RE: 2.3 10v NA

["Duff, Ian" <iduff@charter.com>]

If only... My friend at work has an E30 M3 that, with some rudimentary
tricks like chip, intake cam, variable cam sprocket, gets around 215-220hp
on 2.3L. Granted its essentially factory hand-made (oxymoron?), but wouldn't
it be nice to see him in the rear-view? I already do when the road is
anything except dry, but at Lime Rock...

Ian Duff, New Bedford, MA
1990 Coupe Quattro

>----------
>From: 	Bruce Bell[SMTP:bbell@csn.org]
>Sent: 	Thursday, March 21, 1996 12:09 PM
>To: 	quattro@coimbra.ans.net
>Subject: 	Re: 2.3 10v NA
>
>Don't get me wrong, I never said 200 hp would be easy or cheap, just
>attainable.  
>Improving his exhaust should get him around 155hp. Increasing the
>displacement from 2.308 to 2.584 should yield around 174-5 hp and the
>resulting increase in compression (from 10 to 10.7:1 will get him beyond
>180hp. The 95.5mm crank will get him 10% more torque all the way through
>the
>rpm range and will easily compensate for the bottom end he lost with the
>cam
>and free flowing exhaust. Personaly, I wouldn't consider the increase in
>displacement without both exhaust improvements and some head and manifold
>work. To get close to 200hp plan on serious manifold and head work ($$$).
>At
>the upper end there could well be some fuel delivery questions that may
>need
>to be addressed and whether the chip helps or hurts at that level of tune
>could be another topic for discussion. We are talking about power here in
>the neighborhood of 78 hp/litre. Colin Gynes achieved close to 88 hp/ litre
>with a 4cyl VW engine but that was with an astronaomical CR and a solid
>lifter head which has more potential than the hydraulic.  
>
>At 04:49 PM 3/20/96 -0500, you wrote:
>> 
>>	March 19, '96 Bruce B. wrote (in part) as follows:
>>
>>	"A 2.3 10v with improved exhaust (go for 2.5"), Shrick 272 should
>>get you around 180 hp.  Do the head & manifold work and blueprinting thing
>>and you may just see 200HP NA".
>>
>>	Question:  Are we talking about the same 2.3 10v motor?  The 
>>motor that came stock in the '89 100q?  A friend used the 272, chip & K&N 
>>in this motor and by the seat of my pants I couldn't sense that type of 
>>improvement.  He was estimating closer to 150-155, but of course no dyno 
>>testing.  If you have done this work, and really got this type 
>>improvement, can you tell me what exhaust work was actually done?  What 
>>about the low end loss, if any?  I would really appreciate any info you 
>>or anyone else has in pulling 180-200hp from the 
>>
>>
>
>Bruce Bell
>bbell@csn.net 
>
>