'02 Camaro SS M6 458rwhp/421rwtq !!!
07-12-2009, 11:38 AM
#21
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Somewhere I Belong
Posts: 2,906
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07-12-2009, 11:48 AM
#22
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Another question about your fuels in the Middle East. A few members have bragged about 95 and 100 octane gas available. Just seems to me with fuel like that you'd be able to run more compression on your N/A motors and more boost on your FI motors without detonating. Am I missing something? Are your 95 and 100 octane fuels misleading, or do you calculate octane different there then we do in the US ??
07-12-2009, 11:57 AM
#23
Vengeance has advertised this package multiple times here. Nearly all claimed to be within a few HP of 500, and they all peaked much higher. Yours peaked at only 6200RPM? It should pull cleanly to near 7000RPM.
Last edited by Marc 85Z28; 07-12-2009 at 01:15 PM.
07-12-2009, 12:03 PM
#24
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Somewhere I Belong
Posts: 2,906
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another question about your fuels in the Middle East. A few members have bragged about 95 and 100 octane gas available. Just seems to me with fuel like that you'd be able to run more compression on your N/A motors and more boost on your FI motors without detonating. Am I missing something? Are your 95 and 100 octane fuels misleading, or do you calculate octane different there then we do in the US ??
UAE 'n Kuwait are way better
peace
07-12-2009, 12:07 PM
#25
Another question about your fuels in the Middle East. A few members have bragged about 95 and 100 octane gas available. Just seems to me with fuel like that you'd be able to run more compression on your N/A motors and more boost on your FI motors without detonating. Am I missing something? Are your 95 and 100 octane fuels misleading, or do you calculate octane different there then we do in the US ??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating
The US uses the R+M/2 method to rate octane - I think the folks in the Middle East use only the one that ends up being the higher number (the Research Octane Number) instead of taking the average of the two rating methods.
07-12-2009, 12:18 PM
#26
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Ever notice how the octane rating at the pump has a little formula right below it (R+M/2)? Read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating
The US uses the R+M/2 method to rate octane - I think the folks in the Middle East use only the one that ends up being the higher number (the Research Octane Number) instead of taking the average of the two rating methods.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating
The US uses the R+M/2 method to rate octane - I think the folks in the Middle East use only the one that ends up being the higher number (the Research Octane Number) instead of taking the average of the two rating methods.
07-12-2009, 12:55 PM
#28
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Somewhere I Belong
Posts: 2,906
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
peace
07-12-2009, 12:57 PM
#29
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Somewhere I Belong
Posts: 2,906
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07-12-2009, 01:32 PM
#31
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I am going to speculate here and infer that since the compression is lower then all of the big number Vengeance Pkgs that is part of the reason the numbers are down. The rest of it lies in tuning and fuel. The op said the fuel is crap so I am going to expect a lot less timing is in this motor then the american counter parts. Not saying anything negative about the OP or his tuner. Just saying that lower compression, less timing, bad fuel availability all add up to lower numbers. With that being said it looks like they did pretty good with 91 octane at best. Just imagine if there fuel is like our mid grade. I would say awesome results.
07-12-2009, 02:49 PM
#33
I am going to speculate here and infer that since the compression is lower then all of the big number Vengeance Pkgs that is part of the reason the numbers are down. The rest of it lies in tuning and fuel. The op said the fuel is crap so I am going to expect a lot less timing is in this motor then the american counter parts. Not saying anything negative about the OP or his tuner. Just saying that lower compression, less timing, bad fuel availability all add up to lower numbers. With that being said it looks like they did pretty good with 91 octane at best. Just imagine if there fuel is like our mid grade. I would say awesome results.
07-12-2009, 03:53 PM
#35
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I used stock 346 numbers 3.898 B/ 3.622 S / 59cc / 8 / 0 (out/in the hole) / and .056 for gm MLS
I got 11.13 to 1 ?? Maybe I am doing it wrong.
07-12-2009, 03:55 PM
#36
Bad95, Thanx for such a cool write up!!! Mike still uses that picture as his desktop on lol.
Im not going to get involved in the internet speculation on dyno #s.... That combo is PROVEN by MANY to go 475 to 500rwhp... There are too many variables with your dyno/fuel/tuning to really even care about the #s... Get the car to the track and if the owner is happy we are all happy!!! Im sure with some more tweaks the end result will speak for itself
Im not going to get involved in the internet speculation on dyno #s.... That combo is PROVEN by MANY to go 475 to 500rwhp... There are too many variables with your dyno/fuel/tuning to really even care about the #s... Get the car to the track and if the owner is happy we are all happy!!! Im sure with some more tweaks the end result will speak for itself
07-12-2009, 03:57 PM
#37
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Please explain.
07-12-2009, 04:15 PM
#38
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Somewhere I Belong
Posts: 2,906
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad95, Thanx for such a cool write up!!! Mike still uses that picture as his desktop on lol.
Im not going to get involved in the internet speculation on dyno #s.... That combo is PROVEN by MANY to go 475 to 500rwhp... There are too many variables with your dyno/fuel/tuning to really even care about the #s... Get the car to the track and if the owner is happy we are all happy!!! Im sure with some more tweaks the end result will speak for itself
Im not going to get involved in the internet speculation on dyno #s.... That combo is PROVEN by MANY to go 475 to 500rwhp... There are too many variables with your dyno/fuel/tuning to really even care about the #s... Get the car to the track and if the owner is happy we are all happy!!! Im sure with some more tweaks the end result will speak for itself
peace
07-12-2009, 05:31 PM
#40
Have you looked at the OP's tune? I am merely speculating. If you can happily run 28* timing using 93 octane vs only being able to run 20* without knock due to shitty 91 octane are you telling me that the two motors will make the same power ?? If you are then you are wrong. I would rather have an 11.5 to 1 motor that is happy at 28* advance on 93 then a happy motor with 11.1 to 1 compression and much less timing with 91 octane.
Please explain.
Please explain.