After only 7 pulls on the dyno breaking in one of our motors, the EVO III 16G even surprised us... After numerous 380-390 WHP pulls, it finally went over 400 WHP!

Dyno link

This run never went above 22 PSI, and obviously on race gas...

More Q's... feel free to ask!

MGH

What kind of mods were on the engine?

Yes a Complete Mod list of the car would be nice.

yea when you say "breaking in one of our motors" that could be a highly modded 2.3L 4G63 or a 4G64 be more specific

I guessing by the look of the dyno graph the engine isn't to upgraded to much becuase it doesn't reach full boost till around 3500 - 4000 rpm, which i thought evo3 turbos would spool by 3000rpm on an upgraded motor. But maybe the the power is that high because they are using race gas with a lot of boost?

how many lbs/min was it flowing?

DSMSpyder99 said:

yea when you say "breaking in one of our motors" that could be a highly modded 2.3L 4G63 or a 4G64 be more specific

Click to expand...

Doesn't really matter. When you're talking about the maximum power a turbo can make, it's not going to change much on a bigger motor.

Can we see an AFR curve from the dyno pull, or at least an approximation of the AFR at the power peak?

What engine management was this done with? What was the peak timing advance?

Cams, intake manifold, exhaust manifold?

I think that's all I care about.

Good job guys.

very, very nice, but i would also like to see a mod list

I know exactly what it has but I'm not sure if they want me to tell .

kpt4321 said:

Can we see an AFR curve from the dyno pull, or at least an approximation of the AFR at the power peak?

What engine management was this done with? What was the peak timing advance?

Cams, intake manifold, exhaust manifold?

I think that's all I care about.

Good job guys.

Click to expand...

Send me a private email and I can send you AF graph...... [email protected]

I will be listing mods in the next post...

MGH

SBR Stage II 2.3L stroker (7.5:1 compression, .020" overbore)
SBR Stage VI head, O ring with Topline HG
Comp 101200 camshafts
SBR cast manifold
SBR EVO III 16g, internal gate
HKS VPC
APEXI SAFC I
FIC 650's
SBR fuel system (like we sell on the website, with Aeromotive FPR)

Stock 1990 ECU
Stock intake manifold
Stock cam gears

Tuning, Tuning, Tuning......

Intake manifold testing to come.....

MGH

question,

1. why such of slow spool? 400rpm slow than mine on the dyno. Mine was dynoed in 3rd gear, yours looks like 4th gear pull. I got Crower stage I (264) on 2G piston 6 bolt

Nice # I must say.

Awesome job SBR!

Why such low compression?

A higher compression motor (regardless of displacement) would probably be capable of even more power on that turbo. Awesome!

yo2001 said:

question,

1. why such of slow spool? 400rpm slow than mine on the dyno. Mine was dynoed in 3rd gear, yours looks like 4th gear pull. I got Crower stage I (264) on 2G piston 6 bolt

Nice # I must say.

Click to expand...

Most likely because of starting the run at 3k and only doing a 8 sec sweep... When we do a longer sweep the #'s will stay the same but it "loads" the engine differently... but to keep the same graph, we choose to keep the sweep short and start at 3k.

If we would have started the pull at 2k you would notice a difference in the torque curve...

Thanks guys for the great Q's here and in my inbox

MGH

kpt4321 said:

Why such low compression?

A higher compression motor (regardless of displacement) would probably be capable of even more power on that turbo. Awesome!

Click to expand...

I agree, however like I said we are "breaking in" the motor... The turbo that will be on this motor shortly I feel will do much better at this compression level since we plan on running 35-40 PSI and keep it on 114 octane.

However we will have this car out to the local track soon and see what it can do in a 2500 pound AWD car..... Any one betting on an ET? And no, I am not driving so do not say 12.0X... assume a good driver

This motor is our prototype for our future chasis car in case you were wondering!

