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

Back from dyno after my mods

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 04:14 PM
  #1  
NVetro's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,439
From: New Jersey
Back from dyno after my mods

Hey all. I just got back from the dyno for the first time since I added my mods. I am pretty satisfied i guess. I put down: 309.8rwhp 348.9rwtq.

Before I did my Jet Hot long tubes, SLP Loudmouth, and Hooker Y-pipe (no cats). I put down 283rwhp 324rwtq (only mods were gutted cat, intake, and stage 2 clutch w/ billet flywheel). So I jumped roughly 27 hp and 25 tq. What do you all think from just adding those 3 mods?

Here is the dyno sheet, i should have kept going, fbody fuged up tach strikes agian! Post away.

http://www.webideas.net/94transam/newdyno.jpg
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 04:24 PM
  #2  
ibanez6rg's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,579
From: Cincinnati, OH
I'd be satisfied.
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 04:26 PM
  #3  
drewstealth's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,623
From: Fairfield, ca
Well the numbers looks pretty good. I think that you dyno'ed sort of high the first time out. You got a pretty good gain with the lt's and catback. Are those #'s still uncorrected #'s?
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 05:02 PM
  #4  
NVetro's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,439
From: New Jersey
Those are actual HP numbers, not SAE. I didn't want SAE, can care less what I would run at 1500 feet elevation We are at sea level here.
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 05:22 PM
  #5  
LPEdave's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,007
From: Folsom, CA, USA
Originally posted by NVetro
Those are actual HP numbers, not SAE. I didn't want SAE, can care less what I would run at 1500 feet elevation We are at sea level here.
Ah, but then you can't compare this dyno to your previous one. It could have just been a colder day out, for example. The whole point with startardizing them is to be able to compare between dyno runs and see whether anything's getting better.

Dave
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 05:28 PM
  #6  
drewstealth's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,623
From: Fairfield, ca
his old one was uncorrected i believe also.
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 05:35 PM
  #7  
LPEdave's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,007
From: Folsom, CA, USA
Originally posted by drewstealth
his old one was uncorrected i believe also.
Yep, that's what I understood. But unless all the weather characteristics were identical, those two dynos would have had different correction factors, so the raw data isn't comparable.

Dave
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 07:37 PM
  #8  
NVetro's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,439
From: New Jersey
I personaly think RAW numbers at that moment in time is all that matters doesn't it? I mean if you want to compare with people on the board then I guess SAE is good, or if one guy dynos in the summer and another in the winter. Raw > SAE
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 07:45 PM
  #9  
LPEdave's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,007
From: Folsom, CA, USA
Originally posted by NVetro
I personaly think RAW numbers at that moment in time is all that matters doesn't it? I mean if you want to compare with people on the board then I guess SAE is good, or if one guy dynos in the summer and another in the winter. Raw > SAE
Depends on what you're looking for. If you want to know how much power your car is putting out at this very instant, then sure, use those uncorrected numbers (and see if you can find a guy who runs a dyno inside a freezer ). But if you want to compare to your previous dyno sheet, or someone elses, then you've got to correct.

Dave
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 07:49 PM
  #10  
PredatorZ28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 749
From: cali,chino
nice
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 08:29 PM
  #11  
ChrisUlrich's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,668
From: Cliffside Park, NJ
Yo

I was there at the dyno this time, it ruled...

ok, anyway

He said it was about 50 degrees out last time, and it was about the same today.

His car is very loud.

His car sounds really good... :-)

Anyone else have his setup? Because then their car would sound good too.

I wonder if that person who get ticketed for noise pollution too.

Are there any other headers out there that would do similar gains and produce less volume? If not, whatever... I just want to ATTEMPT to avoid getting noise violations.
Old Jan 4, 2004 | 12:11 AM
  #12  
ibanez6rg's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,579
From: Cincinnati, OH
Originally posted by ChrisUlrich
Yo

His car is very loud.
That doesn't even begin to describe how loud it is.
Old Jan 4, 2004 | 10:21 AM
  #13  
NVetro's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,439
From: New Jersey
Yea she is loud, to loud hahaha. But as for Raw vs SAE numbers. I know the diffrences, but im part of the raw number crowd i guess. Also yea, my numbers before and after mods were all raw. Maybe ill do an SAE for the hell of it. But for some reason, I will prob only score 300rwhp on an SAE. Do you think that is low for my mods? Cus I did 310 and it was like 50 deg and at sea level, SAE is like 70deg and 1500 feet elevation right? Ya know what, I am looking at the chart and im pissed http://www.webideas.net/94transam/newdyno.jpg I should have kept going rather then looking at the fuged up fbody tach. I saw on my tach 6k and I left off, Dyno is reading 5300 roughly, and from what I can see it was still climing. Screw this! Im going back, there are a few more ponies to be had!!! What you all think, how much can those 700 rpms bring?

Last edited by NVetro; Jan 4, 2004 at 10:26 AM.
Old Jan 4, 2004 | 11:04 AM
  #14  
brain's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 746
From: Columbia, SC, USA
You might pick up 1 or 2 from those extra rpms. My car peaked right at 5000, and carried it to about 5400 rpms before it started to go down again. Just so you know, if you want SAE numbers, you don't have to dyno again, just have them print one out in SAE correction. I would estimate right at 300. My car did 300 SAE and I just looked at the Actual numbers, it was 310. I do think you are fooling yourself if all you think about is the raw numbers tho. You will keep wondering why it takes you more power to run the same as everyone else. But, if a high number is all you care about, go for it.
On another note, I am surprised some dyno operators let people drive their own cars on the dyno. I'd rather have a professional that does it everyday guarantee that I'm getting my moneys worth. But yep, my tach is about 400 rpms off, even at 2000 rpms!

Good numbers! Guess the Hooker and JetHot are pretty similar in power production. Only difference I have is true duals, but I'm sure its overkill. 3" pipe all the way. I had to be different, I've always hated how f-bodys sounded like a z71. Boy its different now. Much better IMHO.
Old Jan 5, 2004 | 06:47 AM
  #15  
SaxRulez's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 23
From: Ft. Bragg, NC
Originally posted by brain

Good numbers! Guess the Hooker and JetHot are pretty similar in power production. Only difference I have is true duals, but I'm sure its overkill. 3" pipe all the way. I had to be different, I've always hated how f-bodys sounded like a z71. Boy its different now. Much better IMHO.
where'd you get your true duals at?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:10 AM.