• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

3.0 vs 3.2?

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 2, 2004
Messages
91
Location
New Orleans
I've read that the HP limit on a stock 3.0 400-450rwhp some have made more. Well, what about the 3.2 liter?

I did a search and most of the posts were dated. Anyone have any experience with 3.2 HP limits?
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 31, 2004
Messages
1,895
Location
Toorak, Melbourne
Where are you reading this???? :confused:

Because it is totally untrue!!! (and that is putting it as nicely as I possibly can!)

There are people extracting over 1000hp out of a 3.0L in a drag car and 800+hp in a 3.0L Nations cup race car in Australia... So, I would be throwing away whatever source you got that info from... :wink:
 

KGP

Legendary Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 31, 2001
Messages
3,583
Location
St. Louis, MO
AU_NSX, as I read his post, it appears that he is referring to OEM (IOW, not built) engines.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 31, 2004
Messages
1,895
Location
Toorak, Melbourne
KGP said:
AU_NSX, as I read his post, it appears that he is referring to OEM (IOW, not built) engines.

Hey Gene,

What's up with that avatar??? :confused: ... I like your old one... Are you trying to hide the fact that you have turned to the FI side... :biggrin:

Okay back to the topic... If we are talking OEM internals, then the 3.0 and 3.2 are identical... And what HP you develop depends very much on what PSI you run (for FI) and then what fuel you use and your intake air temp to avoid detonation...

So to answer the question I suppose we need to reduce the number of variables in the equation. I just said a simple answer to a simple Q... because we all know that hp is related to $ in an exponential relationship... :biggrin:
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
192
Didn't someone mention the 3.0 could hold more boost due to thinner cylinder walls on the 3.2?
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 2, 2004
Messages
91
Location
New Orleans
TTony, I thought the cylinder walls were the same thickness it was the stroke was just longer? If the bore is the reason for the increased displacement you could be right!

I'm going to call FactorX since there turbo kit is putting out 400rwhp on the OBDII car's and see what they say.

IMO the limit should be in the mid 400's on stock components with turbo. Blowers, especially PD blowers, use alot HP to spin. I really believe a 360rwhp CTSC is pushing the same air internally as a 400rwhp turbo car, but the parasitic losses are eating it up.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 6, 2003
Messages
1,015
Location
Silicon Valley, CA
Jasil said:
TTony, I thought the cylinder walls were the same thickness it was the stroke was just longer? If the bore is the reason for the increased displacement you could be right!

I'm going to call FactorX since there turbo kit is putting out 400rwhp on the OBDII car's and see what they say.

IMO the limit should be in the mid 400's on stock components with turbo. Blowers, especially PD blowers, use alot HP to spin. I really believe a 360rwhp CTSC is pushing the same air internally as a 400rwhp turbo car, but the parasitic losses are eating it up.

Did you check the FAQ?

The cylinder walls on the 3.2L motor are thinner. In order to compensate for the thinner walls, Honda produced fiber reinforced (FRM) cylinder linings. I do not know whether the thinner FRM cylinder walls or the thicker non-FRM cylinder walls hold more power.
 
Top