T3-T34 is it really worth it?
22-03-2011, 02:24 PM
#41
20K+ Super Poster.
iTrader: (1)
I only asked because i've never seen a 400bhp T34 Graph i don't think..
22-03-2011, 02:35 PM
#42
Simply put in 420bhp worth of fuel and air, and retard the timing a few degrees from optimum, that sort of deliberate inefficiency is great for headgasket life!
22-03-2011, 02:48 PM
#43
380 bhp no probs from a t34.48 lol
I ran mine at 36psi and held it flat out to the limiter, the wastegate could have been welded shut once the spike had been controlled, and it made 370 bhp 420lb/ft
so I wouldn't say it's no problem, more like impossible as they simply run out of puff top end.
Good for torque and punch but no good for ultimate bhp.
T34.63 will do 380 bhp.
For the record I have a graph from my t34.48 showing 470 bhp, I guess it depends what you believe lol.
I ran mine at 36psi and held it flat out to the limiter, the wastegate could have been welded shut once the spike had been controlled, and it made 370 bhp 420lb/ft
so I wouldn't say it's no problem, more like impossible as they simply run out of puff top end.
Good for torque and punch but no good for ultimate bhp.
T34.63 will do 380 bhp.
For the record I have a graph from my t34.48 showing 470 bhp, I guess it depends what you believe lol.
Not only is this on a 0.48 a/r T34, but it is also on four 803s.....
These figures were backed up by a 172mph top speed (ten 170mph runs all on the same day.....) over a fixed distance (static timing lights at 1 mile down the runway) and a 12.64 @ 115mph quarter mile. No other four 803 injected car has come close to this (and ELE only managed the same speed with another claimed 100bhp more
).I think it is safe to say it had the gee-gees, as a Lotus Carlton (with the boost wound up with bleed valves
), which has 377bhp as standard only managed 164mph on the same day in the same distance......
Last edited by Mike Rainbird; 22-03-2011 at 02:49 PM.
22-03-2011, 03:04 PM
#46
IMO it's all about area under the graph, not peak numbers
. I'd have my 385bhp engine over the 420bhp one any day of the week (as it was more diffcult to launch as well as breaking diffs LOL - went from getting regular sub 13s quarters (10 in a day) to struggling to get good low 13s with the more powerful engine (due to it either bogging or lighting the tyres up).
Last edited by Mike Rainbird; 22-03-2011 at 03:20 PM.
22-03-2011, 03:07 PM
#47
Shell Super unleaded of 1998 vintage (when it still had benzine in, but was only rated at 98 RON). The 420 engine was with the benzine removed and when the "new" fuel was originally only rated at 97 RON (before V-power came along).
Last edited by Mike Rainbird; 22-03-2011 at 03:22 PM.
22-03-2011, 03:19 PM
#48
The person that owned it eventually got greedy and went for more power with a 0.63 a/r T34 turbo, fully ported head, cams and different injectors, and although the car was faster above 100mph, it completely ruined the bottom end driveability, and he wished he had left it as it was, as the engine with the "dodgey" maxed out injectors never missed a beat (covering 25,00 trouble free miles), where the 0.63 a/r engine used to eat turbos every 3-5 months, beating the shit out of the lifters every 6,000 miles LOL and destroying diffs on a regular basis (at Santa Pod - where the 385bhp conversion had done 100s of launches without fault).
.48 housing is kind of the right one for a T34 IMHO for that reason though, in that it more or less stops the turbo spinning too fast in the first place so although it limits the output, it does wonders for turbo life! Spools more quickly too of course.
IMO it's all about area under the graph, not peak numbers . I'd have my 385bhp engine over the 420bhp one any day of the week (as it was more diffcult to launch as well as breaking diffs LOL - went from getting regular sub 13s quarters (10 in a day) to struggling to get good low 13s with the more powerful engine (due to it either bogging or lighting the tyres up).
. I'd have my 385bhp engine over the 420bhp one any day of the week (as it was more diffcult to launch as well as breaking diffs LOL - went from getting regular sub 13s quarters (10 in a day) to struggling to get good low 13s with the more powerful engine (due to it either bogging or lighting the tyres up).
23-03-2011, 01:46 AM
#61
10K+ Poster!!
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: birmingham west mids
Posts: 11,919
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
9 Posts
Not only is this on a 0.48 a/r T34, but it is also on four 803s.....
These figures were backed up by a 172mph top speed (ten 170mph runs all on the same day.....) over a fixed distance (static timing lights at 1 mile down the runway) and a 12.64 @ 115mph quarter mile. No other four 803 injected car has come close to this (and ELE only managed the same speed with another claimed 100bhp more
).I think it is safe to say it had the gee-gees, as a Lotus Carlton (with the boost wound up with bleed valves
), which has 377bhp as standard only managed 164mph on the same day in the same distance......
Funnily enough, that was moonstone as well, and also funnily enough, like someone else on here, I smashed it up 
I went through 4 sets of rear tyres (all brand new!), and 3 diffs in just under 3 months
.. Epic fun, although looking back, how I kept my licence unscathed, let alone at all is amazing! I want another RWD saff now
24-03-2011, 11:11 AM
#76
The Bosch 400s would probably have been better, but the turbo was maxed out already and the fuelling was spot on (despite the injectors being maxed out with fuel multipliers in the map).
The spray pattern of some modern injectors don't suit the inlet design and injector location of a Cosworth, so just stating "modern injectors" is a bit of a misnoma, as many (that are used) are completely unsuitable with a spray pattern that isn't ideal (I am referring to the ones that spray in a narrow jet).
24-03-2011, 11:13 AM
#77
Fair point Mike.
I should have put
Appropriate modern injectors with a suitable flow rate / spray pattern / impedance and that are the correct physical fitment for the inlet and the rail
I thought that was implicit but better to make it explicit
Thanks for pointing out the inadequecy of my description.
The point being made though, that 803s arent ideal for 400bhp+ was and of course still is perfectly valid though obviously!
I should have put
Appropriate modern injectors with a suitable flow rate / spray pattern / impedance and that are the correct physical fitment for the inlet and the rail
I thought that was implicit but better to make it explicit
Thanks for pointing out the inadequecy of my description.
The point being made though, that 803s arent ideal for 400bhp+ was and of course still is perfectly valid though obviously!
Last edited by Chip; 24-03-2011 at 11:14 AM.
24-03-2011, 11:31 AM
#79
I did mean it Rich, or I wouldnt have put it.
When I wrote about modern injectors I hadnt considered that someone might fit the WRONG modern injectors, I did mention that ones should be selected that "get decent results" but Mike is right that not everyone will understand what that requires, so its worth mentioning in more detail.
I like my posts to be useful and accurate, and mine would have been more so with that extra detail in the first place so its good that Mike mentioned it.
When I wrote about modern injectors I hadnt considered that someone might fit the WRONG modern injectors, I did mention that ones should be selected that "get decent results" but Mike is right that not everyone will understand what that requires, so its worth mentioning in more detail.
I like my posts to be useful and accurate, and mine would have been more so with that extra detail in the first place so its good that Mike mentioned it.
