Dyno Results are In... most bolt ons
02-18-2005, 11:20 AM
#1
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: AUSTIN TX
Posts: 855
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dyno Results are In... most bolt ons Well my car may not qualify for a freak, but I don't think its a puss either.
Dyno results are: 352.6 HP and 356 TQ
Dyno results were with the following mods:
Early 2000 T/A WS6 (manufactured 08/99 with the 853 heads), LS6 Intake, 28.8 lbs injectors, Jantzer ported T/B, Whisper lid, Fram filter, no AIR, no EGR, Kooks stainless stepped 1 3/4 - 1 7/8 ceramic coated headers, Kooks OR Y, Random Tech catback, Evans overdriven mechanical water pump, 160 stat, M6, McLeod twin with aluminum flywheel, Billingsley Racing 35 spline 9" w/locker and 4.11's, and strange C/M driveshaft, WS6 wheels with 285/40-17 KDW tires. That is about all I can think of, the only mods I do not have are under drive pulley, smooth bellows, different MAF (which I do have but was previously removed). This was done on a stock tune for the most part (only 2 changes were made, changed scale for the injectors, and tweaked a multilplier for the PE). I thought this was pretty good considering the the drivetrain which is supposed to rob some power and the fact that I am still using the stock heads which are said to flow less than the newer 2000 castings. What do you guys think?
Dyno results are: 352.6 HP and 356 TQ
Dyno results were with the following mods:
Early 2000 T/A WS6 (manufactured 08/99 with the 853 heads), LS6 Intake, 28.8 lbs injectors, Jantzer ported T/B, Whisper lid, Fram filter, no AIR, no EGR, Kooks stainless stepped 1 3/4 - 1 7/8 ceramic coated headers, Kooks OR Y, Random Tech catback, Evans overdriven mechanical water pump, 160 stat, M6, McLeod twin with aluminum flywheel, Billingsley Racing 35 spline 9" w/locker and 4.11's, and strange C/M driveshaft, WS6 wheels with 285/40-17 KDW tires. That is about all I can think of, the only mods I do not have are under drive pulley, smooth bellows, different MAF (which I do have but was previously removed). This was done on a stock tune for the most part (only 2 changes were made, changed scale for the injectors, and tweaked a multilplier for the PE). I thought this was pretty good considering the the drivetrain which is supposed to rob some power and the fact that I am still using the stock heads which are said to flow less than the newer 2000 castings. What do you guys think?
02-19-2005, 04:05 AM
#4
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: AUSTIN TX
Posts: 855
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jlaw
I think those are some nice numbers, especially with 853 castings through a 9" as you mentioned. Do you have a cutout?
02-19-2005, 04:12 AM
#5
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: AUSTIN TX
Posts: 855
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SAM98WS6
SAE corrected?
I am guessing that last figure is the correction factor, I just do not know if it added .01 to my actual numbers, or if my actual number is .01 higher than this. I suspect it added .01 to it from the way it is worded. In any event I guess the actual uncorrected HP number would be between 349 and 356.