does anyone have any experience with running the bottle on these 3.0 motors? exactly how durable are they? i've had mine stuck in fields bouncing rev limiter for what seemed like minutes...didn't seem to hurt it. it has 80k on it now and does not smoke on start up or knock or ping or anything. i installed a 160 thermostat (i do a lot of pulling) and the thermo. seemed to help it quite a bit, it appears that these motors do not like heat.

hell my ls1 knocks more on cold start up than my truck :P

 

Remember bouncing the rev limiter, while stressful, isn't near the stress involved in running nitrous. Nitrous is going to produce more power than the engine was designed for, leading to much the same requirements as any other boost application. I.e. go forged.

160 is too low, IMHO. It's never getting fully warmed up, and the truck is running in "warm up" mode. You're not getting the power potential from the engine. And if you try and add anything to it, expect minute differences with the engine that cool.

Wendell, that turbo sounds like a good idea, but I agree, it's gonna overstress something expensive quickly. Either you're going to have to run low boost, practically defeating the purpose, or you're gonna have to upgrade to stronger components, therefore raising the price significantly.

RP
Zach

 

Check out a little car called the Capri RS3100 (and more to the point the Cosworth GAA derivatives... as raced by Köln and the like)
A 3.0l Vulcan wouldn't know which way a 2.9l went if built correctly...
VVT, and V-tec are the same thing (as is VCT)... just a marketing gimmick name for variable valve timing
- but as you mentioned different systems can do different things.
Most variable systems only vary intake, and a some of those vary lift as well.
People harp on about V-tec - but in reality it is a pretty crude system, it was a good system back in the early 90's when it first came out, but its like hitting powerband on a two stroke. Toyota's VVTL-i is similar.
Only a few (Porsche, BMW, and a humble 6-cylinder Australian Falcon) vary both the intake AND exhaust timing.

I would argue that a variable length intake is of greater benefit for road vehicles anyway...

 

Doesn't the new fusion use varible timming on both the 4, and 6 to get it's increased hp numbers?

 

Some observations:

Valve weight is overcome by lighter materials and heavier springs.

Cam ramping can be/is changed to prevent "float." The limiting factor of rpm in most ic engines is weak valve springs. Change the springs and theoretically it could rev till it disentegrates. Overlap is only part of a cam profile, and is limited.

Just because it has 4 valves per cylinder does not necessarily mean it flows better. Space is limited in the head. Improving flow on a 4 valve head is difficult because of this limitation. Single port heads can be made to flow huge amounts of air. Higher air flow usually has the power band at higher rpm.

Horsepower can be increased by other means than just changing the camshaft (hp=rpmxtorque/5252).

Variable camshaft timing is used on several Ford engines.

All of these "engineering marvels" have been known, and used, by hotrodders for years. Detriot started implementing much of this knowledge due to the EPA, and the advent of the computer made much of it easy for them.

Want a bullet proof 3.0? Use the Essex from England. It was made for diesel service as well as gasoline, however, it was never used as a diesel. Alum heads & other parts are available for it.

The original question was concerning the use of nitrous. Giggle gas is used in spurts, not continuous. The engine would probably be ok using a small shot sparingly. Depends on the condition of the engine. jim d

 

Not true, ALL valves will float at a particular RPM!!! Valve float cannot be eliminated!!

 

Here guys, check out this site:

www.cosworth.com

If they an get 300HP out of the 2.3 the numbers you guys are talking about getting from the 3.0 is more than possible, it's a reality, it would just take a boat load of money. Now enough of this stupid bs argument back and forth over this - anything is possible performance wise, the question is how much do you want to spend to get there. Next time why don't you boys just get together, whoop em out and see who's is longer -

 

I didn't say that. I love the way you jump in there and call people liars. Evidently tact isn't your strong suit. I said the engine(speaking of an automobile engine here) will self-destruct before it reaches the rpm limits. You can't just make a flat out statement that something is not true. You have to quantify it. Motorcycles, F1, Indy engines are turning in excess of 15k rpm without valvetrain problems.
NASCAR engines, drag racing engines, etc., are now turning in excess of 9.5k rpm and surviving. This would have been unheard of a few years ago. Technology does improve, you know. 2 and 3 litre engines are now making over 800 horsepower. 300 horsepower for the 2.3 Ford Lima is fairly common. jim d

 

This is from Websters, check out #1, the definition of "prevent"

pre·vent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-vnt)
v. pre·vent·ed, pre·vent·ing, pre·vents
v. tr.
1) To keep from happening: took steps to prevent the strike.
2) To keep (someone) from doing something; impede: prevented us from winning.
3)Archaic. To anticipate or counter in advance.
4)Archaic. To come before; precede.

 

Arrogance is the obstruction of wisdom.

Anyone with knowledge of the internal combustion engine, especially in the high performance field knows what I meant, and was referring to. Too bad you don't fit into this group. jim d

 

While your point is still valid - F1 engines use pneaumatic actuated valves to prevent float.

And whoever said how much hp depends on how deep your pockets are is spot on.

 

Boys, were getting way off topic here, this poor guy wanted to know how to get some more power from his 3.0, I sugested some things that I saw over at rps, and they were claiming to get around 200 hp at the wheels. Bob said you can't get 200 at the wheels on a 3.0, because a sc on a 3.0 won't even give you 200 hp at the wheels, and the race was on ! Bottom line, I think the boys over at rps can very well get around 200hp at the wheels with raised compression, flowed heads, and so on. After reading alot of the comments, I'm more conviced more than ever. Getting another 60, or 70 hp with internals would be a cake walk for any good speed shop. So I called weber racing in North Ridgeville Ohio, they said for around 2,500$, they could get me around 200 wheel hp on my 3.0 ranger, and they have a dyno to show thier results. We didn't go into detail about how they would do it, just that it could be done. Of course I don't have a 3.0, I have a 4.0, but it answered my question. So for the guy that started this post, "yeah", you can get some more power out of your 3.0, but I still believe it to be cheaper and more worth wild to swap in a 4.0, or 5.0, or trade it for a sports car.

 

Careful using the "prevent" word. You might incur the wrath of Ayers.

That is a quote from John Lingenfelter when asked how much horsepower a 350 chevy could make. "How much do you want, and how much money you got?" he asked. jim d

 

By the way, why weren't you honest, and give the complete definitions. Prevent also means to hinder, forestall, impede, delay. This would fall under #'s 2,3, &4. This is from my Webster's Encyclopeic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language. 2078 pages. Is mine bigger than your's, Bob??? This so Waves can be satisfied. jim d

 

Now there is no need to be vindictive is there?

I think not...