ArtSvt
CEG'er
needs more pictures! :laugh: Of what is all included with this GB? When will it all be ready?
-
Welcome to the Contour Enthusiasts Group, the best resource for the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique.
You can register to join the community.
Checking Interest on LIM MODS
- Thread starter BurritaSVT
- Start date
- Status
contour2gq
CEG'er
Yes I know the svt motor has higher rpms due tothe cams and intake setup. And I ahve seen also dyno numbers with a straight 3L with svt cams and then the SAME motor with 3L cams. Makes alot more power with 3L cams. Yeah the svt cams you get more rpms but less power. Whats the point in that? And again why wouldnt they use those cams on the 3L in the first place? Ahhh cause they wasnt designd for a ovalport cause the cam profiels are WAY off.Yeah you can normally get 20 more hp with svt cams on a 3L....when you got the heads to go with it lol. ?And then you get alomsot 20 fptq less also
BurritaSVT
Veteran CEG'er
Do you realize the 2.5 liter motor does 200hp stock with the SVT cams because of the combination of the setup where the 3.0 liter does the same power at 200hp with more displacement. The two motors have the same CR ratio too so the major differences are the cams and intake. Where did you read that the SVT cams puts down less than the escape cams you are really wrong there. Tom put down
You are looking at a 35whp gain and you think oval port will do more it will do the same or less. Heck DavidZ you probably don't even remember did a 3 liter hybrid that put down 250whp all motor with some adjustable cams using the same manifold. The moral of the story both intakes or great peices and they highest number generated so far are SVT upper intake system so far. Prove me otherwise but from the looks of it alot of people are PM'ing me for these peices so the demand is here for them. Joey
contour2gq
CEG'er
I didnt read it anywhere I seen dynonumber. And Yes they made pretty much the same hp the taurus making like 1 or 2 more but hte taurus also made 200 fpt VS the svts little 170 tq. That 30 more foot pounds of tq. And that dyno shows 217 and a little 189. My straight 3L made like 215 hp but the toned it down because it had a idling issue, but still put down 203hp and 210 tq at teh wheels. Thats 21 tq more than that motor and only just over 9 hp less. Ill trade the tq for a little less hp. Which if I took it bnack and got it retuned I bet it would make more than that 217 with this dif intake I have now
Last edited:
contour2gq
CEG'er
Oh yeah and another thing ur dynochart is in sae which give you high numbers than std. Mines in std }
~
~warmonger
Hard-core CEG'er
No that is not quite true. You get more TORQUE from the 3L cams in a lower rpm range but you get almost as much torque from SVT cams about 1000 rpm later, which in turn generates a lot more power when everything else is equal. The 3L cams make less power period.
The equation is HP=TQ*RPM/5252
If you use this math and start with a simple fixed Torque level then you'll see that the HP goes up linearly with RPM. If the torque varies then so does the HP graph but mainly more torque at higher rpms yields much more power.
SVT cams were not designed for an Automatic Transmission!!!! Get that information incorporated into your thinking. The 3L is designed to be coupled with an ATX in EVERY production car it came in.
The 2.5L split port was designed for both ATX/MTX and the SVT was designed only with an MTX in mind.
That should tell you a lot right there.
warmonger
Hard-core CEG'er
Oh yeah and another thing ur dynochart is in sae which give you high numbers than std. Mines in std }
WHAT!!???
SAE gives the Lowest numbers, STD gives the highest! Download the Dynojet Runtime Viewer and load the same datalog into it and switch between SAE and STD. You'll see quickly see for yourself which one gives higher numbers. Also with smoothing on 5 that reduces all the HP peaks. When someone gives you SAE smoothing 4,5 then you are getting the most conservative dynojet numbers in almost all cases.
The only better way to present your data is uncorrected and post up the Ambient Temp, Barometric Pressure and %humidity. Then people can make up their own minds from the data.
Please do a little reading before posting and you'll see that we are not lying to you or having some big conspiracy. Facts are facts.
contour2gq
CEG'er
Well buddy if it make more tq then how come that SAE max tq reading is only 189 VS's my 210.4???? And you are wrong about 3L being matted to a ATX in EVERY app. Theres the AWD 3L jag that comes with a MTX75. THeres also the lincoln LS. And lets not for get the twine turbo 3L noble matted to a 6speed
warmonger
Hard-core CEG'er
I didnt read it anywhere I seen dynonumber. And Yes they made pretty much the same hp the taurus making like 1 or 2 more but hte taurus also made 200 fpt VS the svts little 170 tq. That 30 more foot pounds of tq. And that dyno shows 217 and a little 189. My straight 3L made like 215 hp but the toned it down because it had a idling issue, but still put down 203hp and 210 tq at teh wheels. Thats 21 tq more than that motor and only just over 9 hp less. Ill trade the tq for a little less hp. Which if I took it bnack and got it retuned I bet it would make more than that 217 with this dif intake I have now
You are being pigheaded. Once you figure out that STD correction gives higher numbers and redo it in SAE you'll see that you didn't even break 200wHP.
