[Shotimes] HP & Torque Figures for 3.0 + 3.2

Mon, 22 May 2006 15:14:25 -0500

I tried advancing the stock cams on the dyno, and lost torque everywhere.  
Factory "0" made the most torque, and had the best curve.  Retarding -6 
degrees was the best "open track" setting shifting the curve up a bit, with a 7 
whp gain ~6200 rpm.

I'd have to dig up my charts, but my 3.0L cam'd 3.2L made ~ 200 ft/lbs of 
torque at like 1800 rpm, ie real low.  There's a peak (~215 ft/lbs) at 2.9k and 
again at 4.8k but basically below 2k, it was making more torque than most 
3.0L's do peak.  It's a 7% increase in dispalacement, but the 3.2L cams are a 
7% decrease in lift (and retarted 2 degrees) so real world with a few breathing 
mods, the extra .2L really helps a bunch.  The part throttle work around town 
at low revs is nice.

> From: "Leigh Smith" <leighsm@comcast.net>
> Date: 2006/05/22 Mon PM 02:55:04 CDT
> To: "Peter Maggiacomo" <gtsrider@yahoo.com>, 
>         "SHOTIMES"
>   <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> Subject: Re: [Shotimes] HP & Torque Figures for 3.0 + 3.2
> 
> Pete;
> I've always thought that, and I've been driving SHO's for 10 years.
> At half throttle I get stomped by Escorts for Pete's sake!
> But then the same is true of my gennie 1970 Z28. That LT-1 motor shares 
many
> of the same reavability features as our SHO motor, but with double the
> cubes, and likewise has an even higher 4800 rpm torque peak. Even though 
it
> is 350 cu. in., and 425 HP, and 390 lbs of torque, it is very weak off the
> line at half throttle, because it is so far below the torque peak, and for
> so long. A "truck" 350 makes almost the same torque peak, but at maybe 
half
> the rpm, and seems like a rocket in comparison, at least til the Z28 cam
> kicks in at 3500 rpm. Sound familiar? Lower the torque peak, and you'll be
> happier on the street, but it won't rev quite as well. I played around with
> advancing / retarding the cam and varying the lash, and gained a half-sec 
to
> 60. You could go to a 3.2, use the 3.0 cams, and then advance them to 
lower
> the torque peak. Bet you'd have 30 ft lbs more at 2500 than you have now!
> And peak power should be about the same or more.
> Lee
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Peter Maggiacomo" <gtsrider@yahoo.com>
> To: <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 2:16 PM
> Subject: [Shotimes] HP & Torque Figures for 3.0 + 3.2
> 
> 
> > Does anyone have the factory Hp & Torque figures for
> > the 3.0 and the 3.2. It would help me decide if the
> > swap is worth the effort. It's actually the torque I'm
> > looking for from the 3.2. In Florida I drive with the
> > AC on 365 days a year. IMO... the 3.0 is a dog with
> > the AC on, off the line. Any thoughts?
> > Pete
> > Tampa, Fl.
> > All Stock 95 MTX 93,000 original miles
> > _______________________________________________
> > Shotimes mailing list
> > Shotimes@autox.team.net
> > http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes