Dynamometer Results & Comparisons - Stock internal LS1 N/A H.P. record breaker?




armyboyatc
06-05-2012, 08:11 PM
So after much work my car finally had its day on the dyno. Nothing that touches oil has been touched. Car has 2 tunes, 1 for 93 and 1 for E85.

Car is a 1999 Camaro SS M6.

Engine Mods:
FAST 4150
Vic Junior intake
60lb injectors
Jegs UDP
eBay stainless steel long tubes (wrapped)
Texas Speed true dual exhaust

Tuned by Justin at Gulf Coast Motor Works in Naples, FL.

Stock 6 speed trans. 4.10 gears. 10 bolt.

Here is the dyno graph of the car. The higher of the 2 is the E85 tune. This is a dynojet dyno.
http://i431.photobucket.com/albums/qq31/ArmyBoyATC/1338938445.jpg

Std correction numbers:
393.86hp 378.64 tq

Is this a record breaker? We should start a list to keep track.


z28241
06-05-2012, 08:44 PM
Very sout! Are u the original owner?

armyboyatc
06-05-2012, 08:58 PM
Very sout! Are u the original owner?

No I bought the car not running from a guy in Ohio. I stripped it down. And completely rebuilt it. I pulled the motor that is in it out of another Z28 vert i had. It had factory everything on it down to the factory lid and exhaust. it was bone stock. I will post pics up tomorrow.


TransAmWS.6
06-05-2012, 09:05 PM
Ok, maybe I missed it somewhere or reading wrong, but was that 393/378 done on the stock cam?

armyboyatc
06-05-2012, 09:15 PM
Ok, maybe I missed it somewhere or reading wrong, but was that 393/378 done on the stock cam?

Those are the corrected numbers. What it did on the dyno is on the graph. But from what I understand, in a perfect world it would make 393.

Bone stock LS1. No heads, no cam, no built bottom end no nothing.

z28241
06-05-2012, 09:31 PM
No I bought the car not running from a guy in Ohio. I stripped it down. And completely rebuilt it. I pulled the motor that is in it out of another Z28 vert i had. It had factory everything on it down to the factory lid and exhaust. it was bone stock. I will post pics up tomorrow.

The reason I asked, is I have a friend that had a similar situation, bought a used camaro SS way back in 02 , thought it was stone stock, from a lady 2 boot, stock exhaust manifolds etc, He did every bolt on, and had decent #'s, then recently went internal and low and behold, apparently it already had a Lunati cam in it..

Jenson
06-05-2012, 09:33 PM
Very impressive

armyboyatc
06-05-2012, 09:43 PM
The reason I asked, is I have a friend that had a similar situation, bought a used camaro SS way back in 02 , thought it was stone stock, from a lady 2 boot, stock exhaust manifolds etc, He did every bolt on, and had decent #'s, then recently went internal and low and behold, apparently it already had a Lunati cam in it..

That's crazy. Well as far as I know, this one is bone stock.

kick_*ss
06-05-2012, 10:07 PM
Not doubting you but I know even with my SS it was a freak, I kept track of every (bolt on change) and major with dynos.
2001 Camaro SS (Single Owner, I had it made for me) SLP #1331.

SLP Airbox, K&N, SLP 85MM MAF
RWHP 313.8, RWTQ 331.1 (engine 355+ depending on your choice of dtl)

Dyno After Y-pipes, MAFT, and Free RAM Air
RWHP 320.4, RWTQ 340.5

Added ASP Underdrive(crank) Pulley and ASP Alternator Pulley
RWHP 329.0, RWTQ = 344.5

FLP Long Tube Headers
RWHP 337.6 : RWTQ 345.3

TR 224 Cam w/ REV Valvetrain ( before ls1edit tuning )
RWHP 368.82 : RWTQ 353.33
Tuned - 379rwhp

TR 232/235 cam - TFS 220Ci heads - Meizer Electri water pump.
437 rwhp 396 rwtq

And the latest
102 LSXr Intake/102 TB/36lb injectors/ls2 fuel rails/ Vengeance tuning
459 rwhp /405 rwtq (still have some personal tuning to squeek out a little more)

armyboyatc
06-05-2012, 10:26 PM
Anyone know what the highest recorded LS1 HP n/a is? I would like to know to compare.

98blueSScamaro
06-06-2012, 12:37 AM
how much timing you running ?????

MikeG
06-06-2012, 05:42 AM
That's certainly the highest # I've seen! Congrats man.

J-tuneD
06-06-2012, 06:49 AM
98blueSS-
The engine and made its peak hp on gasoline with the advance at 29.5degrees at the peak hp point.

