LS7 Cam Doctor results...
12-28-2005, 07:20 PM
#21
Originally Posted by slt200mph
A few of my customers have dynoed their bone stock C6 Z06 and they are making 455-460 RWHP..so GM is real conservitive on the 505 FWHP..looks like they are making about 535 FWHP give or take a little at the crank.
C6 shouldn't be very far from this.
Wouldn't that put the C6-Z06 closer to 505?
12-28-2005, 11:16 PM
#22
Teching In
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by slt200mph
That is a little baby cam..the car idles a 600 RPM and has no vibration at all..can't even tell it is running..you can use the new Z06 as a around town dailey driver if you want to ..a very docile car till you put your foot in it...now on the other hand put a 254\254 .630\.630 110 LSA in it and watch what happens...that a long with a set of long tubes and a good exhaust system with a custom tune and it makes 640 + HP at the crank all day long... 
I agree that the cam is small but, my car bumps around pretty good at the stop light. You can definitely hear the cam. I've had many people comment about the sound. I have the LG long tubes with an exhaust switch. I'm sure that helps a little. Even when it was stock (2 weeks ago) you could hear and feel the cam.
The car pulls like a jet airplane taking off in every gear.
Take care,
Dave
12-29-2005, 12:02 AM
#23
Originally Posted by Bink
Doesn't an M6 C5 usually drop about 40 - 45 HP from the crank to the rear wheels??
C6 shouldn't be very far from this.
Wouldn't that put the C6-Z06 closer to 505?
C6 shouldn't be very far from this.
Wouldn't that put the C6-Z06 closer to 505?
12-29-2005, 12:50 AM
#24
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: World
Posts: 1,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Christos
wow 210? thats a tiny peanut. someone toss a cam in a ls7 and show the results!
Thank me after you clean up the mess on your keyboard.
12-29-2005, 06:24 AM
#25
Originally Posted by DocEwww
No, because drivetrain lose is a %, not definite rwhp number.
You're saying that as I increase the HP of an engine (mod it ), at the flywheel, the parasitic losses increase also??
12-29-2005, 08:03 AM
#26
Originally Posted by Bink
Doesn't an M6 C5 usually drop about 40 - 45 HP from the crank to the rear wheels??
C6 shouldn't be very far from this.
Wouldn't that put the C6-Z06 closer to 505?
C6 shouldn't be very far from this.
Wouldn't that put the C6-Z06 closer to 505?
The loss from the flywheel to the rear wheels is usually in the 12 % to 15 % range. If you use a 15% loss from the flywheel to the rear wheels my math is correct...15% of 535 is 80..now subtract that from 535 and you have 455...so the LS 7 is making around 535-540 FWHP to be putting 455-460 to the the rear wheels.
12-29-2005, 12:14 PM
#27
Originally Posted by slt200mph
The loss from the flywheel to the rear wheels is usually in the 12 % to 15 % range. If you use a 15% loss from the flywheel to the rear wheels my math is correct...15% of 535 is 80..now subtract that from 535 and you have 455...so the LS 7 is making around 535-540 FWHP to be putting 455-460 to the the rear wheels.
But you cannot base your computations on a loosely held estimate of RWHP. The drivetrain losses of these cars are known.
The losses do not increase just because the HP does- for a given vehicle.
I doubt the C6 losses exceed the C5 by much if at all.
12-29-2005, 12:48 PM
#28
Originally Posted by Bink
Your math is correct.
But you cannot base your computations on a loosely held estimate of RWHP. The drivetrain losses of these cars are known.
The losses do not increase just because the HP does- for a given vehicle.
I doubt the C6 losses exceed the C5 by much if at all.
But you cannot base your computations on a loosely held estimate of RWHP. The drivetrain losses of these cars are known.
The losses do not increase just because the HP does- for a given vehicle.
I doubt the C6 losses exceed the C5 by much if at all.
Ok here is one for ya..Hot Rod Magazine just did a dyno test on a LS7 crate motor and it made 540 HP at the flywheel..what a coincedense...
12-29-2005, 03:45 PM
#32
Originally Posted by slt200mph
Ok here is one for ya..Hot Rod Magazine just did a dyno test on a LS7 crate motor and it made 540 HP at the flywheel..what a coincedense...
Last edited by Bink; 12-29-2005 at 04:05 PM.
12-29-2005, 04:20 PM
#33
Teching In
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chassis dyno Bink is right... % losses do not work. You also need to consider that all chassis dyno's are not the same.
Hot Rod probably dyno'd with headers, a better induction, and no back pressure.
They make 505 SAE (J-1349)HP on an engine dyno in completely stock form.
Hot Rod probably dyno'd with headers, a better induction, and no back pressure.
They make 505 SAE (J-1349)HP on an engine dyno in completely stock form.
12-29-2005, 11:55 PM
#36
a few questions Bill, if u dont mind
can this cam be used in a conventional
ls1 engine?
does it have the reluctor ring at the rear of cam?
is the LS2 timing sprocket and front sensor needed to run this cam
in a ls1 with the stock sensor in the "distributor hole"
i am intersted in the cam because i understand its under
200$
looks good for a budget FI cam
can this cam be used in a conventional
ls1 engine?
does it have the reluctor ring at the rear of cam?
is the LS2 timing sprocket and front sensor needed to run this cam
in a ls1 with the stock sensor in the "distributor hole"
i am intersted in the cam because i understand its under
200$
looks good for a budget FI cam
12-30-2005, 02:04 PM
#38
TECH Regular
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Paynful
Bink is right... % losses do not work. ...
12-30-2005, 02:32 PM
#39
Originally Posted by Bink
What the LS7 puts down (or out) isn't the point. The failed assumption that you can reverse calculate 10 - 15% of any HP rating is the point.
Try reading the article in HOT ROD..the dyno test on the stock LS7 crate motor with stock exhaust manifolds no cats no mufflers produced 546 FWHP..knock off 20 or so for the no cats and no mufflers and you are at the number I posted..that is the point ! ... I said that these motors were way under rated and the are..happy phuchin new year
12-30-2005, 03:26 PM
#40
On The Tree
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, the thumbnail Gollum posted shows a Stage 3 cam w/ .050" numbers of 233 intake vs. 276 exhaust, I have never seen such a huge split before. I guess the exhaust side is really compromised to allow for the largest possible intake valve and angle.