TBs, CAIs, UDPs and other stupid shit people want to discuss

[Canada]

I'll bet anything with just a 65mm tb and a 2 1/2 down pipe(works wonders and is cheap for the muffler shop to fabricate!!!), you'd get to 200+ crank HP easy to forget about the tq yet still run normal...With minivan hardware the engine is 185 @ 5200and 210tq at 4000. Yes.GEN 3. How Sweet it is.

65 mm TB is WAY to big......ever measure the diameter of the neck of the 3400 upper manifold? IIRC it was 58 mm......at the greatest 60 mm.

2.5" exhaust?........as long as it mandrel bent, includes high flow cats, and a straight through muffler its fine by me.

GM overrated the minivan engine.......the 3400 is exactly the same no matter what it comes from.....the ONLY difference is in exhaust, intake, and PCM tuning. They appear to make more like 175-180 hp.

There should be a good 195 hp from a decent intake (Tranzgenics's ), FFP UDP, and 2.5" mandrel exhaust.

I haven't seen ANY evidance that porting the intake manifolds, heads, TB, or MAF make any gains worthwhile.....like maybe a combined 8 whp from all of the above.

[SappySE107]

If thats the best you have seen...people are fucking up horribly on the porting.

[ikessky]

2.5" exhaust?........as long as it mandrel bent, includes high flow cats, and a straight through muffler its fine by me.

Has anyone seriously flowed the cats? I've been told by a few different exhaust manufacturers that a high flow cat will not flow any better than the OEM piece on my '95. Flowmaster said that where the high flow cats shine is on the older models (didn't give me specific years but I'm assuming probably late 80's and earlier).

[gpse3400]

If it's a monolithic(grid design) catalyst then they are pretty free flow. Its the OLD OLD stuff thats bad like the pellet design. From the late mid 70's to mid 80's. GM and Chrysler used those pellet catalysts. Those didn't flow worth a damn. Ford had the Monolith design and eventually they all switched to that. These days GM likes to make theres a bit on the large side otherwise they still flow a decent amount. Not as much as little ones do but not too far off either. I for one wouldn't drive car every day with out a converter. Without it the exhaust fumes are seriously toxic. With it, it cleans up the air. They might not flow like a straight tube but the car will be much safer for humans and to the earth.

[ikessky]

They might not flow like a straight tube but the car will be much safer for humans and to the earth.

I water my lawn with waste oil and I eat baby seals!

Seriously though, I would never consider an exhaust system without a cat. That's just me though. Well, okay, on my one engine I would, but that's because it's going to be a dune buggy and will have seperate pipes that are only going to be about 40" long!

[gpse3400]

Now off road is a different story

[gpse3400]

I'll bet anything with just a 65mm tb and a 2 1/2 down pipe(works wonders and is cheap for the muffler shop to fabricate!!!), you'd get to 200+ crank HP easy to forget about the tq yet still run normal...With minivan hardware the engine is 185 @ 5200and 210tq at 4000. Yes.GEN 3. How Sweet it is.

65 mm TB is WAY to big......ever measure the diameter of the neck of the 3400 upper manifold? IIRC it was 58 mm......at the greatest 60 mm.

2.5" exhaust?........as long as it mandrel bent, includes high flow cats, and a straight through muffler its fine by me.

GM overrated the minivan engine.......the 3400 is exactly the same no matter what it comes from.....the ONLY difference is in exhaust, intake, and PCM tuning. They appear to make more like 175-180 hp.

There should be a good 195 hp from a decent intake (Tranzgenics's ), FFP UDP, and 2.5" mandrel exhaust.

I haven't seen ANY evidance that porting the intake manifolds, heads, TB, or MAF make any gains worthwhile.....like maybe a combined 8 whp from all of the above.

For bigger TBs we port the plenum

The minivan comes with a 58mm tb, bigger the regular 52 that gets around. So 185 possibly comes from that and the tuning. There's trend there

A 2" or smaller exhaust anywhere within 5 feet on that motor is just really crappy. As long as its bigger and its not crinkel curved.

As far as porting, through professionalism you get top of the line results.

Sorry I don't belive in cone filters(unless its a last resort and or part of a tuned setup) and underdrive pulleys as much as everyone else......

[Canada]

If thats the best you have seen...people are fucking up horribly on the porting.

