v8
02-11-2006, 03:14 PM
2-11-06
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b92/kevmar/Copyofdyno02-11-06.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b92/kevmar/Copyofdyno02-11-06.jpg
|
View Full Version : todays dyno # v8 02-11-2006, 03:14 PM 2-11-06 http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b92/kevmar/Copyofdyno02-11-06.jpg bluecajun5.3 02-11-2006, 03:25 PM looking good kevin. good #'s your putting down. hopefully i make it to the dyno this fri with my new tune so we can compare. v8 02-11-2006, 03:36 PM good deal lance. is your #'s sae corrected or uncorrected, because i put down 349 hp and 351 tq before correction. bluecajun5.3 02-11-2006, 03:55 PM i'm not 100% positive but i'm pretty sure they were corrected. the gainesville track got rained on today. going to the track tomorrow but in orlando, weathers looking good. hopefully we both have some new #'s to post up. take it easy and good luck tomorrow. Sport Side 02-11-2006, 03:59 PM Man, that's a nice square torque curve. I was looking at your HP curve, mainly where it makes 'peak' HP at... Looks to be about at 5750 or so? Seems to me, just more proof about the 'intake restriction' buzz that everyones been talking about as of late. Reason I say that is I've seen over and over again, F-bodys w/ a 220 sized cam and a LS6 intake put down peak HP @ 6000 to 6200 RPM. It's interesting none the less. Hey, good numbers and good luck at the track. :thumb: v8 02-11-2006, 07:08 PM well I'm not sure about new #'s tomorrow night with the N wind of 15mph damnit lol, thanks. tdrumm 02-11-2006, 07:48 PM Man, that's a nice square torque curve. I was looking at your HP curve, mainly where it makes 'peak' HP at... Looks to be about at 5750 or so? Seems to me, just more proof about the 'intake restriction' buzz that everyones been talking about as of late. Reason I say that is I've seen over and over again, F-bodys w/ a 220 sized cam and a LS6 intake put down peak HP @ 6000 to 6200 RPM. It's interesting none the less. Hey, good numbers and good luck at the track. :thumb: I was thinking the same thing Sportside. Nice numbers Kevin, I guess this was a 3rd gear pull this time? v8 02-11-2006, 09:20 PM yes it was, hell i had to go and buy them a crack whore to sux there d!ck so i could do a 3rd gear pull lol ahhahaa. NOT! LOL tdrumm 02-11-2006, 10:37 PM What are your cam and converter specs again, if you don't mind? v8 02-11-2006, 10:48 PM cam 223 225 564 571 114+3, converter vig 3 disc 2500 storm5.3 02-11-2006, 11:45 PM well I'm not sure about new #'s tomorrow night with the N wind of 15mph damnit lol, thanks. Well it looks like there will be a west wind at about 8 and then it will swing around to the north after 8pm... NOAA Weather (http://www.srh.noaa.gov/ifps/MapClick.php?FcstType=graphical&textField1=29.8619842529297&textField2=-94.8690719604492&site=hgx) Best runs should come around 7pm...Zed Sport Side 02-12-2006, 04:50 AM I got some lobe data on your cam Kevin :secret: ... Incase you want it. .006'' duration: Intake/Exhaust: 274/276 .050'' duration: Intake/Exhaust: 223/225 .200'' duration: Intake/Exhaust: 139/146 tdrumm 02-12-2006, 07:16 AM cam 223 225 564 571 114+3, converter vig 3 disc 2500 How do you like a cam that big with a converter that small? How is it down low? That's almost what I want my new combo to be, but everyone says I should get at least a 3000 stall. v8 02-12-2006, 09:54 AM I got some lobe data on your cam Kevin :secret: ... Incase you want it. .006'' duration: Intake/Exhaust: 274/276 .050'' duration: Intake/Exhaust: 223/225 .200'' duration: Intake/Exhaust: 139/146 thanks, but