Thanks Jimdandy for the words of encouragement, I was begining to think I was crazy. It sure seems feesable that you could get a lousey 50 extra hp out of a stock motor with internals, heads, and some bolt on's, or whatever. Bob bust my chops every time a performance issue comes up, he hates performance for some reason, but yet he refuses to stay away from performance threads, and he's allways so negitive. Bob is one of my best friends on here, and he can be very helpfull, but the performance area is we clash all the time, "O well", I still think the world of him. "YEAH" I started second guessing myself, but I knew there were alot of engines out there that have more than 1 hp per 1 cubic inch, not from the factory so much, there were some, but mostly after hot rodders get thier hands on them. I had a 1970 boss 302 create motor that I put into a maveric, ford rated it at 290 hp for insurance purposes, but it dynoed out at 320 hp on the stand before it was put in.

 

I side with Wendell on the more than 1 HP per cubic inch is perfectly possible.

The 427 Cammer. STOCK it gave....658 ponies (the two carb version). That's from the factory. And it was underated from what I read.

However, the 3.0L, not a performance engine. Reliable as everything, but not a performance engine. Get a 4.0L, 5.0L, or take the plunge and drop a 351 in there, now you're talking SERIOUS horses.

I agree with Bob though, just what was mentioned wouldn't give 200 RWHP. (or was it 300...I dun remember). And the S/C measurements were probably done with no intake other than a filter on the front and no exhaust.

Just my two cents.

RP
Zach

 

What it was Zach, was some of the guys over at rps were saying they have gotten around 200 hp at the wheels of thier 3.0's with head work, raised compression, cam, and of course bolt on's. I don't know what they mean by around 200, is it 199, or 189. The 3.0 has about 150 stock, it just doesn't seem impossible to me to get another 60, or 70 hp going inside the engine, people do it with 4 bangers. Even 50 more would puy you at about 180 at the wheels, to them, that might be around 200. the low numbers on the SC maybe due to weak internals, it may can only take low boost on a stock 3.0, i don't know. Even though the 3.0 isn't no race engine, you should be able to squeeze 50, or 60 hp from any engine when you start going inside the motor, were not taking bolton's, like a cai, or headers, were talking cam, port & polish, larger valves, maybe even pistons, depending on what route they used to raise compression, I think it's doable, and thier telling the truth, Bob thinks it can't be done. I'm not a 3.0 expert, but it sure seems feesable to me. But Bob maybe right, I just don't see why those guys would lie about it, they seem to know thier stuff.

 

If you go inside the engine, you should not have any problem getting that power out of a 3.0. There is People in the 2.9 forum getting 200+ horsepower out of their engines and the 2.9 is far more poorly designed than the 3.0(Ive had both apart and its obvious). You can get 10hp from a Cold Air Intake alone on an 05 ranger. I would say that Bolts ons can give you around 25hp over stock and doing some smoothing of the ports, a nice cam and Compression bump could really make the bolt ons come alive. 200 hp at the wheels with a 3.0 is possible, just look at the duratec and SHO engines. The only benefit the duratec has is a little bit better flowing heads and overhead cams, work the vulcan heads over and you can get the same result.

 

Thanks, thats the way I feel about it, but some on here don't think a na 3.0 is capable of 200 hp, a pinto I-4 can make 200 hp for crying out loud. That was my estimate as well for bolton's, was 20 to 30 hp, depending on motor. on my 04 4.0, I have headers, catback, intake, e-fan, udp, and bama programer, and I know I have about a 25 to 30 hp increase, but on a 3.0, i'm sure it wouldn't be quit as much, but still it would be a decent bump.

 

Oooohhh, hey wait a second Wendell. Shaving heads, raising compression, new cam, that I can see. It just might push 200 ponies.

RacinNdrummin, the 2.9L is in a completely different engine family than the 3.0L, it's in the Cologne family with the 2.8L and 4.0L. Not to mention you should expect a 2.9L, with it's older heritage, to be of a lesser design than the 3.0Ls of today.

Pretty much, to get more power, you gotta first open it up. Intake and exhaust. If you just want minor gains, chip it and be done with it. That'll give you some ponies to play with.
After that you start getting into more expensive items. Cams, port and polish, headers, e-fan, etc.
Finally, forced induction. It'll require forged parts to have any huge gains. If you're interested, tear the block completely down and rebuild it as forged. Put a turbo (or two) or a supercharger up on top.
Then you've really reached your limit, provided the chip has been reburned to match all add-ons.

If you are looking for minor power upgrades, intake, exhaust, and chip. And keep it tuned up, that helps a ton!
If you have quite the budget, I honestly suggest a 351. There's a huge aftermarket support network for it, so you can add onto power that's already there.

Take your pick, we're here for support either way!

RP
Zach

 

I guess you don't realize that the Duratec has a 4 valve / cylinder head, which flows A LOT better than the 2 valve / cylinder Vulcan heads. I do
not know how you would rework the Vulcan heads to get the same result.

