LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

425 RWHP 383, what's holding me back???

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 9, 2003 | 09:02 PM
  #1  
neat's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 221
From: Raleigh, NC
425 RWHP 383, what's holding me back???

OK, here's what I got:

1992 corvette with LT1 based 383
SCAT 3.75" crank
6" eagle forged rods
Ross forged pistons (.030 over, 10:1)
Final compression is about 11:1 with block decking and head shaving
LT4 hotcam
Shorty headers
Port matched LT1 intake
30 lb SVO's with a custom tune
Heads flow about 270 at .600 lift

All that made 370 RWHP. I would really like to see 425 to the ground, so what's holding me back? I just picked up a bigger cam (.565/.576, 232/242, 114) and some longtubes, but I don't see those additions adding 60 RWHP. What do I need to do? Is it the heads? Would AFR 195's get me there? Help me out a bit guys, thanks.

Old Sep 9, 2003 | 09:31 PM
  #2  
CamaroBoy96Z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,356
From: Madison Heights, MI
That Hotcam is holding you back and you made the right move to pick up that bigger cam if you want more power. Those LTs should give you a large gain as well. Those 2 combined should put you well over the 400rwhp mark by themselves. AFRs probably wont net much more of a gain over your current heads but would help some. Try the bigger cam and LTs first and go from there.
Old Sep 9, 2003 | 09:37 PM
  #3  
CANTONRACER's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,764
From: North Canton, OH
Well, before you go shooting down the old hotcam, any data logs? AFR? How did the dyno graph look?

Take my last combo, did not dyno much, best was 359 rwhp, but made a lot of rwtq and ran times in the sig with the car weighing in I figure 3650.

I do agree on the LT's..but some guys have gotten some good #'s out of shorties...
Old Sep 9, 2003 | 09:45 PM
  #4  
neat's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 221
From: Raleigh, NC
Originally posted by CANTONRACER
Well, before you go shooting down the old hotcam, any data logs? AFR? How did the dyno graph look?


You can see the graph at the link in my sig. The AFR was a rock solid 13:1. iot made 383 RWTQ.


Take my last combo, did not dyno much, best was 359 rwhp, but made a lot of rwtq and ran times in the sig with the car weighing in I figure 3650.

I do agree on the LT's..but some guys have gotten some good #'s out of shorties...
The car turns excellent track times, but the power is just not there on the dyno. I know you don't race dyno's, but I think it would go much faster with some more power.
Old Sep 9, 2003 | 10:04 PM
  #5  
TreySpeed's Avatar
On permanent vacation
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 520
From: Michigan is a decent state.
.what heads are u running
Old Sep 9, 2003 | 11:22 PM
  #6  
neat's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 221
From: Raleigh, NC
They are Jones competition cylinder heads. I've never heard of them either, lol. The guy who built the engine uses a computer program to select cams. The program uses the head flow numbers, along with a bunch of other stuff. The cam I ordered is the one the program recommends, unfortunately the head flow numbers have been lost and only the recommended cam profile remains.

I'd rather not go through the R&R of the heads just to have them flowed, but I will if that's what I have to do.
Old Sep 9, 2003 | 11:25 PM
  #7  
TreySpeed's Avatar
On permanent vacation
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 520
From: Michigan is a decent state.
Originally posted by neat
They are Jones competition cylinder heads. I've never heard of them either, lol. The guy who built the engine uses a computer program to select cams. The program uses the head flow numbers, along with a bunch of other stuff. The cam I ordered is the one the program recommends, unfortunately the head flow numbers have been lost and only the recommended cam profile remains.

I'd rather not go through the R&R of the heads just to have them flowed, but I will if that's what I have to do.
Jones ported them

Could be the heads, could be the cam could be the tuning. I'd bet all 3
Old Sep 9, 2003 | 11:39 PM
  #8  
neat's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 221
From: Raleigh, NC
Lol, Jones is the brand.

The tune is on the money at WOT. Air/fuel is 13:1. I guess the timing could be low though...

Thanks.
Old Sep 9, 2003 | 11:43 PM
  #9  
TreySpeed's Avatar
On permanent vacation
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 520
From: Michigan is a decent state.
Originally posted by neat
Lol, Jones is the brand.

The tune is on the money at WOT. Air/fuel is 13:1. I guess the timing could be low though...

Thanks.
head flow can give you a good idea of how far to lift (although more lift is usually a good thing provided the valvetrain can handle it)

There are too many other issues. That pesky velocity you always hear about. If you have poor velocity, a cam with an earlier IVO might be a bad idea..

alot depends on goals and powerband "placement."
Thats about all i want/can say. I suggest talking to a pro.
www.cmotorsports.com is always great idea
Old Sep 9, 2003 | 11:48 PM
  #10  
96z's Avatar
96z
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,735
From: Buffalo, NY
I made the numbers in my sig with a small hydraulic roller and LT4's that flowed 280+ at .600. I do have long tubes also.

I would look to work with the hotcam for now. It is small IMO but more power could be found in supporting bolt ons, etc.
Old Sep 10, 2003 | 01:25 AM
  #11  
neat's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 221
From: Raleigh, NC
Originally posted by 96z
I made the numbers in my sig with a small hydraulic roller and LT4's that flowed 280+ at .600. I do have long tubes also.

I would look to work with the hotcam for now. It is small IMO but more power could be found in supporting bolt ons, etc.
Please define supporting bolt-ons... I can't think of much I don't have other than headers, and they are on the way. What else would I need to support what I've got?

Did you get my E-mail?

I've been dealing with cmotorsports all ready. I got the cam and springs from them. Great guys for sure.
Old Sep 10, 2003 | 12:34 PM
  #12  
96z's Avatar
96z
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,735
From: Buffalo, NY
No I didnt get your email. Send it to me again I just changed it yesterday.
Old Sep 10, 2003 | 01:13 PM
  #13  
Gripenfelter's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 3,647
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
I would say get a set of Hooker long tubes and a better cam.

I put down 378rwhp through a 700R4 and 3200 stall. Through a T56 that would have been 400rwhp.
Old Sep 10, 2003 | 05:11 PM
  #14  
7zark7's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 70
I'd say look at the heads before doing anything else. My 383 with stock compression made 407 rwhp with a camshaft that's smaller than a hot cam. And that's through a stalled automatic. With a stick it would be close to where you want to be.

Also you might want to look at some Hooker LTs as well.

Be careful when deciding to go with a bigger cam...if it's a daily driver you don't want to sacrifice a nice strong low/mid range just to get to a desired peak number. A good set of heads allows you to have both, strong low end and good top end power, all with a smaller cam that's much more friendly for the daily grind.
Old Sep 23, 2003 | 11:00 PM
  #15  
neat's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 221
From: Raleigh, NC
Hmmm. The cam has been sitting in my garage for a couple days now. I still need valve springs and a way to tune it. I sure hope the cam wakes it up a bit, I don't have the mod budget to do any head work. Wish me luck.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15 PM.