On e85, it made its peak hp at 26*. However both tunes put more timing to the motor below that point, as I tune for mbt at every rpm point and don't just block out the entire wot region of the map with one number.

Another interesting tidbit about the e85tune.. It made similar power numbers all the way to 34* at peak hp with absolutely no knock. The power was slightly down, but the knock sensors were happy. Just shows the resistance to detonation that fuel offers.

BAMALS1
06-06-2012, 07:23 AM
Impressive...congrat's!

jmilz28
06-06-2012, 09:20 AM
Hmmm, the torque at the low end almost looks hot cam-ish. The power curve vs. RPM looks stock cam-ish. Those injectors look monster for a stock motor, would love to see the duty cycle on those. I think the idea of "straightening" the intake tract along with opening the exhaust with headers and duals is super interesting. Would REALLY LOVE to see a video with high quality sound of this car idling. I think THAT would be the tell tale. IF this car had a cam "snuck" in by a previous owner, it's one helluva stealthy torque monster. Regardless, these are impressive numbers and I wouldn't bother keeping the E85 tune given how close the results are (which also supports that it's a stock cam, to me). Why give up the MPGs for such a small increase in HP? Nice work! Now get us an idle vid!

98blueSScamaro
06-06-2012, 11:26 AM
98blueSS-
The engine and made its peak hp on gasoline with the advance at 29.5degrees at the peak hp point.

On e85, it made its peak hp at 26*. However both tunes put more timing to the motor below that point, as I tune for mbt at every rpm point and don't just block out the entire wot region of the map with one number.

Another interesting tidbit about the e85tune.. It made similar power numbers all the way to 34* at peak hp with absolutely no knock. The power was slightly down, but the knock sensors were happy. Just shows the resistance to detonation that fuel offers.

Yeah i running E85 with 12.3.1 on an SBE h/c/i setup and it's peak hp is at about 28 to 29*. going to try and move timing up at the track and see what it will do. but as for E85 and knock its the best fuel for a high hp Sbe. i never see knock and i d/d mine in the summer in traffic and all while traping 130+ at the track.

J-tuneD
06-06-2012, 11:37 AM
Hmmm, the torque at the low end almost looks hot cam-ish. The power curve vs. RPM looks stock cam-ish. Those injectors look monster for a stock motor, would love to see the duty cycle on those.
We saw IDC's at WOT and peak consumption of about 50-55% iirc
I think the idea of "straightening" the intake tract along with opening the exhaust with headers and duals is super interesting. Would REALLY LOVE to see a video with high quality sound of this car idling.
Ask and you shall recieve, see below
I think THAT would be the tell tale. IF this car had a cam "snuck" in by a previous owner, it's one helluva stealthy torque monster. Regardless, these are impressive numbers and I wouldn't bother keeping the E85 tune given how close the results are (which also supports that it's a stock cam, to me). Why give up the MPGs for such a small increase in HP? Because he plans to hit it with a 200hp shot of N2O, and the E85 will drastically benefit him then
Nice work! Now get us an idle vid!

http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc440/GCMW/Dyno%20Graphs/th_6b482a5c.jpg (http://s1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc440/GCMW/Dyno%20Graphs/?action=view&current=6b482a5c.mp4)

And just for shits... Here's a comparison of this car and a full bolt-on 2001 one owner car that came into my shop last year. It was an auto and the weather conditions were obviously different, but you can see the difference the intake made over an LS6 with ported TB.

http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc440/GCMW/Dyno%20Graphs/TittervsTrey.jpg

The lower HP car was a verifiable stock cam, one owner car.

Lastly, the dyno vid:
http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc440/GCMW/Dyno%20Graphs/th_ece7e333.jpg (http://s1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc440/GCMW/Dyno%20Graphs/?action=view&current=ece7e333.mp4)

Jenson
06-06-2012, 12:12 PM
Was that in 3rd gear?

J-tuneD
06-06-2012, 12:58 PM
No, 4th. But it has 4.10's in the rear.

jmilz28
06-06-2012, 01:16 PM
Damn! Thanks JD! Have you had a chance to dyno the same car on your dyno and someone else's to see how it compares? That stalled auto comparison car is stout as hell too! Nice work and thanks again for the vids and extra graphs!

J-tuneD
06-06-2012, 01:34 PM
Damn! Thanks JD! Have you had a chance to dyno the same car on your dyno and someone else's to see how it compares? That stalled auto comparison car is stout as hell too! Nice work and thanks again for the vids and extra graphs!

I made a mistake and corrected my above post. The comparison car had a stock converter.

