-
Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software hereThank you for being a part of our community!
My performance goals and various questions associated therein
- Thread starter Smorgesborg
- Start date
Smorgesborg
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Location
- Eastern MA
Yes.
If you're keeping that and think you really want a .68:1 5th gear, you want to use a T cam and 530 head. Maybe a mildly ported, 530 and an A or V cam and thinner headgasket with a mild shave at the most. That really is "pulling like a diesel".
Last edited:
spock345
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2016
- Location
- Livermore, CA
My car is 3.73 as it used to be an automatic. I was able to drive a manual with the 3.31 once. The 3.73 is definitely an improvement if you like spirited driving. It will tach slightly higher on the highway (about 3k at 70-75mph) and first gear is a stump puller with the M47 but it hasn't effected my gas mileage much and will still pull while staying in fifth (I am running an A cam advanced 2 degrees). It may work nicely with a 0.68 fifth. 3.31 and 0.68 fifth gear sounds like it would kneecap whatever bottom end you have. First gear on a T5 (3.35?) should be more usable than my M47 (4.01-ish).
Think about what your final drive ratio will be with different rear gearings and your fifth gear. I would aim for something a bit more aggressive than the stock M47/3.31 setup. You can get 3.73 gears out of 240 turbos and automatic cars, 4.10 out of some 940s.
Smorgesborg
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Location
- Eastern MA
If you're keeping that and think you really want a .68:1 5th gear, you want to use a T cam and 530 head. Maybe a mildly ported, 530 and an A or V cam and thinner headgasket with a mild shave at the most. That really is "pulling like a diesel".
So in summary, my initial build (minus exhaust, plush thinner headgasket) is ideal for my intended purpose. Funny how that comes around
Smorgesborg
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Location
- Eastern MA
The Volvol, as it is, is actually really good for spirited driving. As I said, the engine's in *really* good condition and has no issues with the transmission. It's an old car that feels genuinely happy to drive.
I see you already have it in the car. If you're happy with its current ability to cruise, then you'll be fine with everything discussed as long as you increase the compression to match the cam you're running and get reasonable tuning(fuel and ignition). It will feel like a dog down there because there's so much more power at higher rpm, but it won't lose any power/torque compared to the stock setup with the M cam except maybe under 1500-2000rpm depending on cam choice.
Ps. If you have a 2.95:1 first gear, you can get a "Sebring" 5th which puts 5th at .80:1 instead, closer matching the M46/7's ratios. With the 3.31:1 rear end, that's what I would do. Also, it's very lame to have a 3.31:1 rear end and having NA performance. Your car will be faster than it currently is with this work done, but if you want to be able to accelerate quickly, you want to be in the powerband...
Ps. If you have a 2.95:1 first gear, you can get a "Sebring" 5th which puts 5th at .80:1 instead, closer matching the M46/7's ratios. With the 3.31:1 rear end, that's what I would do. Also, it's very lame to have a 3.31:1 rear end and having NA performance. Your car will be faster than it currently is with this work done, but if you want to be able to accelerate quickly, you want to be in the powerband...
Yes, but you have to get rid of your goal of 160hp and go back to 140-145hp.So in summary, my initial build (minus exhaust, plush thinner headgasket) is ideal for my intended purpose. Funny how that comes around
Smorgesborg
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Location
- Eastern MA
I have the World Class T5, with a 3.35 1st, 1.99 2nd, 1.33 3rd, 1:1 4th, and 0.68 5th. Before installing it, I checked the ratios by putting it in gear and counting in
ut.Aw, I was hoping for at least 150hp.
The power band as it is, is actually pretty good. First gear goes to 45mph, putting me at 4500rpm in second. Second takes me to 70, leaving me at 4000rpm in third, which takes me to 105.
Last edited:
Ok, with that gearset the Sebring 5th turns into a .92 ratio, and you don't want that. Well, it'd be ok with a 3.31 rear, but it definitely wasn't with our 4.56 in the General Leif running 22" tires...
If you're ok with that super tall gearing and don't mind that the car will never be quick, that's fine. If you want the car to be quicker, you need a 3.73 in there, minimum. Even with a 3.73, the .68 5th is quite tall and I wouldn't complain about it.
If you're ok with that super tall gearing and don't mind that the car will never be quick, that's fine. If you want the car to be quicker, you need a 3.73 in there, minimum. Even with a 3.73, the .68 5th is quite tall and I wouldn't complain about it.
I have the World Class T5, with a 3.35 1st, 1.99 2nd, 1.33 3rd, 1:1 4th, and 0.68 5th. Before installing it, I checked the ratios by putting it in gear and counting in
Aw, I was hoping for at least 150hp.
