355 (LE1 cam/LE2 heads) LT1 is complete. Final dyno numbers inside.
Just to play devil's advocate here... that chart doesnt show much of a comparison in my mind. Looks like each curve compared had significantly different A/F lines... that makes a big difference. You need the same dialed in A/F lines, then compare the curves of hp/tq.
All I am saying is that the tune might be a bigger contributor in the final numbers instead of cam vs cam.
All I am saying is that the tune might be a bigger contributor in the final numbers instead of cam vs cam.
Just to play devil's advocate here... that chart doesnt show much of a comparison in my mind. Looks like each curve compared had significantly different A/F lines... that makes a big difference. You need the same dialed in A/F lines, then compare the curves of hp/tq.
All I am saying is that the tune might be a bigger contributor in the final numbers instead of cam vs cam.
All I am saying is that the tune might be a bigger contributor in the final numbers instead of cam vs cam.
It does appear that from 5.5K RPM up the difference is .3 leaner on the new cam.
Can that make that big of a difference?
Last edited by wrd1972; Aug 18, 2008 at 10:44 AM.
Thats part of the problem I am talking about. you dont want the same tune... you want the same A/F reading... the tunes should be different when you swap out a cam.
Perhaps not as much difference as the low rpm stuff. You are off almost a full point in A/F down low, where Lloyd's new cam is looking better. You need to fix the A/F and see if that bring the two cam's curves closer together.
Not saying one cam is better than the other... just want to compare apples to apples.
Great #'s BTW!
Not saying one cam is better than the other... just want to compare apples to apples.
Great #'s BTW!
if we could have got all the bugs worked out of the old set up we might have seen these same dyno results. This motor just needs more spring pressure than others for some reason, maybe lifter bores needed/chamfering or maybe not 100% concentric with the way they should be . . . hmmm . . . . not sure but I am glad it is all worked out.
12.20s 
Get those ETSRs nice and warm, remember to check tire pressure before each run.
You'll probably end up somewhere between 18 and 22 psi depending how hard it launches.
You're on stock suspension right?
You'll get better times a little later in the year when it gets colder.
Combine that with some drag shocks and you'll be in the 11s without much trouble at all.

Get those ETSRs nice and warm, remember to check tire pressure before each run.
You'll probably end up somewhere between 18 and 22 psi depending how hard it launches.
You're on stock suspension right?
You'll get better times a little later in the year when it gets colder.
Combine that with some drag shocks and you'll be in the 11s without much trouble at all.
Last edited by user 647483; Sep 18, 2008 at 09:35 PM.
Tubular LCA's, relocation brackets (built in to the Midwest rearend) and tubular tunnel mount torque arm are the aftermarket suspension. Still on the stock springs and shocks but I am going to disconnect the swaybar.
I am expecting mid 12's. If I can drive it right it should go low 12's.
I am expecting mid 12's. If I can drive it right it should go low 12's.
Hey all.
I went to the track on Friday and made four runs.
Three runs were consistant 13.1 and one was a dog from missing a gear. Of course 13.1 is a dog too (considering 410RWHP) but you have to see the rest of the picture. The 60 foot times were 2.1 each time.
I had the MT DR's on the salad shooters and they were biting extremely well on prepped track. I dumped the clutch at 4500 RPM and the tires barely broke loose then the motor would bog down to 1800 RPM then have to rev back up on through first gear. I had my Datamaster data logger going during the run and saw some interesting things. I dumped the clutch at ~500RPM and that was not much better.
Again I dumped the clutch at 4500-5000 RPM and it took ~2.5 seconds for the motor to go from the lowest bog down point of 1800 RPM back up to 4500-5000 RPM with no tires spinning on through first gear. Makes me only wonder what would happen on a good or even excellent launch when the motor stays in the power band.
Another interesting thing.
If you count the point were I was ready to launch at 4500 RPM to the point were the bog down bottomed out, that was 1 full second. If I had easy launched the car out at 1800 RPM I think I would have negated most of that full second since the motor would not have bog down from a 4500 RPM launch like had been ocurring. There is no doubt in my mind this would have been in the 12's.
According to my data logger, I have launched faster on street tires on the street than I did with DR's at the strip. I think if I had my street tires on at the strip, I would have easily made it into the mid to high 12's.
All this being said, its mostly my lack of ability and experience driving the car that caused the **** poor 13.1 ET runs. I am going to have to launch the thing much higher than 4500 RPM to ensure that I don't get any major bog down off the line in order to get the mid to low 12 second ET's that the motor is clearly able to provide.
