TheSamba.com :: View topic - off the dyno, a 2276 and a 2332 turbo combos!

Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:12 am

Check out the small difference between two pump gas combos. A 2276cc and 2332cc turbo combos, The 2276 has a smaller cam and t3 turbo but at 8-9lbs boost were as the 2332 has a t3/t4 turbo and at 6-7lbs boost.

the 2276cc combo
RPM HP TQ
2500 92 194
3000 106 186
3500 124 186
4000 142 186
4500 158 184
5000 170 178

the 2332cc combo
RPM HP TQ
2500 70 147 (off cam)
3000 114 199
3500 128 192
4000 146 192
4500 165 192
5000 175 183

Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:21 am

I don't have a dyno but don't those HP #s seam low for such big engines with all that turbo hardware bolted on them?

Actually looking at the torque #s I kinda like the torque #s. Those would be really drivable high torque street engines!!

What was the duration on the cams for both of those? what heads?
Gary.

Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:23 am

By those numbers, i would say those are street motor. Not drag.
194 ft.lbs. at 2500rpm,, man that's AWSOME!

Craig

Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:33 pm

Pretty sure my 1915 could hang with that...

Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:45 pm

Mini,
no offense, but i'm pretty sure your 1915 doesn't make 194 ft.lbs. at 2500rpm. That's monster torque my friend!

Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:28 pm

Not at that RPM, but a little higher up if I blow on it hard enough. :lol:

Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:45 pm

he probably wont tell you the duration
but it probably not much.. low to mid 230's is my guess :?:

lot of torque!!
not much ponies tho :(

any other details on these engines AJ?
intended use
turbo size
header size
valve size
any fun specs to share with us?

Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:03 pm

Why am I less than impressed?? :roll:

Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:10 pm

You tell me, it's not like YOU have a turbo or anything. :shock:

You know, you could always turbo that 1641.... :lol:

Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:12 pm

1641's long gone......where have you been? :roll: :shock:

Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:45 pm

miniman82 wrote:
You know, you could always turbo that 1641.... :lol:

I recommend it... you'd be surprised... :wink:

Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:30 am

OK ok ok.....I give in.

I'm doing it now....

Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:06 am

Hotrodvw wrote: Why am I less than impressed?? :roll:

Because like everytime AJ posts dyno results, there are always people who solely look at HP numbers and have no idea what TQ is or does.

Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:31 am

this is true but i often find myself wandering...
would it be better to have high torque low HP
or ok torque and high HP?

Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:50 am

Look at those flat torque curves. You build strong motors. I would love to have eather motor in a street car. Torque is where it's at on the street.

Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:51 am

turbodon1776 wrote: this is true but i often find myself wandering...
would it be better to have high torque low HP
or ok torque and high HP?

Or,

"WHAT DID HIS CUSTOMER WANT???"

Seriously. Based on the HP and torque, I'd guess little to nothing has been done to the heads. For the budget-minded customer, you can drop $600 in labor to port the heads and manifolds for the same HP output and not as much torque, or you can buy a turbo and get the results posted above. Both combos were still building HP at 5000 rpm...could either combo break 200 HP by 6K? Maybe. But in the end, what is the customer after? What did the customer pay for? Not every customer wants to drive around with 250-300 HP, or wants to pay for that much power.

hotrodvw wrote: Why am I less than impressed?? :roll:

The reality is ALL OF YOU SUCK. NONE OF YOU BELLYACHERS HAVE BROUGHT JACK-SH!T TO THE TABLE.

NO INNOVATION, NO OUT-OF-THE BOX THINKING, NOTHING NEW. YOU GUYS RECYCLE THE SAME OLD TIRED DESIGNS AND COMBINATIONS AS IF THERE IS NOTHING ELSE OUT THERE.

Figure it out. Your sh!t stinks. All of you. :roll: So, before you criticize or belittle what another builder is doing (especially at the customer's behest), at least have SOMETHING UNIQUE to back yourself up, not simply your ability to replicate the 'flavor of the decade' combination.

Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:39 am

turbodon1776 wrote: this is true but i often find myself wandering...
would it be better to have high torque low HP
or ok torque and high HP?

Like Jason, I agree it's all in what the customer wants... Don't get me wrong, it's real nice to be able to say "I have XXX HP", but that's not always what it's all about. Street engines are much different than all out HP engines... so in that sense, I'd take the higher torque and less HP everytime... higher HP and "ok" torque would be my want for the streetcar that may see track time for fun... I've spent many years running around with high strung screamers(married one! :oops: ) on the street, but these days I prefer a very mild engine with turbo... somewhat that "best of both worlds" scenario... My opinion, of course...

Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:47 am

Its not like he is boosting them to death either, 6-7 psi on the big one? Thats not too bad. These are probably motors that would run all day long make good power when you need it, and be nice drivers when you don't.

Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:51 am

The max HP numbers are OK, but all that low end TQ rocks.
Torque is king on the street. I bet either of these would be a blast stoplight-to-stoplight. And 170+ HP is plenty enough to run hard and fast on the track.

Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:08 am

Holy crap.....

My post was purely because I'm used to seeing the hp #'s up closer to the torque #. I realize that torque is what gets it done. The numbers just seem really off to me for what it is. Say what you want stripped.... your true colors are being presented. We all suck? Wow.... Sure, the customer may want a certain thing, whatever. Talk about blowing things out of proportion.