Estimated HP
07-05-2004, 05:06 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: So.Cal on the Best coast
Posts: 866
Originally posted by Ray86IROC
Suggesting that amount of mods added 10 hp altogether is absolutely ridiculous. You most certainly can add horsepower up for mods, you just have to have realistic numbers and use parts that work together, obviously not numbers thrown around by the parts manufacturers... And it's entirely been proven before.
GMHTP has done a series of dyno tests and dragstrip runs on a 305 TPI Formula recently. A standard dynomax catback added 8 rwhp. Installation of dynomax headers added another 7 rwhp and 12 ft-lbs of torque. A set of underdrive pullies and the SLP runners added just over 20 rwhp together. A Ed-Wright computer chip (custom not off the shelf) added around another 14 rwhp I believe it was . All simple, bolt on stuff. Now anyone of these parts added by itself on a bone stock motor may have given more power, or more likely less. But together as a system of improvements they'll add up to significant increase in power.
That's nearly 50 rwhp added for simple mods in this case, there is no way in hell the kind of fairly significant intake and exhaust mods the original poster has made only netted him a 10 hp improvement. In his case, headers, hi-flow cat, cat-back, ported plenum and SLP runners together have got to have added a solid 25-30 hp at bare minimum I would think... The exhaust and intake setup on these cars is just too poor from the factory to not show these kinds of gains with the right parts together...
Suggesting that amount of mods added 10 hp altogether is absolutely ridiculous. You most certainly can add horsepower up for mods, you just have to have realistic numbers and use parts that work together, obviously not numbers thrown around by the parts manufacturers... And it's entirely been proven before.
GMHTP has done a series of dyno tests and dragstrip runs on a 305 TPI Formula recently. A standard dynomax catback added 8 rwhp. Installation of dynomax headers added another 7 rwhp and 12 ft-lbs of torque. A set of underdrive pullies and the SLP runners added just over 20 rwhp together. A Ed-Wright computer chip (custom not off the shelf) added around another 14 rwhp I believe it was . All simple, bolt on stuff. Now anyone of these parts added by itself on a bone stock motor may have given more power, or more likely less. But together as a system of improvements they'll add up to significant increase in power.
That's nearly 50 rwhp added for simple mods in this case, there is no way in hell the kind of fairly significant intake and exhaust mods the original poster has made only netted him a 10 hp improvement. In his case, headers, hi-flow cat, cat-back, ported plenum and SLP runners together have got to have added a solid 25-30 hp at bare minimum I would think... The exhaust and intake setup on these cars is just too poor from the factory to not show these kinds of gains with the right parts together...
07-07-2004, 12:05 AM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Was TX, now in Portland, OR
Posts: 537
I have to disagree with people that are saying the SOHC GTs are fast. I have driven one, and have friends that have them. They suck. The GT I drove was a 2003 GT, Auto, and slower than ****. My 95 LT1 stock would have BLOWN it's doors off, and they're only rated 15 hp difference. Another friend of mine has a bolt on 01 GT (no headers, but all the other typ GT bolt ons) with a 3000 or so stall, and that car could muster only a 14.0.
I also had an 87 L98 Z28, and loved the low end tq. I also had a 305 TPI in that same care before hand (before the 350), and thought it was a pretty good running engine for what it was. I would say if you were to put a slightly better cam, you would hang with an 00 GT. The way you are sitting now, stop light to stop light you would hang, possibly win( Because of the low end the TPI makes), but on the highway, the GT would beat you almost every time on the top end. I have an LT1 cam and other valve train parts you can have for really cheap if you want to improve your car's power significantly. They came out of my car. PM me if you are interested. Ill tell you more details there. They're sitting collecting dust in my apt.
I also had an 87 L98 Z28, and loved the low end tq. I also had a 305 TPI in that same care before hand (before the 350), and thought it was a pretty good running engine for what it was. I would say if you were to put a slightly better cam, you would hang with an 00 GT. The way you are sitting now, stop light to stop light you would hang, possibly win( Because of the low end the TPI makes), but on the highway, the GT would beat you almost every time on the top end. I have an LT1 cam and other valve train parts you can have for really cheap if you want to improve your car's power significantly. They came out of my car. PM me if you are interested. Ill tell you more details there. They're sitting collecting dust in my apt.
Last edited by FastWhiteTA; 07-07-2004 at 12:07 AM.
07-07-2004, 03:50 PM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: MD
Posts: 2,022
Originally posted by FastWhiteTA
I have to disagree with people that are saying the SOHC GTs are fast. I have driven one, and have friends that have them. They suck. The GT I drove was a 2003 GT, Auto, and slower than ****.
I have to disagree with people that are saying the SOHC GTs are fast. I have driven one, and have friends that have them. They suck. The GT I drove was a 2003 GT, Auto, and slower than ****.
Auto GTs account for a VERY small portion of all the GTs, and you managed to pick it for a comparison.
And I wouldn't call them slow as ****. Most are good for at least high 14s, and good conditions well driven mid 14s are entirely possible.A 5 speed GT is a very good match for an LT1. I've seen one go 13.90s around 100-101mph within 2 hours of leaving the dealer's lot. Had the car been broken in a little and driven by someone who's had more time behind the wheel it may have gone faster. He was only cutting 2.1x 60s, and NOT powershifting.
Again, drive a manual trans car.
Last edited by Marc 85Z28; 07-07-2004 at 03:52 PM.
07-08-2004, 08:01 AM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: North Canton, OH
Posts: 1,764
Personally, if your going to spend that type of money to beat a "stock GT", why ditch the 305 and put some mores cubes in the car.
Just from reading this post...I can tell that some of you have never set foot on a dragstrip. Why...because your full of it.
Your talking about a in it's day, low miles, good shape cars that ran 15's and slower with basically no mods going after cars that make 40-50 rwhp more, weigh less, better gearing, not to mention new and in good shape.
Keep smoking the crack.
And about that dyno flog...I work part time at my local dyno shop. It is not hard to get #'s out of modifications at all.
Just from reading this post...I can tell that some of you have never set foot on a dragstrip. Why...because your full of it.
Your talking about a in it's day, low miles, good shape cars that ran 15's and slower with basically no mods going after cars that make 40-50 rwhp more, weigh less, better gearing, not to mention new and in good shape.
Keep smoking the crack.
And about that dyno flog...I work part time at my local dyno shop. It is not hard to get #'s out of modifications at all.
07-08-2004, 02:18 PM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: So.Cal on the Best coast
Posts: 866
Originally posted by CANTONRACER
And about that dyno flog...I work part time at my local dyno shop. It is not hard to get #'s out of modifications at all.
And about that dyno flog...I work part time at my local dyno shop. It is not hard to get #'s out of modifications at all.
Flogg ,didn't see no stinkin' flogg!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cmsmith
2016+ Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and General Discussion
2
04-11-2015 09:37 PM