I Tend to think the real limiting factor on the 3.0 seems to be the exhaust valves. You can clearly see the seat being much smaller than the exhaust bowl area and most places only offer 1mm over sized valves that use a stock seat for what would seem to me like no performance gain but maybe some gain in heat dissipation.

Im really trying to get some talk going about 3.0 performance but most people just want to talk about how much it sucks and wont give any specifics why. I cant for the life of me figure out why it wont make any power?

__________________________________________________________

>>>*I don't really understand that, either. The engine design does have some nice potential, 150 H/P out of the gate, potential to 175+ looks easy to me. Some are reporting 200+ already.
On the larger exhaust valves, of course added exhaust flow has just one basic function, and that is to increase RPM potential. Horsepower there, of course. So adding intake flow is the obvious next step. I personally think 1mm is exactly correct as to size for normal street use. But I noticed my young Son Tod is already beating my airflow numbers with the 22RE engines, so I stay out of his way on that now...

The trick seems to me to always be to add airflow, and the engine runs on fuel so I have been looking at the intake side, time permitting.
The factory got very close with the cam designs, I see powerbands changed with not a lot of gain, taking driveability into account. Most daily drivers are not run at higher RPM's as a rule. Still, good numbers and DOA seems to lead the field there..
It does get interesting, gains are small here and there but stack up.
So I am interested in getting a discussion going, too. My feelings are this powerplant is a bit overlooked, perhaps because of the bad rap from the gasket failures common to the early designs.....*EB