Also, that SVT dynogrpah was showing about 185 wTQ but in a much broader/flatter curve. That dyno of yours is pretty week in the bottom and the top end. In truth it would be great for an ATX but suck for an MTX car. All in all it isn't a bad graph if you open up the intake and exhaust a bit for the top end flow and get a decent tune you can pick up a LOT Of power in the lower rpm range. But that SVT 3L hybrid up top is a totally stock SVT pcm and tune, no tuning.
warmonger
Hard-core CEG'er
Those are with different cams and valvetrains. The Jag had direct acting buckets, LS may also. The noble is a boosted turbo engine so it isn't the same for this comparison. What else have ya got to throw in there hmm???:shrug:
Edit: By the way, you talk about torque but look at your torque around 5500-6000 rpm. Maybe 105-110mph range. You aren't even breaking the torque that a stock duratec 2.5 can make at that rpm. Not to mention the numbers are artificially high with STD correction...which isn't a big deal to me. It is the shape of your torque curve that sucks, not the peak numbers.
contour2gq
CEG'er
No you are wrong sae is the raw hp numbers before it has been smoothed over and calculated. Which normally going to give you higher number and which alot of crap happend with manufactures cause they giving fauls numbers by giving the SAE numbers. ANd yes I know the TQ falls off and is peak at a low rpm. As does car like z28 gto's ect. There lower reving engines just like a 3L. I could sya look at me tq at "said" rpm rang and the svt motor would even be close cause its tq peaks higher. And next time clarify cause you said ALL 3L apps
I am with warmonger on this one, I have viewed my dyno files in the dynojet viewer and the SAE numbers are always lower then one with a STD correction.
morbid
Hard-core CEG'er
Please quit regurgitating what 1 other person said until you understand what you are puking all over this groupbuy. There was one guy on FCO that was going to do back to back dyno's with his 3L.. with SVT cams then 3L cams. To my knowledge, he never did so as he never updated that thread.
As Tom pointed out... and is VERY obvious, your 3L tq that you keep bragging about is very peaky. Try this... average out your tq from 2000-7000 (no crying that that rpm range is an unfair comparison.. and no higher than 500rpm increments), then average the tq from the 3L+SVT cam dyno. I'm confident the SVT one will be much higher.
Also... if you want to post your dyno plot and have it in any way relevant, post it with SAE with 5 smoothing.... AND with RPM's, not MPH!
Last edited:
Rara
Hard-core CEG'er
1. contour2gq, if you keep pissing up this group buy thread, you will be banned.
2. If you want to have technical discussions on this subject, feel free to start a new thread, or continue a relevant thread in the 3L discussion forum. And if you want to have technical discussion, you better bring real tech, and not straw man arguments based on quotes from other people and dyno plots that were obviously manipulated by the operator to make you feel better about your setup. Feel free to bring Terry into the discussion as well, we have long maintained that Terry is welcome to return, all he has to do is ask, and agree to follow the same rules as everyone else.
3. I'm sick and tired of people attributing a god-like status to Mr. Haines. Yes, Terry is an engineer, and yes he was involved in the early contour program, but my god, the way you guys talk about him its like he did everything on the program all by himself. There are hundreds, if not thousands of engineers working on these types of programs for OEMs, Terry was ONE GUY, IIRC was a prototype coordinator while he was on the program, not an engine designer, or even an engine component designer. Further, every single person I could find within Ford that remembered him, did not remember him with warm regards, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't because they were jealous.
Terry has spent plenty of time studying the Duratec, and the MTX-75 and his technical opinions are certainly of value, but they certainly are not the final word on all things duratec. I've got friends still closely associated with the Duratec program within Ford, and they run engine dyno tests virtually every day on various configurations of 3.0L Duratecs, and thier opinions don't always line up with Terry's.
2. If you want to have technical discussions on this subject, feel free to start a new thread, or continue a relevant thread in the 3L discussion forum. And if you want to have technical discussion, you better bring real tech, and not straw man arguments based on quotes from other people and dyno plots that were obviously manipulated by the operator to make you feel better about your setup. Feel free to bring Terry into the discussion as well, we have long maintained that Terry is welcome to return, all he has to do is ask, and agree to follow the same rules as everyone else.
3. I'm sick and tired of people attributing a god-like status to Mr. Haines. Yes, Terry is an engineer, and yes he was involved in the early contour program, but my god, the way you guys talk about him its like he did everything on the program all by himself. There are hundreds, if not thousands of engineers working on these types of programs for OEMs, Terry was ONE GUY, IIRC was a prototype coordinator while he was on the program, not an engine designer, or even an engine component designer. Further, every single person I could find within Ford that remembered him, did not remember him with warm regards, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't because they were jealous.
Terry has spent plenty of time studying the Duratec, and the MTX-75 and his technical opinions are certainly of value, but they certainly are not the final word on all things duratec. I've got friends still closely associated with the Duratec program within Ford, and they run engine dyno tests virtually every day on various configurations of 3.0L Duratecs, and thier opinions don't always line up with Terry's.
morbid
Hard-core CEG'er
contour2gq is a troll. Apparently he emailed Terry and is trying to get him involved in this O/T debate.
how is he a troll? He has a silver 3l svt
hylix
CEG'er
Wow, interesting info guys, but i think think it needs to get back on track. People are probably interested in this thread 'cause they have already made up their mind about using the 2.5 UIM, and for those that have not, this product just might change their mind. If i was planning on using the 3l intakes, i would use them, and other wise i would buy this product, except, i have already ported my heads. thanks for the info guys. More power to Joey and Tom for bringing interest and innovation to this platform.
warmonger
Hard-core CEG'er
Hey, I've got no problems allaying concerns anyone might have about the performance of a part. I don't think this thread needs to become a pissing contest but hell, sometimes other people can learn a lot from two well argued points even if neither were 100% correct. We are however correct!
Anyway, we should not drag anyone into our arguments that hasn't voiced the opinion themselves.
Anyway, we should not drag anyone into our arguments that hasn't voiced the opinion themselves.
morbid
Hard-core CEG'er
Well, ok... not a troll, but he's only in this thread to argue.
Rara
Hard-core CEG'er
Though it may not have come across this way, but this was exactly my intent with my post above.
Let's get this thread back on topic about Joey's group buy, and if people want to discuss the relative technical merits of one port combination over another, go start a thread in the 3L section.
- Status