bgoins11 Trans Am

The numbers look alittle low to me!! I know dyno's are different but I dynoed at 305 rwhp / 338 rwtq with the mods in sig.


Brad

RealQuick

Did you buy your car used with mods, or was it stock. MPH and dyno is awefully high for mods. Maybe you got a roller rockers too, mods you cant see.

chesee48

bgoins-those are pretty sweet number IMO

96Z28SS

I just saw this post and just wanted to clear up some confusion. The total job was $1300 NOT just the cam swap. The cam swap is typically around 10 hours to do. The remaining time was cleaning up the heads, which needed all new valve seals, new springs, rockers, etc. The water pump was replaced, new coil was put in, a new optispark, new wires, new timing chain and gears, fixing the oil pan gasket leak, dyno testing and miscellaneous parts.


Rob

sleeperZ96BT

hey man, i was at the dyno day when you orignally dynod your 270ish. let me ask you a question. where did you make your peak power pre-cam kit? 5200 or so? what about after your cam kit? 6k? 35 hp in only what changed in regards to your peak number. do me a favor, take your new peak power, say 305@6k and take your non-cam kit power @6k and subtract it. ijm guessing that youll prolly see 50-60hp which would be more consistent with the normal power increase. people forget that peak numbers are peak numbers and while they look nice thats not all that matters. broad powerbands as well as WHERE you got your gains at are more important IMO. heres an example as to what im talking about:

stock dyno: 260rwhp@5k
FLP's, MAC catback, 52mm TB, CAI, UD pulley: 295rwhp@5500
did i gain 35 rwhp? sure i did, in peak talk only. at 5500 stock i was down to about 245rwhp or so. so did i gain 50rwhp? maybe. by 6k i was at 285rwhp while stock i was down to about 225rwhp or so. so at one point (6k) i gained 60rwhp........which one is accurrate, who knows. (numbers are approximations, but close to reality).

maybe you could look at your charts and give us a 'play by play' on how your curves changed and where your new peak was as well as where you gained your most power etc...that might be very helpful to those who are weirded out by the 35rwhp number. all that matters is that you are happy!
brian
BTW, those numbers are corrected, the dyno is a dynojet and the place that did the install is VERY reputable and doesnt screw ANYONE. i know theres a great chance ill be taking my car to get my cam done when i get it in.

95TA8280

That's what I was telling people before, that the cam was around $1000 and the rest for parts, dyno, etc.....

As far as my curves go, pre cam my peak was around 5200....after the cam my peak was around the same........if I'm reading it right.....I will try to go to Staples this weekend and get it scanned and if someone can host it I'll try to get it on the board.

As for my A/F, at around 4100 RPMs its at 13, and then takes a dive down so when it's at 5200 it's around 11. So with a tune hopefully they'll be fixed.

95TA8280

I know Dean (the guy who dyno's) clicked on the corrected numbers on the computer and it came up at 315. I didn't get a graph or anything like that, but the corrected was 315. I assumed that wasn't as accurate as what my car actually did, so I just kept the 305.

RealQuick

Hey bro, I remember you now. I was at the dyno day too recently. I told you about my Z and that it made 301rwhp. You told me you got a flat tire on the way up right?