I've had a few customers make pulls on my Dyno that reported similar numbers to other DynoJets in FL. But nothing or orchestrated back to back. They were all done on different days, weather conditions, etc.

A lot of shops tend to use the STD correction factor too. Which you can see by post #1 reads a bit higher than the SAE factor. I feel that SAE numbers are more realistic because of how the formula works, so I usually only post graphs numbers with that factor.

studderin
06-06-2012, 04:00 PM
:)


hahahahahah. I like the title, right on man

titter
06-06-2012, 09:08 PM
As posted the comparison car was my old SS. ARH 1 7/8ths headers, ARH ORY, SLP PowerFlo, MTI Lid, 4L60e, and a Summit SFI flex plate due to the stock one breaking from the over torque issues from factory. The car was still on a factory tune minus torque management from what J-tuneD saw. Stock converter, and stock 3.23's as confirmed by me.

Here is our race before he went with the Vic Jr. and new TB. I believe his other mods stayed. (20 rolls, first one he spun, 2nd he didn't and we were door to door with him getting me by a whole fender.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwrlgziLbhw

Golf&GM
06-07-2012, 07:40 AM
I'd really love to see what this thing runs.

s346k
06-07-2012, 11:56 AM
good numbers. is this car still on the stock fuel pump? what valvesprings, lifters, pushrods?

any port matching / porting on the intake? sd tune i assume.

TheLS1Lover
06-07-2012, 12:09 PM
good numbers. is this car still on the stock fuel pump? what valvesprings, lifters, pushrods?

any port matching / porting on the intake? sd tune i assume.

It says STOCK INTERNAL.

I assume the power comes from the Vic and 4150 TB.

s346k
06-07-2012, 12:12 PM
It says STOCK INTERNAL.

I assume the power comes from the Vic and 4150 TB.i am aware of what stock internal means. however, i highly doubt he is using stock valvespings and pushrods. if he is...i wouldn't say it's the best choice for the car, esp @ 6400 rpm. i'd say the majority of the power appears to be coming from the fuel.

armyboyatc
06-07-2012, 12:13 PM
good numbers. is this car still on the stock fuel pump? what valvesprings, lifters, pushrods?

any port matching / porting on the intake? sd tune i assume.
It has a Racetronix fuel pump and Hotwire kit. Stock valvesprings, lifters and pushrods. Anything that touches oil is stock.
No port matching. And yes it's speed density tuned.

It says STOCK INTERNAL.

I assume the power comes from the Vic and 4150 TB.

Yes the Vic jr and 4150 is where the power comes from. It also has a lot to do with the tune. J-tuneD did work on the tune.

s346k
06-07-2012, 12:17 PM
good results. did yoy guys do any testing with a fast 102 setup?

armyboyatc
06-07-2012, 12:29 PM
good results. did yoy guys do any testing with a fast 102 setup?

No, No testing with that intake. I went with the vic junior because it will work better with nitrous than a fast intake will. I have the Nitrous Outlet spray bar setup.

Zmg00camaross
06-07-2012, 12:52 PM
Nice numbers. The track will tell it all :)

Gunslinger09
06-07-2012, 12:55 PM
I know power is dependant on getting the engine to breathe but I am having a hard time believing almost 80 horsepower is gained with just an intake manifold swap. Color me skeptical on this deal.

J-tuneD
06-07-2012, 01:14 PM
Nice numbers. The track will tell it all :)
Agreed!! However, I have a feeling he wont be doing too many all motor passes, lol. He bought that manifold purely for the spray bar nitrous setup.
Either way, at 3100lbs it outta move! Did he mention the A/C still works? :)

I know power is dependant on getting the engine to breathe but I am having a hard time believing almost 80 horsepower is gained with just an intake manifold swap. Color me skeptical on this deal.

I have found multiple bolt-on cars with the same peak torque and just slightly less top end power. The comparison car I posted had the factory LS6 intake and only made 23 less hp on gasoline.. This car has every power adding bolt-on you can do aside from an electric water pump (running the stock one). Look at that comparison graph and tell me your still skeptical.

WSsick
06-07-2012, 02:00 PM
Not doubting you but I know even with my SS it was a freak, I kept track of every (bolt on change) and major with dynos.
2001 Camaro SS (Single Owner, I had it made for me) SLP #1331.