what does all that mean lol sorry, send me a pm, thanks. v8 02-12-2006, 09:55 AM How do you like a cam that big with a converter that small? How is it down low? That's almost what I want my new combo to be, but everyone says I should get at least a 3000 stall. It could use a 3000 stall, best 60" has been a 1.74, but usally around 1.80 is what i pull. dropkick13 02-24-2006, 07:19 AM those are impressive #'s. how are you getting into the 12's though? these trucks weigh about 4400lbs with driver right? using an et calc, 340whp will put you at around mid 13's...i know they arent the most accurate things, but i must have something wrong v8 02-24-2006, 01:53 PM race weight is 4100, and the stall and 4.10's help it alot. hell the calc. numbers don't match up but thats what it runs, and if you believe in dyno numbers then your going to be disappointed as well. track times don't lie well i guess they could ahhha LIL QIK 02-24-2006, 04:39 PM I guess I need to get the stall in. I popped 13.40's all night with 109-110 mph's. Unfortunately I could only get the 60' to 2.10. It pulls really hard in the upper rpm's........just real sluggish out of the hole. I've never run a stall before...and was unsure of how it would drive on the street with it. My brother's trying to talk me into a 3200 for it. If you dont' mind me asking...what would you say about the stall and how high. I'm 4040 with me in it and a 3.73 gear. Toe 02-24-2006, 05:24 PM Great numbers, very close to the numbers I am making with my hemi. What blows my mind is that 330hp in your chevy equals mid 12s, where I'll be lucky if I am mid 13's. the extra 600lbs and a stock stall is hurting me badly. bluecajun5.3 02-24-2006, 07:42 PM strip that sucker down toe, lol... Sport Side 02-24-2006, 10:11 PM Toe, Could you give a little bit of detail on the (NHRA) correct, ET/MPH in your sign.? Just thinking, it would be neat if there was a correction factor to get us all at the same elevation, DA... However, I have no idea if something like this would work or not?? Toe 02-25-2006, 03:16 AM Here's what I know about it. The only thing is it doesn't take into consideration weather conditions at the time. We would just need to get the elevation that the run was made at and run the numbers through this. Found this at http://www.smokemup.com/auto_math/nhra_correction_factors.php To convert your timeslip ET and MPH to sea level. Multiply applicable factor times your ET or MPH. (Example: You ran a 13.8 @ 100 MPH at 5000' elevation track. The correction factors are .9367 and 1.0661 for 5000'. (13.8 * .9367) = 12.93 , (100 * 1.0661) = 106.61 MPH. So the correct timeslip would be 12.93 @ 106.61 MPH.) Altitude above Sea Level (Feet), Elapsed Time Factor (ET), Trap Speed Factor (MPH) 1200 .9874 1.0129 1300 .9861 1.0143 1400 .9848 1.0157 1500 .9835 1.0171 1600 .9822 1.0185 1700 .9809 1.0199 1800 .9796 1.0213 1900 .9783 1.0227 2000 .9770 1.0241 2100 .9757 1.0255 2200 .9744 1.0269 2300 .9731 1.0283 2400 .9718 1.0297 2500 .9705 1.0311 2600 .9692 1.0325 2700 .9679 1.0339 2800 .9666 1.0353 2900 .9653 1.0367 3000 .9640 1.0381 3100 .9627 1.0395 3200 .9614 1.0409 3300 .9601 1.0423 3400 .9588 1.0437 3500 .9575 1.0451 3600 .9562 1.0465 3700 .9549 1.0479 3800 .9536 1.0493 3900 .9523 1.0507 4000 .9510 1.0521 4100 .9497 1.0535 4200 .9484 1.0549 4300 .9471 1.0563 4400 .9458 1.0577 4500 .9445 1.0591 4600 .9432 1.0605 4700 .9419 1.0619 4800 .9406 1.0633 4900 .9393 1.0647 5000 .9380 1.0661 5100 .9367 1.0675 5200 .9354 1.0689 5300 .9341 1.0703 5400 .9328 1.0717 5500 .9315 1.0731 v8 02-25-2006, 11:31 AM yeah that works great untill you get a negative DA lol |