Tim Wortman had Street Arsenal Stage 2 heads, Street Arsenal upper and lower intake manifolds, APOC TB, FFP UDP, cone filter and exhaust on his 3400. He dynoed at BerettaFest '03...

http://www.beretta.net/fast_lane/dyn...03/wortman.jpg

He made 157 whp after raising the fuel pressure a few pounds....the previous run showed he was a *tiny* bit lean. A stock 3400 should be able to lay down 142-144 whp (180*.79). So he made 15 horse over stock.

I come in with my 3100 with RSM Racing's WAI, FFP's UDP, and exhaust...


Thats a comparison of RSM's WAI, a K&N drop-in, and a paper filter. A stock 3100 should be able to make 122-124 whp....that means I made about 15 whp as well.

I know Sappy doesn't like RSM Racing, but I found a guy with a GA thats trying to turbo it.....he went out and bought RSM Racing's TB, upper and lower IM, and heads.......

Before....


After.....


More info on his RSM stuff here....

http://www.jeepnuts.com/12sGASE/RSM.htm

I'm not saying porting doesn't work.....it obviously does.....BUT....the only real way to port the intake manifolds is to get them extrude honed......$$$. Either way, I can't see Extrude Hone IM, heads, and a TB making more than a combined 10 hp. Considering its very easy to have more than $1k in all of that ($600 for extrude hone alone)......its simply not worth it.

Don't believe in an intake? I refer you to my comparison.....


As well as a Tranzgenic intake on a 3100.....


Don' believe in UDPs? Here is FFP's dyno chart of theirs on a 3.1 MPFI/5 speed Beretta....

[Rhedalert]

I dont think anyone would feel 5 horsepower....how much $ for that pulley again? I'm sorry thats just truly negligible. Most engines gain or lose a few horsepower just based on the weather, and seeing that underdrive pulley, isn't even made to act as a torsion dampener. Maybe it's good for when you live in the outskirts of nowhere Idaho, but when I'm in traffic crossing the Verrazano bridge I'm already beating the hell out of my alternator. God forbid if I use the rear defroster :P

[Canada]

I felt a 5 hp gain according to the butt dyno........maybe it was placebo effect. It DID make my car quicker.....ran a 15.8@87 with the additional UDP and exhaust vs a 16.1@85.5 with just the intake.

I've had this UDP for around 18,000 miles (this car IS my daily driver).....NEVER had an issue with it....be it charging or engine durability problems. I pulled the 3100 out this winter in place for a 3400.....everything checked out fine.

What exactly is that tiny bit of rubber supposed to keep engine vibrations from anyways? The serpitine belt???

I posted proof that it works..........do you have ANY proof that it doesn't?

I don't exactly live in the middle of nowhere....although Iowa does seem like it sometimes.

[v6h.o.]

im sorry but i still think its absolutly stupid to run any engine with an aftermarket pully that does not keep the Dampner. it IS there for a reason.

before anyone brings up the argument that its all good because 60degree's are internally balanced... that has nothing to do with it. it has to do with inherent harmonic vibrations caused from the process of combustion.
without a dampner your running the risk of eventually fucking your engine. its just stupid to run an engine without one.

not worth the 5hp or whatever the fuck it gives you. no dampner, no good.

[Rhedalert]

it has to do with inherent harmonic vibrations caused from the process of combustion.
without a dampner your running the risk of eventually fucking your engine. its just stupid to run an engine without one.

not worth the 5hp or whatever the fuck it gives you. no dampner, no good.

Exactly. Anyone that's taken automotive or some forms of mechanical engineering would know this too.

[v6h.o.]

it has to do with inherent harmonic vibrations caused from the process of combustion.
without a dampner your running the risk of eventually fucking your engine. its just stupid to run an engine without one.

not worth the 5hp or whatever the fuck it gives you. no dampner, no good.

Exactly. Anyone that's taken automotive or some forms of mechanical engineering would know this too.

doesnt even take a mechanical engineering degree to know or understand what goes on in an engine to know how wrong this concept of no harmonic dampner is...

[Cliff8928]

Tim Wortman had Street Arsenal Stage 2 heads, Street Arsenal upper and lower intake manifolds, APOC TB, FFP UDP, cone filter and exhaust on his 3400. He dynoed at BerettaFest '03...