SLP Airbox, K&N, SLP 85MM MAF
RWHP 313.8, RWTQ 331.1 (engine 355+ depending on your choice of dtl)

Dyno After Y-pipes, MAFT, and Free RAM Air
RWHP 320.4, RWTQ 340.5

Added ASP Underdrive(crank) Pulley and ASP Alternator Pulley
RWHP 329.0, RWTQ = 344.5

FLP Long Tube Headers
RWHP 337.6 : RWTQ 345.3

TR 224 Cam w/ REV Valvetrain ( before ls1edit tuning )
RWHP 368.82 : RWTQ 353.33
Tuned - 379rwhp

TR 232/235 cam - TFS 220Ci heads - Meizer Electri water pump.
437 rwhp 396 rwtq

And the latest
102 LSXr Intake/102 TB/36lb injectors/ls2 fuel rails/ Vengeance tuning
459 rwhp /405 rwtq (still have some personal tuning to squeek out a little more)

There is absolutely nothing "freak" about your car's #s. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Anyone know what the highest recorded LS1 HP n/a is? I would like to know to compare.

No one really cares about bolt-on LS1 power anymore. Good luck finding #s. The fastest/big hp # guys usually never post up anyways when it comes to things like these. Friend of mine went 11.0@119 on stock internals but never posted up here...

armyboyatc
06-07-2012, 02:34 PM
There is absolutely nothing "freak" about your car's #s. Sorry to burst your bubble.



No one really cares about bolt-on LS1 power anymore.LOL!!! Excuse me for being curious then. Good luck finding #s.Thanks The fastest/big hp # guys usually never post up anyways when it comes to things like these.Riiiigggghhhhtttt. LS1tech is just full of us slow cars who actually care to find out new things about cars and new ways to produce power. Guess they just have it all figured out. Hell, in 20 years they will probably still be running the same ole setup because its so perfect and there is no improvements out for our cars..... Right? SO WRONG. Friend of mine went 11.0@119 on stock internals but never posted up here...I have a friend whos brothers mothers sisters 2nd cousin that went 10.9 at 121 on stock internals but you probably dont know him

If you dont have any imput that is useful then please show yourself out. Forgive me for being proud that my car made this much power with some well thought out bolt-ons. If you dont have anything nice to say then click on the next thread. Thanks. Good day

titter
06-07-2012, 02:46 PM
I know power is dependant on getting the engine to breathe but I am having a hard time believing almost 80 horsepower is gained with just an intake manifold swap. Color me skeptical on this deal.

I picked up 50rwhp from my full exhaust. LS1's love to breath.

1Hawk
06-07-2012, 06:33 PM
My Brothers 2000 Firehawk made 395 with Full Bolts-Ons (lid, Pulley, SLP Bellow), Kooks 1 7/8, and FAST 92mm....through a Cutout... That was on a Dynojet.

studderin
06-07-2012, 07:58 PM
I'm calling BS on this, stock cam and springs would not rev over 6K like that.

armyboyatc
06-07-2012, 08:07 PM
My Brothers 2000 Firehawk made 395 with Full Bolts-Ons (lid, Pulley, SLP Bellow), Kooks 1 7/8, and FAST 92mm....through a Cutout... That was on a Dynojet.

Dyno sheet?

s346k
06-07-2012, 10:50 PM
i think it's kind of silly to argue dyno sheets. the track is the tell-all. at the very least, the car cannot forge a powercurve. i think that is the most impressive thing. look at the tq curve...lt1 what? the power does seem to carry far too well past 6k to be on the stock springs, let alone a stock cam. but who am i to argue, i am not there to see the car or the parts inside of it.

good work using simple parts and getting results. go make some passes and let us know what it traps. i feel it should mph better than the numbers indicate given the curve. i've wanted to run an ls6 cam, vic jr, and e85 for years. this year i finally have the opportunity to do something so we shall see.

OP: i am very intersted in your setup and track results. good luck.

PREDATOR-Z
06-08-2012, 06:39 AM
Happy Dyno

armyboyatc
06-08-2012, 07:08 AM
i think it's kind of silly to argue dyno sheets. the track is the tell-all. at the very least, the car cannot forge a powercurve. i think that is the most impressive thing. look at the tq curve...lt1 what? the power does seem to carry far too well past 6k to be on the stock springs, let alone a stock cam. but who am i to argue, i am not there to see the car or the parts inside of it.

good work using simple parts and getting results. go make some passes and let us know what it traps. i feel it should mph better than the numbers indicate given the curve. i've wanted to run an ls6 cam, vic jr, and e85 for years. this year i finally have the opportunity to do something so we shall see.

OP: i am very intersted in your setup and track results. good luck.

What I have learned is that the E85 will not greatly benefit you unless you have a power adder or higher compression. I would like to see a back to back comparison between 93 and E85 on a heads cam motor.

If someone produced more power than this then I want to see what they have done and where they picked up the power and why and also what their curve looks like. Not argue their results.

