bench dyno results- ai,le,afr w/ gm846(7),cc503,280xfi
08-06-2010, 05:36 PM
#1
bench dyno results- ai,le,afr w/ gm846(7),cc503,280xfi Let me get the DISCLAIMER out of the way first. I'm not implying anything as to what is better or not doing this analysis, I did it purely for fun and as a learning experience for myself on how head flow and cam selection can impact performance. Going through this was fun and interesting experience. Now that the disclaimer is out of the way...
I got bored and fired up engine analyzer pro v3.9 to demo it and see if it's accurate. I tried to replicate the conditions to produce the same results that GM high tech did on their LT1 comparison where the AFR headed 383 made 515hp on the dyno. After I was able to get that pretty close, I then setup a 355lt1 and used my own dyno results to test it and it was pretty close (my original dyno was 356, this came up with about 360 so close enough).
I then also loaded the parameters for a stock car to get a baseline avg of 221hp/276tq (lt1 stock cam/tb/exhaust,170cc head 1.94/1.5 valves,stock water pump, stock flywheel)
Here are my assumptions for testing:
1)355 lt1 (4.03/3.48/5.7)
2) electric w/p
3) used SAE Conds (77deg, 29.6")
4) coolant at 180
5) chassis dyno loss at 18%
6) starting from 2500-6500
7) 93 octane
8) fuel and spark left default for best power
9) LPP headers through full exhaust
10) 1.6RR
11) 58MM intake (left defaults on intake)
I held the 11 assumptions constant as I changed the different head/cam combos. The results below are based on the above assumptions,
For cylinder head flow #s, I did some quick digging on AI site, LE results posted on here and AFR site. For cam specs, I used comp cams website or crane to get the 846/847 #'s to match.
Ok, so here are the results of my fun. I'd be curious if anyone else tried or if you can get me better info on the intake/LPPs or any other parameters for this software to try to get this more accurate. I still feel like I might be missing something as the results are all pretty consistently in the same range.
I couldn't hide some of the columns so ignore the increase values as they are just comparison to the run below it.
I got bored and fired up engine analyzer pro v3.9 to demo it and see if it's accurate. I tried to replicate the conditions to produce the same results that GM high tech did on their LT1 comparison where the AFR headed 383 made 515hp on the dyno. After I was able to get that pretty close, I then setup a 355lt1 and used my own dyno results to test it and it was pretty close (my original dyno was 356, this came up with about 360 so close enough).
I then also loaded the parameters for a stock car to get a baseline avg of 221hp/276tq (lt1 stock cam/tb/exhaust,170cc head 1.94/1.5 valves,stock water pump, stock flywheel)
Here are my assumptions for testing:
1)355 lt1 (4.03/3.48/5.7)
2) electric w/p
3) used SAE Conds (77deg, 29.6")
4) coolant at 180
5) chassis dyno loss at 18%
6) starting from 2500-6500
7) 93 octane
8) fuel and spark left default for best power
9) LPP headers through full exhaust
10) 1.6RR
11) 58MM intake (left defaults on intake)
I held the 11 assumptions constant as I changed the different head/cam combos. The results below are based on the above assumptions,
For cylinder head flow #s, I did some quick digging on AI site, LE results posted on here and AFR site. For cam specs, I used comp cams website or crane to get the 846/847 #'s to match.
Ok, so here are the results of my fun. I'd be curious if anyone else tried or if you can get me better info on the intake/LPPs or any other parameters for this software to try to get this more accurate. I still feel like I might be missing something as the results are all pretty consistently in the same range.
I couldn't hide some of the columns so ignore the increase values as they are just comparison to the run below it.
08-06-2010, 05:48 PM
#2
TECH Addict
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: limbo
Posts: 2,124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you should plug in some 21* TFS and some stageII TEA heads too just for the hell of it. considering everythings basically the same I doubt how accurate that program is tho, but its good for a ballpark I imagine..
03-14-2011, 08:59 PM
#6
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WTF???^^
I praise anybody who looks beyond the "interwebs" for info...
Sure it might not be very accurate but many people can guess, within a good amount, of what a motor with such and such cam/head/intake/displacement combo will produce.
Saying this thread is a fail is just plain stupid... and keeps people from trying to apply tools to help them decide between options they have, and sharing any info they "might" have found..
whether done accurately or not it's still interesting...
I praise anybody who looks beyond the "interwebs" for info...
Sure it might not be very accurate but many people can guess, within a good amount, of what a motor with such and such cam/head/intake/displacement combo will produce.
Saying this thread is a fail is just plain stupid... and keeps people from trying to apply tools to help them decide between options they have, and sharing any info they "might" have found..
whether done accurately or not it's still interesting...
