Hacked Dyno of stock vs CC306/stock heads
11-30-2003, 02:03 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,622
Hacked Dyno of stock vs CC306/stock heads
In a couple of my resent posts regarding the loss of low end with a cc306 and stock heads
Well I found a stock dyno (well K&N) and the dyno from the stock headed CC306 provided by xxsaint69x (hooker LTs, 1.6 RRs)
After I got both dynos I used PS to put the stock headed dyno run onto the stock car dyno. both dynos were SAE corrected dynojet.
I know this wont be perfect as its two different cars in different locations at different times, but for what I wanted I feel that it helped me enough.
I felt that enough people had the same questions as me so I feel that I should psot my graph that I made.
http://www.speedinc.ca/car/ws6comdyno306.jpg
the grey is the stock headed CC306
the numbers matched up pretty much perfect +/- ~2 from the transfer
Hope this helps someone else.
Well I found a stock dyno (well K&N) and the dyno from the stock headed CC306 provided by xxsaint69x (hooker LTs, 1.6 RRs)
After I got both dynos I used PS to put the stock headed dyno run onto the stock car dyno. both dynos were SAE corrected dynojet.
I know this wont be perfect as its two different cars in different locations at different times, but for what I wanted I feel that it helped me enough.
I felt that enough people had the same questions as me so I feel that I should psot my graph that I made.
http://www.speedinc.ca/car/ws6comdyno306.jpg
the grey is the stock headed CC306
the numbers matched up pretty much perfect +/- ~2 from the transfer
Hope this helps someone else.
11-30-2003, 02:12 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Posts: 558
interesting chart. Looks like the guy with cc306 needs more tuning, just some thought, he could contact madwolf who knows big cams pretty good (cc306, gm847)
. Also it looks like cc306 makes no power under 1700 rpms, which is not true, but I got ported heads. What I noticed in my car is that if I put a more restrictive exhaust, my car makes plenty power in lower rpms, but slows down in higher rpm's. However, when I put true duals with bullet mufflers, I don't even catch tach needle above 5000 rpms, car is flying like a ****. So now I am getting a cutout to have low rpm's power in the city, and higher rpm power for when I need it. 
. Also it looks like cc306 makes no power under 1700 rpms, which is not true, but I got ported heads. What I noticed in my car is that if I put a more restrictive exhaust, my car makes plenty power in lower rpms, but slows down in higher rpm's. However, when I put true duals with bullet mufflers, I don't even catch tach needle above 5000 rpms, car is flying like a ****. So now I am getting a cutout to have low rpm's power in the city, and higher rpm power for when I need it.
Last edited by tanker; 11-30-2003 at 02:15 PM.
11-30-2003, 02:41 PM
#4
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,622
The dyno started at different points (and ended as you can see to), I did my best, and I dont know if he has tunning, I'm sure he'll see and chime in for us.
but even bad tunning it answered my question of if under 3k rpm it has more or less power then stock.
If someone has a better or even an other dyno of a stock headed car with the CC306 (or I guess an other big cam) I can make that compairison too.
a stock and then cc306 with stock heads on the same car would be all too perfect.
but even bad tunning it answered my question of if under 3k rpm it has more or less power then stock.
If someone has a better or even an other dyno of a stock headed car with the CC306 (or I guess an other big cam) I can make that compairison too.
a stock and then cc306 with stock heads on the same car would be all too perfect.
11-30-2003, 03:20 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 3,068
Originally posted by tanker
interesting chart. Looks like the guy with cc306 needs more tuning, just some thought, he could contact madwolf who knows big cams pretty good (cc306, gm847). Also it looks like cc306 makes no power under 1700 rpms, which is not true, but I got ported heads. What I noticed in my car is that if I put a more restrictive exhaust, my car makes plenty power in lower rpms, but slows down in higher rpm's. However, when I put true duals with bullet mufflers, I don't even catch tach needle above 5000 rpms, car is flying like a ****. So now I am getting a cutout to have low rpm's power in the city, and higher rpm power for when I need it.
interesting chart. Looks like the guy with cc306 needs more tuning, just some thought, he could contact madwolf who knows big cams pretty good (cc306, gm847)
. Also it looks like cc306 makes no power under 1700 rpms, which is not true, but I got ported heads. What I noticed in my car is that if I put a more restrictive exhaust, my car makes plenty power in lower rpms, but slows down in higher rpm's. However, when I put true duals with bullet mufflers, I don't even catch tach needle above 5000 rpms, car is flying like a ****. So now I am getting a cutout to have low rpm's power in the city, and higher rpm power for when I need it.
11-30-2003, 05:11 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,591
Re: Hacked Dyno of stock vs CC306/stock heads
Originally posted by Xride
Well I found a stock dyno (well K&N)
Well I found a stock dyno (well K&N)
Ideally we would compare a dyno of hooker longtubes, and then with only the cam swapped. Someone HAS to have one somewhere .....
I wish i would have started my dyno a little lower like around 1800 rpms, but i started at 2600. I don't think mine drops off quite as hard as the 306 on the low end, but it also doesn't quite have the punch of the 306 at 6k rpms.
Nice job though on the paintshop hack
-brent
11-30-2003, 06:14 PM
#9
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,622
Re: Re: Hacked Dyno of stock vs CC306/stock heads
Originally posted by 94formulabz
It doesn't really matter, but that dyno looks more like a K&N + cutout dyno.
Nice job though on the paintshop hack
-brent
It doesn't really matter, but that dyno looks more like a K&N + cutout dyno.
Nice job though on the paintshop hack
-brent
But when I go to do it I'm going ot try my hardest to keep enough money to dyno at a few stages.
oh and it was photoshop
11-30-2003, 07:07 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,591
Originally posted by tanker
true, 350 hp is too much for stock heads, but I remember somebody on the board posting that he got almost 350 rwhp with cc306, stock heads, Hooker LT's, catback and a good tune.
I could speculate that xxsaint69x could get ~330 rwhp with a good wideband O2 tune on a dyno, just my $.02
true, 350 hp is too much for stock heads, but I remember somebody on the board posting that he got almost 350 rwhp with cc306, stock heads, Hooker LT's, catback and a good tune.
I could speculate that xxsaint69x could get ~330 rwhp with a good wideband O2 tune on a dyno, just my $.02
It was probaly marcin (xxxsaint69x) who yoru referenceing reading about. 330 rwhp??? He already has 350 rwhp (from tuning it on the dyno with a wideband himself i believe)
11-30-2003, 07:26 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,591
Re: Re: Re: Hacked Dyno of stock vs CC306/stock heads
Originally posted by Xride
Well I think it had a catback.... but again, I cant find a fully stock dyno, and I cant find dynos of in between stock and getting to the cc306 like jstu headers and stuff.
But when I go to do it I'm going ot try my hardest to keep enough money to dyno at a few stages.
oh and it was photoshop
Well I think it had a catback.... but again, I cant find a fully stock dyno, and I cant find dynos of in between stock and getting to the cc306 like jstu headers and stuff.
But when I go to do it I'm going ot try my hardest to keep enough money to dyno at a few stages.
oh and it was photoshop
Now that i recognize that is the ws6.com stock dyno, your right that is doesn't even have a catback. Most would agree though that its significantly higher then most peoples with JUST a K&N. They have the advantage of having perfomed those dyno pulls when the car was new and in perfect condition. I compliment them for being extremely carefull controlling the conditions like temperature for repeatability. Being at 5000 feet means that they probably have a hefty correction factor and that may also contribute to why their absolute numbers being slightly high stock. Just speculation though. And of course every dyno is a lil different
I'd love to have a dyno and perform all those progressive dynos. I couldn't afford to dyno my car just after my exhaust install
i had to wait for the exhaust plus cam vs stock (well close to it).I meant photoshop, paintshop is pretty weak, hehe.
-brent
11-30-2003, 07:37 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,591
yeah, what is going on here.
sorry, i thought you were tuning it yourself. Atljar did his own tuning, was i thinking of him? Not the stock tune though, just not a dynotune?
My main point was that you were already well above 330 I thought it was a smidge less then 350, i was actually just searching for your name to look at your dyno myself, hahaa.
-brent
sorry, i thought you were tuning it yourself. Atljar did his own tuning, was i thinking of him? Not the stock tune though, just not a dynotune?
My main point was that you were already well above 330
I thought it was a smidge less then 350, i was actually just searching for your name to look at your dyno myself, hahaa. -brent