Thanks for the kind words. Track times will be coming soon.

10secZ28
06-08-2012, 09:24 AM
lol i have personally seen this car, driven this car, worked on this car you name it, it does not have a cam in it.

chrs1313
06-08-2012, 10:06 AM
I would like to see a back to back comparison between 93 and E85 on a heads cam

:lurk:

98blueSScamaro
06-09-2012, 12:13 AM
:lurk:

Do it fucker.....

nmass399
06-27-2012, 03:23 PM
I made 372hp and 389ft/lbs stock internal, not sure how much the bad cylinder, bad valvesprings and 24 degrees of timing hurt it. Probably not that much. I was running vp109 in it. Dyno at holley lsfest whatever kind that was. Its crazy to see your graph keep pulling up top like that, if i was to just look at that without info i would assume its a bigger than stock cam.

Dyno's don't tell the whole story tho, timeslips will help to see if its got the power. The e85 is helping out with power similar to the vp109 i ran.

usmonaro
06-27-2012, 05:38 PM
I'm not sure if the older LS1's are anything to judge. I mean that is extremely good numbers to me if it was on 93oct only with a few bolt ons. My 04 M6 GTO put 386rwhp / 374rwtq with Torquer V.2 cam, PAC .650 springs and a K&N cai as the only non GM stock parts on the car. That's on 93oct.

IllusionalTA
06-27-2012, 06:06 PM
Fwiw Both A4 Bolt on car's i've had a hand in tuning personally, both made 347&352rwhp respectively on a Dynojet... Same dyno... One was 3500lbs went 11.7@114mph or so the other was 3Klbs and went 11.04@121mph... Oh btw the 352rwhp one was through a 9" and was a 98 Car w/ 130K miles... Congrats on your numbers.. But dyno's are tool's.. not benchmark's.. Run it at the track.. report back w/ your MPH... i'm guessing 116mph is about where your gonna fall...

armyboyatc
06-27-2012, 07:18 PM
Fwiw Both A4 Bolt on car's i've had a hand in tuning personally, both made 347&352rwhp respectively on a Dynojet... Same dyno... One was 3500lbs went 11.7@114mph or so the other was 3Klbs and went 11.04@121mph... Oh btw the 352rwhp one was through a 9" and was a 98 Car w/ 130K miles... Congrats on your numbers.. But dyno's are tool's.. not benchmark's.. Run it at the track.. report back w/ your MPH... i'm guessing 116mph is about where your gonna fall...

Nice numbers..... I understand that dynos are just tuning tools. I was just posting up to show off the power that the Vic junior picked it up and the E85 gains. We are still workin some bugs out of it but track times will come soon.

IllusionalTA
06-27-2012, 07:28 PM
Honestly, I think your cars pretty strong, should be nice .. Just have fun..

studderin
07-23-2012, 12:57 PM
and then

redcam622
07-25-2012, 05:56 AM
My 02 camaro 115k miles..ebay t/body,K&N filter,flowmaster muffler only..no cat back..on 87oct..cause i'm too cheap for 93. 353hp 347lb ft torque.

88blackiroc
08-03-2012, 09:30 PM
My 02 camaro 115k miles..ebay t/body,K&N filter,flowmaster muffler only..no cat back..on 87oct..cause i'm too cheap for 93. 353hp 347lb ft torque.

Track tells all. As mentioned, dynos are only tuning devices.
OP did you ever make it to the track? That dyno sheet is very... impressive for stock internals.

kinglt-1
08-04-2012, 05:54 PM
Dyno numbers are like fake tits...they look good but thier not the real thing!

redcam622
08-08-2012, 04:31 PM
actually..dyno #s are pretty acurate..assuming gear,converter, suspension, and tires are matched correctly...my car has a stock converter and 273s...so it comes out like a snail and gos through the traps in 3rd. at 107. w/26# tires @3700 lbs...With gear and converter...which wont change the dyno #s would expect mid 12s @110...Dynojet dyno #s tend to be a bit high because of the way they load..the mustang dyno has been dead nuts.

thunderstruck507
08-09-2012, 09:14 AM
Happy Dyno

No joke....nearly 400 rwhp with boltons? Most small-mid size cammed cars don't even get within 10hp of that.

This thread is worthless without track results IMO.

TransAmcoupe98
08-09-2012, 01:18 PM
Happy Dyno

Someone finally said it lol.

maxpower_454
08-26-2012, 10:54 AM
No heads, no cam, no built bottom end no nothing.

No heads, cam, bottom end, nothing??!!??? This is crazy power for just a bare block!!!!!:jest::judge::jest: