Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to OOF

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: 3.0 elite 1996  (Read 1450 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

salvo3.0

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • wiltshire,swindon
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
3.0 elite 1996
« on: 20 January 2007, 19:33:58 »

can anyone please tell me what the bhp is ment to be for a 3.0 elite 1996,
Logged

tunnie

  • Get A Life!!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Surrey
  • Posts: 37526
    • Zafira Tourer & BMW 435i
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #1 on: 20 January 2007, 19:35:31 »

212 i think... 215?  :-/
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 106012
  • I Like Lockdown
    • Whatever Starts
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #2 on: 20 January 2007, 19:38:32 »

207bhp
Logged
Grumpy old man

Admin

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • 0
  • Posts: 2595
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #3 on: 20 January 2007, 19:48:25 »

And 199lb/ft torque. :)

Until you change the ecu for an Mtek one that is... ;)

Logged
The Administrator.

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 106012
  • I Like Lockdown
    • Whatever Starts
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #4 on: 20 January 2007, 19:50:13 »

Quote
And 199lb/ft torque. :)

Until you change the ecu for an Mtek one that is... ;)

What are the likely figures with the mtek chip?
Logged
Grumpy old man

M-Tek Performance

  • Intermediate Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Hull
  • Posts: 372
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #5 on: 30 January 2007, 13:32:27 »

Quote
Quote
And 199lb/ft torque. :)

Until you change the ecu for an Mtek one that is... ;)

What are the likely figures with the mtek chip?

Phil got 265lbs ft.
Logged

Marks DTM Calib

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • West Bridgford
  • Posts: 33855
  • Git!
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #6 on: 30 January 2007, 14:21:53 »

I would expect the stock engine in fine fettle to be out putting more then the 199 figure.....and you realy CAN tell the difference with an Mtek chip fitted....

Note I talk torque/rpm figures....bhp is only a conversion from torque to make people happy...

i.e.

Bhp = (Torque x rpm)/5252

Hence if you ever see a torque graph with bhp plotted on it then the bhp should equal the torque at 5252 rpm....

One of the old tuning tricks is to move the exitsing torque peek up the rpm range to get more bhp.....the engine will be less driveable but it has more bhp....
Logged

Paul M

  • Omega Knight
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Edinburgh
  • Posts: 1528
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #7 on: 30 January 2007, 22:33:34 »

Quote
Quote
Quote
And 199lb/ft torque. :)

Until you change the ecu for an Mtek one that is... ;)

What are the likely figures with the mtek chip?

Phil got 265lbs ft.

No disrespect but I find that figure VERY unlikely... it's over 30% increase over stock, which is simply unheard of with just a remap on a N/A car. It's not like these engines are particularly under-tuned either, they're producing a healthy 67 lbft per litre. How that can be increased to 88 lbft per litre (which would be a fantastic output for an N/A car) with just a chip just doesn't make sense - all you can do is change fuelling and timing. I'd say you'd need a fair bit of work to improve the airflow, such as hotter cams, better exhaust manifold (which I believe is a known restriction on the Omega), probably complete free flowing exhaust system, possibly intake mods.

Unless the chip has also moved the torque further down the rev range (unlikely, usually they push it higher to maximise power as Mark points out) then the power output must be touching 280 BHP!

I expect that figure was obtained on a chassis dyno and "back calculated" to flywheel figure, a method fraught with assumptions and their associated errors. I don't doubt that the chip is very good and there have been a few positive reviews on here, but if anyone buys one expecting more than a mild power increase coupled with driveability gains I think they'll be disappointed -- 30% torque or power hikes just don't happen from remaps on N/A cars unless there was something badly wrong with them to start with.
Logged

Admin

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • 0
  • Posts: 2595
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #8 on: 31 January 2007, 08:30:38 »

Paul. I too was astonished by this figure, and suspect there was an error in calculation somewhere.

Now, the RR getogether I am arranging will settle a few arguments on this subject.

I am taking the manual MV6 along with the Mtek chip and we are going to do rolling road tests with the standard ecu setup and Mtek chip.
The car will also be fitted with a 4 bar fpr and a new air filter (it has new plugs etc).

This should provide us with clear evidence of the improvements. :)
Logged
The Administrator.

Marks DTM Calib

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • West Bridgford
  • Posts: 33855
  • Git!
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #9 on: 31 January 2007, 09:09:58 »

Quote
The car will also be fitted with a 4 bar fpr

Pointless....absolutely pointless.....only required when you are getting to the limit of the injector flow....which the 3.0 injectors are nowhere near...
Logged

Admin

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • 0
  • Posts: 2595
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #10 on: 31 January 2007, 10:42:40 »

I expected that response...  ;D

Just a bit of experimentation...  ;)
Logged
The Administrator.

M-Tek Performance

  • Intermediate Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Hull
  • Posts: 372
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #11 on: 28 February 2007, 14:38:19 »

Quote
I expected that response...  ;D

Just a bit of experimentation...  ;)

Remember what i said about too much fuel pressure as well ;)
Logged

Phil

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • 0
  • Posts: 799
    • View Profile
Re: 3.0 elite 1996
« Reply #12 on: 28 February 2007, 15:01:55 »

Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
And 199lb/ft torque. :)

Until you change the ecu for an Mtek one that is... ;)

What are the likely figures with the mtek chip?

Phil got 265lbs ft.

No disrespect but I find that figure VERY unlikely... it's over 30% increase over stock, which is simply unheard of with just a remap on a N/A car. It's not like these engines are particularly under-tuned either, they're producing a healthy 67 lbft per litre. How that can be increased to 88 lbft per litre (which would be a fantastic output for an N/A car) with just a chip just doesn't make sense - all you can do is change fuelling and timing. I'd say you'd need a fair bit of work to improve the airflow, such as hotter cams, better exhaust manifold (which I believe is a known restriction on the Omega), probably complete free flowing exhaust system, possibly intake mods.

Unless the chip has also moved the torque further down the rev range (unlikely, usually they push it higher to maximise power as Mark points out) then the power output must be touching 280 BHP!

I expect that figure was obtained on a chassis dyno and "back calculated" to flywheel figure, a method fraught with assumptions and their associated errors. I don't doubt that the chip is very good and there have been a few positive reviews on here, but if anyone buys one expecting more than a mild power increase coupled with driveability gains I think they'll be disappointed -- 30% torque or power hikes just don't happen from remaps on N/A cars unless there was something badly wrong with them to start with.

For clarification, on 25th November at Jamsport, my car a 3ltr MV6 with M-tek chip came back with 228 bhp and 262 ft/lb torque
On 17th Feb at Northampton Motorsport it came back with 244.4 bhp @ 5853 rpm and 233.3 lb/ft @ 5009

So yuor guess is as good as mine as to what its knocking out, nothing was done to the engine between rolling roads, apart from 3k miles.

I think the Jamsport figure is more acurate for BHP as Northampton Motorsport say i loose 87.5bhp through the transmission. Also on the same day, Sir Sideways 3ltr auto which is standard came back with 247bhp and only an 81bhp transmission loss

Basically running an auto is difficult on a rolling road as you cant dip the clutch at the red line, unless you have the correct software to compensate, which Northampton didnt appear to have.

Worth noting on the same day a 3.2 signum that has been re-mapped and was reading 230ish at Coutrenay 2 weeks before only made 213bhp, and most other owners felt the results were 15-20bhp down

But ill be in Total Vauxhall with 244 and 233 so i dont realy care as it looks good!!  ;D
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.016 seconds with 19 queries.