The power band as it is, is actually pretty good. First gear goes to 45mph, putting me at 4500rpm in second. Second takes me to 70, leaving me at 4000rpm in third, which takes me to 105.
Those t5 ratios go really well with a 3.73 rear end, or a 3.54 rear gear if you freeway cruise on flat land.
3.31 and a t5 is basically useless unless you have a v8.
Here's a dyno graph of four different cars and levels of modification for reference. All on different dynos, but all the same correction factor and manual transmissions.
Green line is a stock 1983 LH2.1(?) B23F that may or may not have a modified intake/airbox with a B cam. No tuning or engine work aside from twisting the distributor, so this is closest to your setup aside from the fact that it has a B cam and you have an M currently. Lots of torque from low rpm, I'm sorry it doesn't start the pull lower than it does.
Orange line is a near stock LH2.4 B230F with an A cam that has .040" shaved off the 530 head with a .030" headgasket and very minor bowl work. Some sort of larger exhaust starting at the factory downpipe. I have a almost directly comparable D cam plot for that day if wanting a comparison between the two.
Blue line is my NLMGG LH2.4 B230F with an H cam, .040" shaved off a 530 head, a .040" headgasket, mild(unfinished) port work with 46/38mm valves, a 4-2-1 header with 44.5mm(1.75") primaries and secondaries, and some LH tuning, full 2.5" exhaust including cat, and opened up factory airbox.
Red line is the General Leif last year with LH2.4, B230F with .030" overbore, ENEM K13 camshaft, .123" off a STOCK PORT 405 head with the chambers grooved, opened up and valves unshrouded enough that the chamber volumes were around 44-45cc(similar to a 530 with .080-.100" off, I think?), FACTORY exhaust manifold going into 44.5mm secondary pipes with a full 2.5" exhaust and a B21F k-jet intake manifold with an adapter elbow going to a 960/850 throttle body.
**I also have a K cam plot for .100" off the head and LH tuning with some other tweaks including a 38mm exhaust valve, but still using a stock intake/exhaust manifold and the numbers are better than my H cam run below which had a more aggressive build.
Green line is a stock 1983 LH2.1(?) B23F that may or may not have a modified intake/airbox with a B cam. No tuning or engine work aside from twisting the distributor, so this is closest to your setup aside from the fact that it has a B cam and you have an M currently. Lots of torque from low rpm, I'm sorry it doesn't start the pull lower than it does.
Orange line is a near stock LH2.4 B230F with an A cam that has .040" shaved off the 530 head with a .030" headgasket and very minor bowl work. Some sort of larger exhaust starting at the factory downpipe. I have a almost directly comparable D cam plot for that day if wanting a comparison between the two.
Blue line is my NLMGG LH2.4 B230F with an H cam, .040" shaved off a 530 head, a .040" headgasket, mild(unfinished) port work with 46/38mm valves, a 4-2-1 header with 44.5mm(1.75") primaries and secondaries, and some LH tuning, full 2.5" exhaust including cat, and opened up factory airbox.
Red line is the General Leif last year with LH2.4, B230F with .030" overbore, ENEM K13 camshaft, .123" off a STOCK PORT 405 head with the chambers grooved, opened up and valves unshrouded enough that the chamber volumes were around 44-45cc(similar to a 530 with .080-.100" off, I think?), FACTORY exhaust manifold going into 44.5mm secondary pipes with a full 2.5" exhaust and a B21F k-jet intake manifold with an adapter elbow going to a 960/850 throttle body.
**I also have a K cam plot for .100" off the head and LH tuning with some other tweaks including a 38mm exhaust valve, but still using a stock intake/exhaust manifold and the numbers are better than my H cam run below which had a more aggressive build.
Attachments
Last edited:
And there's some crap about grooving your head in here if you really want to read into it. http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=57077&page=31
Kestrel
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2010
- Location
- Albuquerque, NM
All of this is so much harder than slapping on a 13c with factory parts... 
Smorgesborg
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Location
- Eastern MA
Small update:
Just to make sure I wasn't crazy, I decided to go on another top speed run in my Volvol. I was able to do 105mph, in fourth gear, up a slight hill. Unfortunately, traffic isn't completely clear so it's hard to get a full picture of how performant the Volvol is. Attached is a pic of the body and the engine bay.
When I decide to go for full performance, I want to go fast, but most of the time I just want to cruise for economy. I have big aspirations for the future.
I'm aware that is a late model power steering pump, I had it put in when I swapped out the rack from the 93 car. The old rack was leaky, as was the old reservoir.