MGH

You guys are awesome I just got one of those bad boys from you fully ported and 34mm flapper. Awesome awesome street turbo. Im actually coming up their either today or tomorrow for a dnp manifold. Craggar's been really helpful Gotta retune it and get my center diff fixed then ill be going to the dyno for some numbers. Hopefully i can make it to the track in time. Ill be sure to post the numbers when im done. Nice going with evo3 turbo. Props to SBR

all these posts are making me want the 2.3l and sbr evo3 even more!!, I am planing on autocrossing and wheel to wheeling a 2.3l with an evo3. I am planing on running 264s for better torque and response, but with a littl higher compression I think I could get a ton of torque out of the evo. One question with a 2.3l stroker, 264 cams would clipping the wheel be worth it? My big 16g now reaches full spool at about 3k(15psi) so Im figuring with a stroker and cams Ill be able to spool a little quicker then with the 2.0l and stock cams. Just wondering...by the way great numbers
Andrew

Slowboy said:

I agree, however like I said we are "breaking in" the motor... The turbo that will be on this motor shortly I feel will do much better at this compression level since we plan on running 35-40 PSI and keep it on 114 octane.

Click to expand...

If you're running on race gas all the time, that's an even better reason to run higher compression! A bump from 7.5:1 up into the mid to high 8's will probably gain you 5% more thermal efficiency in the engine.

However, it's your car.

However we will have this car out to the local track soon and see what it can do in a 2500 pound AWD car..... Any one betting on an ET? And no, I am not driving so do not say 12.0X... assume a good driver

Click to expand...

2500 pounds, 400 whp? You could see close to 130 mph if that is the race weight.

This motor is our prototype for our future chasis car in case you were wondering!

Click to expand...

It's going in the RWD, or another project?

kpt4321 said:

If you're running on race gas all the time, that's an even better reason to run higher compression! A bump from 7.5:1 up into the mid to high 8's will probably gain you 5% more thermal efficiency in the engine.

However, it's your car.



2500 pounds, 400 whp? You could see close to 130 mph if that is the race weight.



It's going in the RWD, or another project?

Click to expand...

I will sacrifice 5% for ease of use and tuning ability However, I know where you are coming from and agree with you.

I was hoping for 123-125 MPH... we will see... Yes that will be race weight.

This motor will be in the RWD chassis car within 6-8 weeks with a slightly different turbo, and better engine management

MGH

see i told you it was a modded 4G63 long block but either way those are very impressive nuimbers

Slowboy said:

I agree, however like I said we are "breaking in" the motor... The turbo that will be on this motor shortly I feel will do much better at this compression level since we plan on running 35-40 PSI and keep it on 114 octane.

However we will have this car out to the local track soon and see what it can do in a 2500 pound AWD car..... Any one betting on an ET? And no, I am not driving so do not say 12.0X... assume a good driver

This motor is our prototype for our future chasis car in case you were wondering!

MGH

Click to expand...

hmm. 2500lbs, 400whp and you only want 12.0x id say mid 11's to low 11's shouldnt be too much to as for. If this was a awd car? Mind tell us what the afr was? and timing advance? Im kinda curious.

DSMSpyder99 said:

see i told you it was a modded 4G63 long block but either way those are very impressive nuimbers

Click to expand...

I said it before, and I will say it again. The fact that it is 2.3 liters is totally irrelevant. It takes the same airflow to make 400 whp on a 1 liter engine, as it takes on a 2 liter engine and a 4 liter engine.

This simply proves that the EvoIII is capable of 400 whp, it doesn't have anything to do with the engine. It might take a little more boost on a 2.0 liter, but that doesn't matter.

Slowboy said:

Most likely because of starting the run at 3k and only doing a 8 sec sweep... When we do a longer sweep the #'s will stay the same but it "loads" the engine differently... but to keep the same graph, we choose to keep the sweep short and start at 3k.

If we would have started the pull at 2k you would notice a difference in the torque curve...

Thanks guys for the great Q's here and in my inbox

MGH

Click to expand...

I went from 3Krpm for 9 sec sweep.