Also, the ECM in Tim's (now TJ's) car was messed up, aswell as the trans died just after tim sold it... Also it had a 3400, and even with the ported heads that computer was still tuned for a stock '94 3100, not the engine that was in it...

When it gets yet another new ECM (hopefully a W-Body one will work better), it should run a bit better with that and the new trans (from a DOHC)


Cliff Scott
89 BerettaGT
89 Volvo740

[gpse3400]

Well I don't like them for a number of reasons...

1 there is little or no inertial dampening or on that side of the engine. You'll probably get x amount of miles out of the engine and in time eventually the crank will destroy itself. (example racers rarely run cars without some type of tuned damper). The rubber ring is the control for how much the outer ring will deflect relative to the inner hub. It's a tuned piece and is ment to last the life of the engine. On power stroke the crankshaft deflects thus knocking the inner hub faster foward. the outer hub lags behind til it comes back into phase with the inner hub. the rate of lag is determined by the rubber ring and the weight of the outer ring. Basically the outer ring and rubber ring provides a counter force thus controlling crank deflection. Flywheels do the same thing but because they are so big they can be solid. Torque converters really absorb alot of deflection as they contain fluid. But that's on one side of the motor.

2 For heavy traffic its too hard to the alternator to make power even with the stock pully. When the regulator gets hot is lowers it's output to not overcharge the battery yet the power gets so low the battery has to take over. Quite possibly the main reason why the alternator also gets hot possibly for lack of ventilation. When it overheats it gets really hard to push power though those diodes thus making it hotter. People measure output at normal non-broiling hot operating conditions thus showing normal numbers. But in hard conditions when you need it to really perform it can come up short and can fail. The diodes and the regulator hate excesive heat and the rotor needs to spin faster to keep the didoes and regulator cool, and to keep the power consistant. If it were any other alternator I would'nt be so leary but both the CS-130 and CS-130D just insists on crapping out. You get worried when you see your volt meter at 11.1 volts and dropping and you are stuck in the Holland tunnel. The more the alternator is taxed at idle the more it will be prone to failure. The faster the alternator spins the more consistant power it will make, the less it will overheat. In fact I'm all up for making that alternator spin faster.

For $100 I'll wait till the weather shifts to get my 5hp...I rather spend alittle more buy a nice set of valve springs.... Like Rhedalert said, in the middle of nowhere, or on the track, or for hahas at the dyno, the pulley might be a good thing(yet still leaning towards catostrophic faliure), for those of us in town...that wouldn't be the best thing to do. In fact overall I'd rather have my accessories spin a hair faster, and I want my crank dampend.

As far as Head/intake work is concerned, it leads all back to what I was saying. Porting work is nice and has many potential benefits but if you can't get the exhaust out of the engine then at least with this particular motor will hit a HP wall. A torque wall not so much but a hp wall yes. 190 crank 20% computed down to roughly 150 wheel seems to be the "COMMON" wall of altered GEN3's at these engine sizes so I see and hear about. Exhaust work has to be done as far close to the engine as possible. You want 200+ hp, you need a bigger exhaust manifolds(preferably headers) and downpipe...at least a downpipe. Do all the work you want to the TB, intake, heads whatever, you will reap rewards of it but if you don't deal with the immediate exhaust, the engine is only going to react so much. You need both, at least with this engine. a stock Grand Am can get roughly 18-20 hp with a set of headers alone, just think how it would react with intake and head porting work now that it can exhale. I mean these exhaust manifolds are similar to stuff used back in in '80, they are just there to direct the exhaust out the back. Well I think this engine reached its limit with this style of manifold, stock or not. Even just alittle exhaust runner length like how the 3800 has would be a treat. Cat backs are nice, but up front makes all the difference. Same goes for any motor. As for cone filters..well I just don't like the sheer loss in tq I keep seeing and feeling and I just don't trust them to filter as well as paper. 10-20 lbft of torque is somthing I will not sacrifice for 3-5 more hp. I only use them when I don't have a choice and/or if I were to ever seriously outflow the stock box to the point it was an operational problem.

This is my situation and how I see it. Reliabily and power must meet an optimal compromise otherwise I personally dismiss it. Take this info and do what you want with it.

Sorry Brad this really went off topic. Hope the engine gives you years trouble free miles but definately look into that electrical mishap...