Also, during the run, it occurred to me that it was funny how when I first began planning this build like 2 years ago, I bought a T cam with the intention of installing it, and that was your first recommendation once you found out about my gearing.
My reasoning for going with the T5 in the first place, wasn't because of the power it can handle but because it gives me a dedicated fifth gear (overdrive was/is not working, even after replacing the overdrive solenoid with a new old stock), and a taller gear for economical long distance cruising. Swapping out the 3.31 for a 3.54 might work, but aren't those a bit rare? Something else I'd like to do is put an AC compressor electric clutch on the power steering pulley, for better power output. How feasible would that be? Would the 3.54 gear expand my options for power?
Edit: Reading your Groove experiments now. Improvements below 2000rpm and increased detonation resistance? Even if it doesn't increase efficiency, the improved running in the low end is what will really help with the grooves (for obvious reasons). Def gonna do it on my head.
Just to make sure I wasn't crazy, I decided to go on another top speed run in my Volvol. I was able to do 105mph, in fourth gear, up a slight hill. Unfortunately, traffic isn't completely clear so it's hard to get a full picture of how performant the Volvol is. Attached is a pic of the body and the engine bay.
When I decide to go for full performance, I want to go fast, but most of the time I just want to cruise for economy. I have big aspirations for the future.
I'm aware that is a late model power steering pump, I had it put in when I swapped out the rack from the 93 car. The old rack was leaky, as was the old reservoir.
Also, during the run, it occurred to me that it was funny how when I first began planning this build like 2 years ago, I bought a T cam with the intention of installing it, and that was your first recommendation once you found out about my gearing.
My reasoning for going with the T5 in the first place, wasn't because of the power it can handle but because it gives me a dedicated fifth gear (overdrive was/is not working, even after replacing the overdrive solenoid with a new old stock), and a taller gear for economical long distance cruising. Swapping out the 3.31 for a 3.54 might work, but aren't those a bit rare? Something else I'd like to do is put an AC compressor electric clutch on the power steering pulley, for better power output. How feasible would that be? Would the 3.54 gear expand my options for power?
Edit: Reading your Groove experiments now. Improvements below 2000rpm and increased detonation resistance? Even if it doesn't increase efficiency, the improved running in the low end is what will really help with the grooves (for obvious reasons). Def gonna do it on my head.
Last edited:
3.54 gears are more rare, yes. They will give you a little increase in acceleration if you can find them, but with the .68 5th I would do a 3.73 rear. It's still taller gearing than the stock overdrive/5th gear with a 3.31 which is plenty tall. I've been using an M47 for the past 11+ years with a 3.73, and yes, I'd prefer a taller 5th but it's nice to be able to accelerate nicely without dropping a gear. Ideally it'd be a 6 speed. Hah.
http://www.grimmjeeper.com/gears.html
http://www.grimmjeeper.com/gears.html
Those are the SUPPOSED benefits. I didn't notice much difference with the basically stock -.033" 530 head with a .036" headgasket and H cam on my car when compared to the exact same thing without grooves. Maybe a slight benefit in detonation resistance, but the stock ignition timing was already too much for where I was having an issue(around 2000rpm). Idle performance did not really improve much, if at all. Changing the valve clearances looser made the same difference...
spock345
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2016
- Location
- Livermore, CA
It would probably be good to stick this graph in the new sticky NA performance thread. Do you know of anyone with dyno results for a stock car as a control? I fully intend on getting mine on a dyno once I am done with my cylinder head and it is safe to venture out to such a thing. Maybe I should slap the M cam and stock ignition chip back in for a run as a baseline. It is probably something around 85-90 wheel HP.
Smorgesborg
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Location
- Eastern MA
Besides having a GenIII injectors, 93 power steering pump and a T5, I'm bone stock. Is that close enough?
spock345
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2016
- Location
- Livermore, CA
Seems close enough to me. I don't think the GenIII injectors will improve power too much. Although I am unsure about the effect of the T5. Although I can't imagine the losses being much different than an M47 or Getrag 265.
Smorgesborg
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2020
- Location
- Eastern MA
Alright. Once I figure out how to spoof the temp sensor I'll see about finding a Dyno that's open. Is there a specific format I should be using, or type of dyno?
Before you ask, I know I should replace the temp sensor itself. I'm spoofing it in the meantime because I'm going to be replacing the head anyways shortly, and it's a dang pain to replace it.
Before you ask, I know I should replace the temp sensor itself. I'm spoofing it in the meantime because I'm going to be replacing the head anyways shortly, and it's a dang pain to replace it.
spock345
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2016
- Location
- Livermore, CA
I'd just replace it. That way you have the part for when you do the head. Also It may run too rich or lean and mess up a dyno result.