Also, just a comment, it seems like everybody is confusing flywheel and rear wheel HP specs. The original discusion was getting "around" 200HP rear wheel HP on the Vulcan 3.0L with mods, other than forced induction. Just for a comparison, showing the difference between flywheel and rear wheel HP, the Whipple SC, on the Vulcan 3.0L develops 230HP (flywheel), and 197HP (rear wheel).

The only other technology that gives you a substantial increase in HP, without forced induction is VVT (Variable Valve Timing). The Honda 2.0L in the S2000 is a good example, 240HP (flywheel) from N/A 2.0L!!! To increase HP at the higher RPMS, you have to increase the overlap spec on the cam (the time the intake and exhaust valves are both open). The problem with this, there is very low vacuum at low RPMs, killing torque, and it's hard to get the engine to idle. VVT solves this problem by decreasing overlap at low RPMs, increasing overlap at high RPMs.

 

Does Honda (or the 2.0L manufacturing company) have rights to the VVT? Just wondering if we might see this coming around in any of the Big 3 (or is it the Big 2 these days?) anytime in the future.

Sure would make our trucks a little more interesting.

RP
Zach

 

Zach, VVT is used on the Triton 3-valve 5.4L V-8 used in the F-150, a FORD!!!

 

Im Not an idiot, of course the DOHC Duratec has 4 valve heads, and yes they flow better than vulcan heads, but unless you have the flow numbers, dont tell me they flow A LOT better, you dont know that. Virtually the same thing can be done by opening the ports up, putting in bigger valves and running a cam with more lift and duration. 2 valves per cylinder does not mean that it is impossible to flow a decent amount of air, look at Top Fuel dragsters, they are still running 16 valve engines. As Far as Flywheel Vs. wheel HP, when I said that guys were getting 200hp out of 2.9s, that was at the wheels on a chassis dyno. 33hp difference on the SC 3.0 between the Flywheel and RWP is approx. 15%. That is very little as far as parasitic loss is concerned. The reason the supercharger puts out so little power is because the boost wasnt set that high on a completely stock engine. Put a more free flowing exhaust on there, kick the boost up a bit with some forged pistons and I wouldnt be suprised to see 275-300 hp out of an SC 3.0 at around 15psi. V-tec (not VVT, thats toyota) Increases both the overlap and the lift with a 3rd, more radical lobe on the intake cam that is used at high RPMs, it has nothing to do with Variable valve timing which advances or retards the camshaft according to driving conditions and demand. Ford is using VVT now in the f-150 and the new 3v 4.6 mustang. Even with V-tec, the engines that honda has are horrible for torque, the ports are still huge to benefit the increased flow at high RPMs.

 

Yes, I never said the 3.0 was in the same engine family as the 2.9, the only I said was the 2.9's design was crap compared to the 3.0, I have had 2.8's-4.0's apart and even 3.0's. The pre-2.8, 2.9, and 4.0 engines were all derivitives of the taunus V-4, the 3.0 is its own engine designed and built here in the US. As far as the 351 goes, what is the excitement in that. Anybody can have a built 351 easily in their ranger, but who has a custom built 3.0 that screams? Nobody. A built 3.0 would be much cooler.

 

Here is a quote from your original post:

"The only benefit the duratec has is a little bit better flowing heads"

This is not true, the Duratec 4 valve heads flow MUCH better than the 2 valve Vulcan heads.

Here again, you don't inderstand what the 4 valves / cylinder is all about. By using 2 large valves, the effective opening is larger, but due to the linear acceleration of a valve, they would "float" due to the increased weight, which is one of the factors that determine an engine's RPM redline. By using 4 valves, the valves are smaller, but the effective opening is much larger.

 

[QUOTE=RacinNdrummin]...forged pistons....[QUOTE]

It's actually forged piston rods....

 

This is turning into quite the little brawl eh? *insert popcorn here*

The "excitement" about the 351 is simple. Build the 3.0L all you want, a built 351 will school it. Will be fun to watch too, and much more original that a built stock engine.

If I had the BS flag smiley face, I'd put it here. I'm not pictureing a 3.0L happily pumping out 300 ponies.

Then again, what do I know? I have and enjoy the 4.0L.

RP
Zach

 

There's some guy over at offroad ranger named Jackson who is in the final stages of developeing a turbo kit for the 3.0. He expects the final product to produce 275 to 300 hp, He dosn't mention what boost the kit will run, but it seems to me that it would have to be more than stock internals would take. He says you need to take timming out to run higher boost, this is true to a point, along with lowering compression. It just seems his numbers are alittle high for a stock 3.0. He's selling the kit for 2 grand, what I think he'll be selling, is some blown motors. All though I do believe getting 200 hp from a built 3.0 is reasonable, but 300 from a stock 3.0 seems even far fetched to me. "O", and his kit will use the t-bird turbo coupe rebuilt turbo. Any thoughts on this deal, can it be done? I don't think so on stock internals, but I'm not a 3.0 expert.