[Mk2] [Turbo] Stock Rev2 3SGTE: 487.3bhp & 364.6lbft, 2.2 bar & 8100RPM

[Magic Beans]

Kudos for carrying out what you'd planned to do and being successful so far.

I know there's quite a lot of people on here who are interested to see how things hold up, including myself. It's very much one of those things you think about but aren't willing to risk your own time, money and engine to test out. However you've obviously thought about and prepared for this, hence the results so far. Even if the worst does happen you've always got those forged pistons to go in

Keep us updated.

[Turbonoz]

Cheers, I hope it makes the numbers where it counts.

Full project thread here: http://www.imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1474137

First paragraph:

I suppose I can use this to update how long the engine lasts & how well the car does on the drag strip.

I'm not going to be surprised if it does either crack a ringland or the block itself.

[jimGTS]

To those talking about US popular boost limits in pump fuel - isn't their fuel really crap octane? Like 93 ish?

Sorry to bump the thread, but just to pick up on this, 93 US is same as our 98/99, so directly comparable.
They just measure octane directly to us. But is comparable.


Ps, GTR going well, but isn't without it's innitial issues! Now 450-500+ hp safely, and feels fab.

[rs007]

To those talking about US popular boost limits in pump fuel - isn't their fuel really crap octane? Like 93 ish?

Sorry to bump the thread, but just to pick up on this, 93 US is same as our 98/99, so directly comparable.
They just measure octane directly to us. But is comparable.


Ps, GTR going well, but isn't without it's innitial issues! Now 450-500+ hp safely, and feels fab.

Ahhh cheers for the explanation! I did wonder why it would be the case that their petrol was so much lower octane than ours at first glance. I take it they must use a different reference fuel or sommat

As an aside, I'd always assumed US tubbies were lower powered because the fuel was lower octane and so timing had been set back - with this not being the case after all, what accounts for the 20bhp difference? (with rev2) Tuning to meet their emissions?

[jimGTS]

Purely ecu. US cars are mapped for 91 (our 97), but a direct jdm ecu swap will make up difference. It's not plug and play afaik, but nothing in it really if they can find there 93 with a jdm ecu.

[bobhatton]

Idiots question because you have already stressed the stockness of the stock engine

But need to be one million percent sure

Stock compression ratio?

Bob Hatton was saying in a thread I started on fueling that this is the defining limiter on 3s-gte power, implication being it will det itself to pieces if the boost is pushed, and to be fair the stock CR is higher than most similarly specced engines. But through aggressive inlet charge cooling, and good fueling, you've avoided this, yes? I'm guessing so, since it didn't turn into a jap 4 cylinder grenade, Jeff Hartman also exceeded the commonly quoted power ceiling both inexpensively and easily...

Reliability for the rest of us using them as road car is naturally going to be a concern, but I acknowledge that is not what this project is about. But then, I doubt many road users are as hard on their cars as multiple runs up the strip lol!

To those talking about US popular boost limits in pump fuel - isn't their fuel really crap octane? Like 93 ish?

There is MON and RON when talking about octane. The US 93 is about 100 over here so is not low, if fact just a small bit better than ours..

Keeping boost down at low revs will stop knock, once the revs increase more boost than stock can be run.

Mods that work on one engine will not work on all engines, every engine has to be designed for the use it will be used for

[gazrev1tubby]

I think you need to map mine next!

[Al-sw20]

Great result.

[Turbonoz]

I think you need to map mine next!

Great result.

Thanks

[chaos19810]

Loved reading this someone who is willing to just go for it and see what happens and share the details.

Keep it up and can't wait to see what happens

[Turbonoz]

Loved reading this someone who is willing to just go for it and see what happens and share the details.

Keep it up and can't wait to see what happens

Thanks, much appreciated


Some better pics of the dyno sheet:



Note the maximum torque achieved is actually 389.6lb·ft, the clutch was beginning to struggle a lot toward the end



Video:

[bobhatton]

You have to run a lot of boost to get that power, with 2.2 bar boost and some high octane fuel you should be up around 650hp.
I expect you have retarded the ignition timing back too far, try and richen up the fuelling and put the timing back where Toyota designed it to be and it should be much better.

[Turbonoz]

You have to run a lot of boost to get that power, with 2.2 bar boost and some high octane fuel you should be up around 650hp.
I expect you have retarded the ignition timing back too far, try and richen up the fuelling and put the timing back where Toyota designed it to be and it should be much better.

It's not just a stock bottom end, it's also got stock camshafts. It is not possible for the engine to physically ingest the amount of air required for 650bhp in this configuration. Running richer is not required, it will simply lose power. A 3SGTE performs best at 11.8 or leaner I've found, obviously within reason. I'm not running race fuel, it's stock engine on pump fuel. Regardless, I doubt very much the cast pistons can withstand the cylinder pressures required to produce 650bhp.

Putting the timing back to where Toyota designed it to be doesn't make any sense at all I'm afraid, it doesn't work like that. The timing is whatever it needs to be to provide the maximum amount of torque.

[silverspeed]

Metal head gasket. Not quite stock.

[Turbonoz]

Metal head gasket. Not quite stock.

Yeah, sorry about that. Also running NGK BCR8ES spark plugs and Shell Helix 15w50 fully synth.

Metal head gasket available from Toyota for same engine. Stock enough

[Ryan S]

Metal head gasket. Not quite stock.

it would be stock for a rev3 and the bottom end is stock mate, either way it's impressive figures. the rev2 head gasket wouldn't have lasted 2 seconds.

[silverspeed]

Very impressed mate.

Looks a little laggy though.. I managed 500 in me 185 with the tvis still fitted, it became an issue then.

[Peter Gidden]

Very impressed mate.

Looks a little laggy though.. I managed 500 in me 185 with the tvis still fitted, it became an issue then.

Not on a stock turbo i presume.

[Turbonoz]

Very impressed mate.

Looks a little laggy though.. I managed 500 in me 185 with the tvis still fitted, it became an issue then.

A little laggy? That's being way too kind. It has a very high boost threshold on the dyno, it's better on the road but still only suited for the strip, which is what it's designed to do. That is just to be expected given the fact it's a massive olde-worlde Mitsubishi hybrid turbo fitted to a 2.0L.

What's the spec of your GT4?

[silverspeed]

Too much mate.. 2.1 bar on a 3071.