11 second SHO.

[somedude_001]

we drove it to 199K and after 1 autoX it sounded like hammers were trying to escape the engine block, then when my brother would hop in and run it after me (we would codrive it back to back when my car was broke). the rod bearings were shot I don't know how we didn't spin them but he sold the car for 200 bucks and it was parted out ultamately.

it ran a 14.4 @99mph with this setup. it was gutted

 

[Axianator]

Is that data posted somewhere? I'd like to check it out, especially if it has data on flow vs. PW, like I did here:

http://www.shonutperformance.com/inj.pdf

The aforementioned factory injector flow data was originally posted by John Hrinsin on the SHOtimes mailing list. Eventually, Ian Fisher ported the information to the forum himself in response to the following thread:

http://www.shoforum.com/showthread.php?p=527293

Here's the factory injector data gathered by Hrinsin:

The stock MTX injectors (23.7 lbs/hr @ 2.7 BAR or 39.2 PSI) can safely (85% duty cycle) support about 270cHP or about 225 wHP. The ATX injectors (24.3 lbs/hr @2.7 BAR or 39.2 PSI) flow about 2.5% more fuel than the MTX units, so they are worth maybe another 5-8 cHP. If you push a set of ATX injectors a bit to 90% duty cycle, they can flow enough fuel to support 290cHP or about 240 wHP.

If you boost the fuel pressure with one of Josh's adjustable FPR kits from the stock 39 PSI to say 45 PSI, you can also boost the flow rate of the injectors by about 7.5%. Not sure how the TwEECer software can command the WOT fuel curve to keep the adaptive learn from causing the interpolated WOT valves from becoming too lean. Sounds like a Josh question there.

don't get the impression that a lot of time was invested in tuning this engine from the factory. becasue it wasn't. the factory tune is a hack.

Excusing their inherently conservative nature, I personally feel that the factory V6 ATX SHO calibrations are among the best programmed calibrations I've seen. If nothing else, they are certainly the best programmed calibrations out of all the existing V6 SHO calibrations. On the other hand, I will readily agree that it is difficult to classify the MTX SHO calibrations as little more than a "hack" in many areas.

if your car is stock (includes exhaust and intake mods not cams or boost or LPM) go out disconnect both o2 sensors AND your maf and rip down the street your car will be faster than stock. this is my brothers secrete to his "supder beater project". a couple years ago. With no exhaust after the Y-pipe and gutted cats (stock crappy y-pipe) a short ram intake basicly consisting of 6" of rubber with a massive cummins truck K&N filter it dynoed at 201hp and 199 tq. no O2's no maf. the iat sensor was connected but seemed to make no difference. with 189K on a beat to crap engine with rod knock.

Your results reinforce the expected outcome of the factory failure mode programmimg, which was programmed to err on the rich side whenever a failure mode state has been tripped for the MAF, HEGO sensors, or other engine control component. Combined with the altered load readings that stemmed from your disconnected MAF sensor and the effect it had on your commanded spark advance, this richer AFR could easily explain the increase in power over the factory program that you measured on the dyno.

 

[SHO NUT]

The aforementioned factory injector flow data was originally posted by John Hrinsin on the SHOtimes mailing list. Eventually, Ian Fisher ported the information to the forum himself in response to the following thread:

http://www.shoforum.com/showthread.php?p=527293

Here's the factory injector data gathered by Hrinsin:

Originally Posted by ManySHOs
From a private email exchange on the same topic with John Hrinsin (I'm not posting classified info so I hope he doesn't mind ) :

"The stock MTX injectors (23.7 lbs/hr @ 2.7 BAR or 39.2 PSI) can safely (85%
duty cycle) support about 270cHP or about 225 wHP. The ATX injectors (24.3
lbs/hr @2.7 BAR or 39.2 PSI) flow about 2.5% more fuel than the MTX units,
so they are worth maybe another 5-8 cHP. If you push a set of ATX injectors
a bit to 90% duty cycle, they can flow enough fuel to support 290cHP or
about 240 wHP."...

This looks like (to me) that in this case, Hrinsin is simply quoting the book numbers for the flow rate of the SHO injectors. He did some flow testing at one point in time, like I did, but I don't know if he ever actually tested the stock SHO units.

 

[SHO NUT]

don't get the impression that a lot of time was invested in tuning this engine from the factory. becasue it wasn't. the factory tune is a hack.

if your car is stock (includes exhaust and intake mods not cams or boost or LPM) go out disconnect both o2 sensors AND your maf and rip down the street your car will be faster than stock. this is my brothers secrete to his "supder beater project". a couple years ago. With no exhaust after the Y-pipe and gutted cats (stock crappy y-pipe) a short ram intake basicly consisting of 6" of rubber with a massive cummins truck K&N filter it dynoed at 201hp and 199 tq. no O2's no maf. the iat sensor was connected but seemed to make no difference. with 189K on a beat to crap engine with rod knock.

