did'nt see the bashing of allen but if belle even alluded to allen being incompetent, then he's an a$$ and anything else coming out of his mouth will be considered s_it. with one "shot in the dark" tune he turned my whipple nightmare into a truck i actually want to get into and floor. while i've always been leery of manufacturers claims, i take cues from people who depend on making power for a living, racers. you know the racers who put stock chevy airboxes and exhaust manifolds on their race cars because they flow so well. i was considering doing the kenne bell conversion thing, now i'm glad i did'nt. i don't like people who talk trash, they usually do it to hide they're own inadequacies and insecurities, add greed to it and you've got a real piece of work. e

 

Yeah, sure KB...my truck was running at peak performance stock!

If you call -40* of timing being pulled from pretty much 3800rpm on up. A/C compressor not kicking off until like 6000rpms when my truck's max speed was 5800rpm stock! What else... like 8* timing BTDC. Abuse mode coming on over 1500rpm.

Vehicles are detuned on purpose to comply with CAFE (Corp Avg Fuel Econ) requirements and prolly for CARB reasons too. You gotta love Big Brother...

I guess a set of long tubes don't make a difference in power either or any other bolt on. Strange, I recall those making like 22rwhp on someone's truck. 13rwhp on a underdrive pulley. Catbacks making around 12rwhp. Oh and considering one of my pals laid out about 210rwhp in his '95 F150 with only BOLT ONS (stock cam, heads, intake manifold)....that's up from about 140rwhp stock!

Oh yeah, a 4 hr cam swap making 20-30rwhp is oh so difficult too.

Guess I need to get a Flux-Capacitor in mine to make real power!

 

yay whoever said bolt on's dont make power is a fraking idiot.

 

Hehe, alot of great posts. I'm glad to see the consensus is the same here. My bolts ons are netting me 289 RWHP and 308 RWTQ.

 

Some of their low numbers probably resulted from not letting the computer "learn" the new bolt-on's. But I still don't see how they could have gotten that low of numbers. Sounds like a load of to me.

 

dyno numbers are not reliable for comparison of power output unless its the exact same type of dyno and all the conditions are the same. 50 or 70 hp variatiions in power could be shown as absolute fact when in actuality it was just different numbers from a different dyno set up. I hav e had my engines dynoed going on 37 years now since my vw with weber 48s back in 1968. engine dynos, water brake dynos, inertia wheel dynos, the g tech numbers, how many ways to a claimed number. I use dynos but rely on going to the dragstrip to see if it really helps and how much. obiously if i went from 15.66 stock to 14.84 with bolt ons something worked better. including huge hp average gain from raising shift points andcoming in at higher rpm next gear. anyway its all good cause now is the best performance cars and trucks have ever been till the gas runs out.

 

How can they say that bolt-ons do not help. My dad and I had indentical RCSB trucks. We raced almost religously every weekend. It was dead even almost everytime. I got a Hi-Flow intake from Jet and a Stage II chip from them. I was able pull away from his truck everytime after that. That is real evidence for me.

 

Allen,

This statement you qoute is a bunch of BS from many standpoints(did KB attack you on another board and they posted this??). The last time I checked, and believe me I check a lot(headed towards powertrain engineering in school right now), the major auto makers take a respective powerplant a literally test the hell out of it. They run versions that are extremely high strung, some that are so docile nobody would buy them, and everything in between. The auto maker understands what the powerplant is capable of and THEN they make it a 100K plus milage powerplant. As I am sure Allen can attest to, they put in torque managment systems, run timing in less optimum parameters, and put restrictions on intake and exhaust systems to keep the "noise factor" in check. All of these are "compromises" on absolute performance. They use the PCM to allow the resulting powerplant to run extremely effecient WITHIN these design restrictions.

Todd

PS. Allen, I will stopping in very soon to discuss some PCM work for the Escalade. Our house sold and I am headed to UT for the remainder of my schooling. I will drop down to San Antonio soon after we get settled.