LT1Brutus

If you aren't reading it wrong then something is up. Every stock headed car I've put a Hotcam in made peak power @ 6,000rpms+. IN my case, since I have heads, my peak is @ 6300-6400. You may be getting valve float from overtightened roller rockers, possibly you aren't firing properly in the higher rpms, or possibly you need some more spark. Are you running an ignition system? I also guess its a possibility that your tuning is causing this. Also I think you mentioned you don't have an LT4KM. If that's the case, my car was picking up 3.7* of knock retard from 4500rpms up and it was killing my power. It picked up 4mph after the KM was installed. Other possibilities are that you need to check your TPS setting and make sure that you're getting 100% when you completely open the throttle. I seen quite a few stock cars that were only getting readings of 90%-97%. The tps is how the computer knows to administer fuel and handle timing.
As for people expecting over 35hp gain from just a rather mild cam....I think your conception of the facts is somewhat distorted. You can slap a CC306 in there for all I care, unless you've got the intake, spark, programming, and exhaust to back it up, you won't gain much. On high mile cars, 50 and 60hp gains are seen only because their valve springs are SO worn out that they're already down 20-30hp. Factor that and the amount of slop in the timing chain that most cars over 90K miles have and you get big gains. There's other things people claiming those kinds of gains aren't telling you. If the car had a stock tune, bad wires, a bad coil, soft springs, stock logs, and original plugs in it before hand, of course they're gonna see a bigger gain. What cracks me up is people claim 50-60-70hp just from a cam but don't say, "Well, I also added a mezierre water pump (9hp), a 52-58mm TB (5-20hp), hours of dyno tweaking for absolute maximum output, replaced my bent-azz springs, rebuilt the heads w/ swirl polished valves, put long tubes on it, cut out the cat, port matched the intake, and through a set of pullies on while they were down there.
30-40 peak hp is nice, but when I look at my curve, from 2,000-5,900rpms (that's where I shifted the motor before) I'm making an average of 87 more hp. Now of course that 87 will be more like 47 for a stock-headed car. The real fun starts at 6Krpms, where the old setup was beyond it's optimal range and had even reached valve-float.
If you want to look at track numbers vs. hp gained that's a whole new can of whoop-**** too. Most stock-headed cars that I've put an LT4 Hotcam in have picked up between .55 and .81 seconds in the 1/4 mile. This is once tuning is done and traction issues are solved (via DRs). 4 cars now have gained over .7. Go grab a "30-hp" bolt-on and try to pick up that kind of time.
As for anyone saying that if you're getting head-work you shouldn't even bother w/ the LT4 Hotcam, the hotcam still gives me 20+mpg and I picked up 1.3seconds and 12mph in the 1/4.

bgoins11 Trans Am

Car was stock when I got it!!


Brad

FastZinTennessee

Glad to hear that!! Ive pretty much decided on the HOTcam, because mostly I'm a cheap bastard

My current mods are in the sig, here are specs on the heads I'm working on- fully ported, chambers and exhaust polished, 2.00x1.57 valves, milled to bring compression back around to stock. I'll also be port matching the intake manifold. You've actually see an LT1 with bolt ons like me and heads and HOTcam pick up 1.3 seconds and 12mph

John

95CamaroZ-28

This question was never addressed. So, what was wrong with it? The timing cover for the vented opti should have been the cover that was needed. Also, I hope you were not charged extra for: "water pump was replaced, new coil was put in, a new optispark...new timing chain and gears". All of these items should have came off to do the cam swap so it was no extra effort to put on the new parts. Maybe not the coil, but give me a break, removing a couple of wires and bolts shouldn't really be an extra charge when you're already giving $1000 for a cam install.

sleeperZ96BT

5200 is WAYYYY low, my buddy has the hotcam and hes in the 6200 range for peak hp on an impala SS, and its similar powerwise through an A4, i think its like 305-310 rwhp so your numbers are right on, just the range is off..... that kit comes with new springs, so id assume he shouldnt be hitting valve float, although its possible. as for the corrected/uncorrected debate, the number you get from the dynojet initially IS corrected, if her clicked that means he showd you the UNCORRECTED number which has been slightly higher in every case i have seen it used. post those graphs!
brian

Cman

ok, you're right mine doesn't say corrected like yours (been a while since I went to the site to check the graph) but that doesn't matter. If he's using a dynojet all measurements are SAE corrected when he/she prints out the graph. There is another dyno system call "mustang dyno" that supposedly is more "realistic" if you can call it that. Most people that dyno on a mustang dyno usually have lower #'s than at a dynojet dyno. I'm not sure why maybe someone can chime in on that one. I don't think there's a mustang dyno here in TO, if there is I'd like a crack on that sucker with my ride.

Yep, getting a LT4 KM on there should be the first thing you should do to see if knock is affecting your #'s, anybody thinking about modifying these cars should've had that done as one of the first bolt-ons.

Brutus, I agree with what you said about some people "claiming" big gains from bolt-ons and cam swaps after they "freshen" up the various other parts in order to make the mods work better, but shouldn't one be aware of the state of tune of their vehicles before doing mods? If the car is so bad tune wise why do mods and then say "I got this MAJOR increase from bolt-on A but I had to install and/or replace item B,C,D,E,F to give me the gain I noticed/felt, got on the dyno from bolt-on A"?

However, I don't think my facts are distorted, the original poster has installed all the parts necessary AWA the cam therefore he should have higher #'s than I who only has done the valvetrain mods that I have but with a stk. cam (and I have similiar #'s to him). I know my car is 100% tune wise, if I decide to do a cam (whether it's the hotcam or any other one) the #'s would be higher without any major dynotuning time and more money spent. With the price of mods for these cars you would hope that your hard earned bucks spent modifying these cars should pay off with expected gains without the need to shell out more dough to make them work.

max929

You have a custom burned chip or moded computer?