A car with a bad MAF will run better with the MAF disconnected - this is a quick and dirty way to see if your MAF is bad - disconnect, and if the car runs better, the MAF is bad (common).

The O2's are ignored at WOT, so that doesn't make much of a difference at WOT, assuming a freshly reset EEC.

Now if the stock MAF is a restriction (and it is), and if you've removed it and other restrictive items like exhaust, then if the limp-home fueling/spark is close enough, (and it probably is) you will make more power that way due to increased air flow with more fuel to go with it (stock, rich limp-home programing), but you can acheive the same results (and probably better) with a proper MAF, exhaust and tune, and STILL have closed loop operation for optimum fuel economy.

 

[somedude_001]

Excusing their inherently conservative nature, I personally feel that the factory V6 ATX SHO calibrations are among the best programmed calibrations I've seen. If nothing else, they are certainly the best programmed calibrations out of all the existing V6 SHO calibrations. On the other hand, I will readily agree that it is difficult to classify the MTX SHO calibrations as little more than a "hack" in many areas.

I was refering to "super beater" 89 SHO so far I have done many stupid things to my ATX and my engine is still alive and kicking so I don't dare diss its programing... well except for the ****** that programed the transmission to destroy itself on every taurus ever made.

Now if the stock MAF is a restriction (and it is), and if you've removed it and other restrictive items like exhaust, then if the limp-home fueling/spark is close enough, (and it probably is) you will make more power that way due to increased air flow with more fuel to go with it (stock, rich limp-home programing), but you can acheive the same results (and probably better) with a proper MAF, exhaust and tune, and STILL have closed loop operation for optimum fuel economy.

he had open y-pipe and open intake. it worked well for what we used the car for. it had a very strong top end and got over 30mpg on the highway but you would want to punch yourself in the face after driving it for any length of time because of the noise.

 

[SHO NUT]

you would want to punch yourself in the face after driving it for any length of time because of the noise.

I resemble that remark when I'm running my 6" long catback

http://www.shonutperformance.com/SHO_NUT_12_second_run.mpg

 

[scrabblegod]

Any guesses on the times a stock 3.0 (except headers and free flowing intake and only running an alternator.. no ps or ac) will run in a RWD chassis at 1800lbs on the starting line.

Gene

 

[somedude_001]

high 12's

but good luck getting that weight becuase this engine is just under 600lbs fully loaded.

and lol at SHO nut. it sounds good outside of the car... no i lie it sounds good everywhere but it is just stupid loud.

 

[Toolman]

Hmm, have you ever put one on a scale? 600 seems waaay heavy.

 

[SHOMurph]

Hmm, have you ever put one on a scale? 600 seems waaay heavy.

thats because it has those heavy turbew pipes on it!

 

[Toolman]

All my piping/turbo/IC weigh less than just the Vortech head unit!

 

[scrabblegod]

high 12's

but good luck getting that weight becuase this engine is just under 600lbs fully loaded.

.

With the car I am building, I am currently on track to come in at 1500lbs, but I am allowing 100 extra to cover things such as oil, water, fuel, small things I may have over looked, etc...............

I am hoping for better times than that, as my Fiero at 3000lbs on the line and 205rwhp has done a best of 13.89
If not, once it is complete and has the bugs worked out, I have a couple superchargers and turbochargers laying around.

Gene

 

[SHO NUT]

Just watched the 3.0 SHO motored steamliner run a 250 mph pass with a two way record at 244.416 mph. The modified roadster with a 3.0 sho motor on gas set a two way record at 163.568 mph with a run at 170 mph

This just came across my inbox - we have our parts on a couple of SHO-powered streamliners:

From: TERRANCE L LUCAS

Subject: Tracer Racing Modesto Cal Terry Lucas

Hey
We are back from Bonneville Salt Flats and we brought 3 records home and 2 200 MPH Club hats. Tim Billington went 244 mph on a 223 record for fuel category (though he only ran gasoline ) and his exit speed was 250.619 mph at the 5 mile trap. Give him a red cap! I was the test pilot for this thing and I will admit to a certain amout of shyness (chicken). My record that we set is 233 mph on a 221 record with an exit of 238 for the first run for the new configuration of the car. Give him a red hat!!! This is a 180 cubic inch V-6 ford taurus SHO engine on a single carb on gas.
Our third record was Tim in the roadster at 165 mph with a fouled #5 spark plug. We have a tune issue to be continued.
On another note Don Monaco set a modified roadster record at 172 mph GOOD JOB
That is with the fabulous flathead ford designed and built by Joe Cardoso and Terry Lucas class XF BGMR
We had our problems but we got what we aimed at.