Also instead of running 18# of air in the DR tires, I would have been better off leaving them at 30# or so in order to reduce the traction and allow them to spin more. Bottom line it ran 13.1 @107 while being bogged down like a big dog every time off the line.
Here is the datalog:
I went to the track on Friday and made four runs.
Three runs were consistant 13.1 and one was a dog from missing a gear. Of course 13.1 is a dog too (considering 410RWHP) but you have to see the rest of the picture. The 60 foot times were 2.1 each time.
I had the MT DR's on the salad shooters and they were biting extremely well on prepped track. I dumped the clutch at 4500 RPM and the tires barely broke loose then the motor would bog down to 1800 RPM then have to rev back up on through first gear. I had my Datamaster data logger going during the run and saw some interesting things. I dumped the clutch at ~500RPM and that was not much better.
Again I dumped the clutch at 4500-5000 RPM and it took ~2.5 seconds for the motor to go from the lowest bog down point of 1800 RPM back up to 4500-5000 RPM with no tires spinning on through first gear. Makes me only wonder what would happen on a good or even excellent launch when the motor stays in the power band.
Another interesting thing.
If you count the point were I was ready to launch at 4500 RPM to the point were the bog down bottomed out, that was 1 full second. If I had easy launched the car out at 1800 RPM I think I would have negated most of that full second since the motor would not have bog down from a 4500 RPM launch like had been ocurring. There is no doubt in my mind this would have been in the 12's.
According to my data logger, I have launched faster on street tires on the street than I did with DR's at the strip. I think if I had my street tires on at the strip, I would have easily made it into the mid to high 12's.
All this being said, its mostly my lack of ability and experience driving the car that caused the **** poor 13.1 ET runs. I am going to have to launch the thing much higher than 4500 RPM to ensure that I don't get any major bog down off the line in order to get the mid to low 12 second ET's that the motor is clearly able to provide.
Also instead of running 18# of air in the DR tires, I would have been better off leaving them at 30# or so in order to reduce the traction and allow them to spin more. Bottom line it ran 13.1 @107 while being bogged down like a big dog every time off the line.
Here is the datalog:
looks like you need a jockey....
Also if you took of from a dead idle in 4th gear it should still get better m.p.h than that......
We have a junk *** thrown together with spare parts Lt1 car that runs 110 with cam only...its full weight etc.
Something is wrong....410 h.p. and 107 mph do not add up
Also if you took of from a dead idle in 4th gear it should still get better m.p.h than that......
We have a junk *** thrown together with spare parts Lt1 car that runs 110 with cam only...its full weight etc.
Something is wrong....410 h.p. and 107 mph do not add up
looks like you need a jockey....
Also if you took of from a dead idle in 4th gear it should still get better m.p.h than that......
We have a junk *** thrown together with spare parts Lt1 car that runs 110 with cam only...its full weight etc.
Something is wrong....410 h.p. and 107 mph do not add up
Also if you took of from a dead idle in 4th gear it should still get better m.p.h than that......
We have a junk *** thrown together with spare parts Lt1 car that runs 110 with cam only...its full weight etc.
Something is wrong....410 h.p. and 107 mph do not add up
Here is my next plan of attack. Get the 4.10's installed, air the DR's up to 30# and skip the waterbox. Dump it at 5-5.5K RPM and let it fly.
Even the DR's on the street dumped at 4.5K will spin a considerable bit as compared to the strip.
And let me say again. This is the first time I have ever driven this car at the strip plus the first time I have ever driven on DR's. The last time I went to the strip was 1991. Maybe things will be better next time. I think someone with much more M6 seat time at thestrip would do far better than me.
Last edited by wrd1972; Sep 22, 2008 at 07:52 PM.
don't pass the water box.
The tires are sticky as it is. the burnout is to clean the tire of rocks and get the water off.
If you have big *** fronts with tread they will track water up to the line.
I wouldn't air them up over 22 either. If you want it to run be brave and dump it hard. Consider letting someone else drive it? Not a buddy or something but someone that knows how to drive good.
Good luck.
The tires are sticky as it is. the burnout is to clean the tire of rocks and get the water off.
If you have big *** fronts with tread they will track water up to the line.
I wouldn't air them up over 22 either. If you want it to run be brave and dump it hard. Consider letting someone else drive it? Not a buddy or something but someone that knows how to drive good.
Good luck.


