5.3 vs 5.7 vs 6.0
09-10-2011, 02:58 PM
#21
My internet calculator can beat up your internet calculator.....
I used his MPH to figure the relative HP, as his ET isn't representing the theoretical power production at all.
3950lbs, 109mph
http://www.wallaceracing.com/et-hp-mph.php
Gear and converter are the biggest issues holding back the potential of his present combo.
Car would probably pick up close to a half second with an optomized converter and gear change, as the HP is already there.
I used his MPH to figure the relative HP, as his ET isn't representing the theoretical power production at all.
3950lbs, 109mph
http://www.wallaceracing.com/et-hp-mph.php
Gear and converter are the biggest issues holding back the potential of his present combo.
Car would probably pick up close to a half second with an optomized converter and gear change, as the HP is already there.
09-11-2011, 02:18 PM
#23
TECH Regular
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver area, West coast Canada
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
19 Posts
Thanks for the tips guys. I did choose the cam/comverter toward the milder side. I wanted this thing to be very driveable anyday/anywhere. And it is !. No stumble or lag on tip-in, and it pulls great in the off idle range. Also is very happy burbling down the highway at 1500 rpm in OD with the converter locked. Ive put 2500 miles on it since May.
I don't want to give up any of that driveability.
I realise it could be faster with the items mentioned by Speedtigger-Topbrent, I just want to make sure I am getting the most from what I've got.
Yes ~3600 is the correct driving weight after a good pasta infusion on the driver
>Is that racing calculator rear wheel or flywheel HP ?
I don't want to give up any of that driveability.
I realise it could be faster with the items mentioned by Speedtigger-Topbrent, I just want to make sure I am getting the most from what I've got.
Yes ~3600 is the correct driving weight after a good pasta infusion on the driver
>Is that racing calculator rear wheel or flywheel HP ?
09-14-2011, 11:08 PM
#27
TECH Resident
You have a great street combo and are not comparing apples to apples.
#1 most guys are running sticky tires at the track...not street tires.
This is your quote and I agree with you... "I prefer to run on my street tires just as the car would be on the road." Anyone can build a car to be one dimensional...aka track only. I bet if you lined up against any of these guys on sticky tires that you'd give them a run for the money...at least any one that is still in the (low) 12's.
#1 most guys are running sticky tires at the track...not street tires.
This is your quote and I agree with you... "I prefer to run on my street tires just as the car would be on the road." Anyone can build a car to be one dimensional...aka track only. I bet if you lined up against any of these guys on sticky tires that you'd give them a run for the money...at least any one that is still in the (low) 12's.
09-26-2011, 07:51 PM
#28
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sylvester, ga
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't beat me up to bad for this post. In the december 2007 issue of hot rod they did a build with the 6.0. They started with a crate Lq9 but a junkyard motor like i have should work fine. This was all on the the stock shortblock. With l92 heads, bill mitchell 750 carb, GM single plane intake, Crane cam which was 232/236@.050 110lsa, and headers. It dynoed 540hp@6900rpm and produced 461ft/lbs torque @5400rpm. After that they slapped on a then new prototype Magnuson 1900 supercharger and alcohol injection kit, changed to a milder cam and made 751hp@6700rpm and 621ft/lbs @4700rpm.
It's a real interesting read. Probably can find it with a google search. It's what I want to put in my 68 camaro.
It's a real interesting read. Probably can find it with a google search. It's what I want to put in my 68 camaro.
09-27-2011, 06:10 AM
#29
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: ohio
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12.68 is still fun, and quicker than just about everything driving up the highway.
109 mph tells me that you are making at least 420hp, which means that your car is not 60-foot'ing well at all.
***edit: uh...err...well, just a few misread weight numbers by me....realistically more in the 360-380hp range ***
Your car is slower because you spec'ed out and purchased the parts for a nicely running 12.68 combo!
You installed a tight converter, highway gearing, and a very mild cam.
- If you are wanting to go faster, you will need to address these issues.
Looser Torque Converter
Agreed 109 mph is 12.10-12.20 mph with a good 60 ft time.
Deeper Rear gear
Bigger Cam
109 mph tells me that you are making at least 420hp, which means that your car is not 60-foot'ing well at all.
***edit: uh...err...well, just a few misread weight numbers by me....realistically more in the 360-380hp range ***
Your car is slower because you spec'ed out and purchased the parts for a nicely running 12.68 combo!
You installed a tight converter, highway gearing, and a very mild cam.
- If you are wanting to go faster, you will need to address these issues.
Looser Torque Converter
Agreed 109 mph is 12.10-12.20 mph with a good 60 ft time.
Deeper Rear gear
Bigger Cam
09-27-2011, 09:39 PM
#30
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sylvester, ga
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-04-2011, 09:36 AM
#31
Though probably a bit racier than the OP's goals, as an example, one could take those exact same parts, ie, intake, carb, heads, short-block, headers and add a cam similar to what DMMizell runs, and you will see some serious power numbers with track proven results. (Valve notching, deeper gearing and a loose converter required to make this one fly, however)
https://ls1tech.com/forums/13909340-post3.html
Use the calculators and calculate what it takes to push 2900lbs to 137mph @ 9.90's (9.87 best ET)
https://ls1tech.com/forums/13909340-post3.html
Use the calculators and calculate what it takes to push 2900lbs to 137mph @ 9.90's (9.87 best ET)
I have been reading as much as possible, just gathering info here and elsewhere. It seems the LQ4/LQ9 route may be the route to go with a good set of heads, cam, intake and carb. I also need to find a reputable engine builder around here and see what it would cost to build one up from a shortblock vs me just adding the bolt ons to a lower mileage dropout.
