brake Power] then overall wheel diameter, and gear ratio applied, must also be considered.

If you are looking for improvements, or losses, in performance, as a result of modifications and / or adjustments to an individual engine then fine, put it on a rolling road. If you are looking to directly compare different vehicles, I think it is decidedly questionable!

You are more likely to find improvements in performance by making sure everything original is in top order than by buying some sort of fancy bolt-on goody. In fact, taking this approach, might even reduce performance!

R.

 

[Guest]

You obviously don't know me or my car []

 

[Richard Savage]

ORIGINAL: Richard Bernau

You obviously don't know me or my car []

Richard - True. However, I don't understand the significance of your statement within the context of mine!

R.

 

[ClubSport 911]

Richard - True. However, I don't understand the significance of your statement within the context of mine!

R.

Well, I do, and it is funny to watch the posts developing !

Richard (S).... Richard B has a very well sorted car...tracks it, knows engineering and is a regular contributor and guru on matters 3.2 but, we could use all the wisdom we can muster on this forum [8D]

 

[bones]

I think Richard might have taken umbrage with,

You are more likely to find improvements in performance by making sure everything original is in top order than by buying some sort of fancy bolt-on goody. In fact, taking this approach, might even reduce performance!

Could be seen as a veiled slur; []

It's not hard to extract more power from 911s, you just have to have deep pockets, the knowledge and expertise and remember to over engineer where possible as Porsche did when these cars were made.

 

[Guest]

No offence taken - hence the smiley in my post. I meant exactly what I said. If you knew me or perhaps followed the forum a little more closely you would know I have a history of modifying my car. Those mods have been IMHO well thought out and very successful in terms of the way I use my car. Hopefully once the engine is fully sorted it will also perform to potential - expecting 250+hp. I wouldn't use the phrase "bolt-on goody" to describe the comprehensive suspension or brake mods I have made or the engine rebuild just completed - and neither would my bank manager.

If you think you can get 250+hp from a standard "everything original and in top order" 3.2, then I would love to know how. []

Richard

 

[Richard Savage]

ORIGINAL: ClubSport 911
Well, I do, and it is funny to watch the posts developing !

Steve - Yeh init! Or going totally off topic. Like now.

R.

 

[Guest]

ORIGINAL: Richard Bernau

You obviously don't know me or my car []

[]

I think you'll do 265/270 on that car when it's sorted mate. Trying to host a quick compilation vid I have made of your 5 runs at the minute, will post a link if I get it organised. Then they can all hear THE SOUND!!

 

[bones]

ORIGINAL: Richard Bernau

No offence taken - hence the smiley in my post.  I meant exactly what I said.  If you knew me or perhaps followed the forum a little more closely you would know I have a history of modifying my car.  Those mods have been IMHO well thought out and very successful in terms of the way I use my car.  Hopefully once the engine is fully sorted it will also perform to potential - expecting 250+hp.  I wouldn't use the phrase "bolt-on goody" to describe the comprehensive suspension or brake mods I have made or the engine rebuild just completed - and neither would my bank manager.

If you think you can get 250+hp from a standard "everything original and in top order" 3.2, then I would love to know how.  []

Richard

are you replying to me or Richard?

 

[Richard Savage]

ORIGINAL: bones
are you replying to me or Richard?

Pete - I assumed, maybe incorrectly, that Richard's comments were pointed at moi. However, if you check the bottom right corner of Richard's post, he is replying to your comment. I missed that! Too many Richard's spoil the post. Confusin' at times init? Apologies.

R.

 

[ClubSport 911]

Then they can all hear THE SOUND!!

Indeed - it reminds me of the Starship Enterprise as they wind up to Warp 9. Intoxicating / Refreshing.

 

[Guest]

[[/quote]
are you replying to me or Richard?
[/quote]

To Richard S. I just posted in chronological order rather than quoting so apologies for it coming up as a reply to you - not my intention at all. Further, I have read your posts with enthusiasm for years so the reply would be totally out of context if directed to you. Again, apologies if you took any offence.

 

[bones]

No offence taken just trying to keep track of the 'logic' of this increasingly funny post ( I have a strange sense of humour)

 

[Richard Savage]

ORIGINAL: bones

I think Richard might have taken umbrage with,

You are more likely to find improvements in performance by making sure everything original is in top order than by buying some sort of fancy bolt-on goody. In fact, taking this approach, might even reduce performance!

Could be seen as a veiled slur; []

Pete - Yeh, on reflection, I can see that it might look like the statement was directed at Richard, and that was how I read into his response to it. It wasn't. I was referring to those individuals that come across products in the small adds, in the back of auto. magazines, which suggest such products are the answer to everything!

I wouldn't mind betting that Richard himself has admonished such individuals for using just that approach to engine 'modification'.

R.