that is really cool what an awesome car it must be. 200kw 3sge with NA like powercurve..

288nm ? are you sure about that figure.
considering a STOCK gen 2 3sgte makes 165kw (whywheel)and 304nm..... i would expect yours to have a higher toque output than 288nm (power and torque are related).... are you sure 288nm is corect?

not saying it in a critical way, but saying it in disbelief.

anyways AWESOME engine and car, i would love to own this, would be super fun !

Here is the Dyno.
FYI
7,300 RPM injectors 75 % duty
Intercooler is very effecient only 8 degrees over ambient temp
Rotrex oil even with all the power runs only hit 51 degrees celcius.
Comment was that there is still a lot adjustment available in the timing and the low temps that i could have run a higher compression ratio than the 8.9 that i built.
But its very safe tune and just to be sure extra fuel is added at 7,300 rpm. Thats the reason for the curve downwards



Also the second dyno is compared to an import MR2 Turbo. Look at the difference between the Rotrex SC and a Turbo MR2

why is your compression ratio so low? you could run 20psi through that thing..

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr_ken

288nm ? are you sure about that figure.
considering a STOCK gen 2 3sgte makes 165kw (whywheel)and 304nm..... i would expect yours to have a higher toque output than 288nm (power and torque are related).... are you sure 288nm is corect?

not saying it in a critical way, but saying it in disbelief.

anyways AWESOME engine and car, i would love to own this, would be super fun !

---

Ive posted a comparison.
Do you have any plots of a turbo MR2

comparing a high ve engine like yours with the latest in aerodynamics supercharger is unfair against a standard built in the early 90's mr2 turbo.

nice figure, should be reliable and last you years.

quote:

---

Originally posted by surok

why is your compression ratio so low? you could run 20psi through that thing..

---

Builder got instructions from me to be safe. We settled at 8.9 : 1

There is enough adjustmentleft in timing to go to 10 - 10.5 .
I have another engine for the future but this ia awsome , fast and is just like a N/A so i dont need anymore

quote:

---

Originally posted by kameleon

comparing a high ve engine like yours with the latest in aerodynamics supercharger is unfair against a standard built in the early 90's mr2 turbo.

nice figure, should be reliable and last you years.

---

But correct me if im wrong. Evo , WRX as stock are under 205 at the wheels ?
This is more like around 240 kws at the flywheel , m3 teritory and 500 kgs less weight ?

your not wrong but you certainly did not mention what you typed above in the dyno sheet? i thought thats what we were comparing?

build a beams Lotus 7 if you want power to weight! but once again we were comparing 2 engines...

Shame you were not at haunted hills. Will us Melbourne locals ever see this car???

yep, once its all together. Just remember Sunny day / beach !