Terry and all of our friends
Thanks
<end>

Here is a pic of his car:
http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/PMX0106Speed002_large.jpg

Here is a writeup claiming 500 HP.
http://popularmechanics.smartmoney.com/automotive/motorsports/2169297.html?page=4

Chuck, of course, has passed away (search Tracer Racing Chuck Billington ), but his team continues with the car in his honour.

 

[92sho16]

Here is a writeup claiming 500 HP.
http://popularmechanics.smartmoney.com/automotive/motorsports/2169297.html?page=4

Chuck, of course, has passed away (search Tracer Racing Chuck Billington ), but his team continues with the car in his honour.

I just read a little bit on the engine and it doesn't say much but the bore and stroke and its right at 3 liters so how is the engine generated that much power?

 

[SHOMurph]

I just read a little bit on the engine and it doesn't say much but the bore and stroke and its right at 3 liters so how is the engine generated that much power?

I'm a guessing raised compression, reworked heads and some super duper gas.

 

[SHO NUT]

I'm a guessing raised compression, reworked heads and some super duper gas.

... and (obviously) a custom intake to go with the carb, which has an air scoop, so there's some intake pressurization at speed ... and did you read the part about a 10,000 RPM redline? If you can keep the torque constant (quite tough ...), HP increases ~1:1 with RPM. IOW, double the RPM, and with the same torque, you can double the HP.

That's why TQ is such an important number, it tells you how much power you get per cycle. Double the number of cycles, each with the same TQ, and you get double the amount of power.

http://www.shotimes.com/php-bin/mod...le=article&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0&sid=21

Using 10,000 RPM and 500 HP, he needs to make 263 ft.lb. at 10,000 RPM. That's a lofty goal, of course, for a 3.0L (remember the ram air pressurization though ...) ... and assuming a flat torque curve (obviously not the case), here's his dyno curve ..

RPM HP TQ
1,000 50 263
2,000 100 263
3,000 150 263
4,000 200 263
5,000 250 263
6,000 300 263
7,000 350 263
8,000 400 263
9,000 450 263
10,000 500 263

FWIW, the 2003 SHO Shop catalog shows a Stage IV 3.0L at 216 WTQ @ ~6,000 PRM. 216 / 0.82 = 263 FWTQ which is the chart above.... So if that torque could be maintained to 10,000 RPM (did I say ram-air pressurization and custom manifold?), then you have your 500 HP number.

This just goes to show what a meaningless number HP is ... TQ is where it's at, and what you can feel.

 

[SHO NUT]

FWIW, the 2003 SHO Shop catalog shows a Stage IV 3.0L at 216 WTQ @ ~6,000 PRM. 216 / 0.82 = 263 FWTQ which is the chart above.... So if that torque could be maintained to 10,000 RPM (did I say ram-air pressurization and custom manifold?), then you have your 500 HP number.

This just goes to show what a meaningless number HP is ... TQ is where it's at, and what you can feel.

BTW, a few people have privately called BS on the 248 WTQ figure from the Stage V 3.2L 297 WHP chart, saying that it's impossible to get 248 WTQ from a N/A 3.2L, which works out to ~300 ft.lb. at the crank. I tend to agree here. As the salt flats motors show, it's possible to get mega HP by spinning the motor with an intake that can move the air, but the TQ never gets any better without increasing displacement or a power adder.

Now .. Stage III 3.6L 268 WHP / 251 WTQ ... that's more believable in terms of a similar WTQ figure. So maybe a Stage V 3.2L is bored and stroked, and then the numbers make sense to get 297 WHP / 248 WTQ

 

[HotRodKid]

ram air on a top fuel dragster = something like 1psi at 200mph , which IIRC is something like an 8% increase in air density

edit: and 350mph + ram air = 15% increase ... just wish i could find the artical i was reading when my friends tried to tell me that ram air doesnt count as forced induction because theres no pressure developed

 

[SHOMurph]

I'd love to talk to the guy that built the motor...

especially to see what they did to the heads. I think thats the big part of that puppy keeping its torque at 10k.

Also it would great if someone someday had the coin to put a 3L on a engine dyno and run it up to 10k to see what the stock numbers would read.

I know on my dynos my numbers keep going up until I shut it down at 7k.

I've always wondered how far these motors could take it and what rpm/numbers would be.

 

[egroce11]

I'd love to talk to the guy that built the motor...

especially to see what they did to the heads. I think thats the big part of that puppy keeping its torque at 10k.

Also it would great if someone someday had the coin to put a 3L on a engine dyno and run it up to 10k to see what the stock numbers would read.

I know on my dynos my numbers keep going up until I shut it down at 7k.

I've always wondered how far these motors could take it and what rpm/numbers would be.

I've spent some time on the track with tracer and the builders of their motors, the heads have over 40 straight hrs of work on them, custum ground cams forged crank and pistons and they feel the these motors have never seen the real power that they are capable of.

Ernie