Dynoed H/C AFR's. I wanted more though!!
07-24-2009, 01:44 PM
#22
10 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: New to South Carolina
Posts: 910
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This all just an opinion[you know what they say about those]
Very good selection on the heads,would not look for any problems there.
Cam,mucho power with a cam change.
Is this a 6 spped car ?
From 5800 to redline looks like a roller coaster on dyno sheet.
Torque drops from 5500 to 6000 then spikes up to,can't quite tell,then drops below 350fp's.
Looks like valvetrain instability.
Very good selection on the heads,would not look for any problems there.
Cam,mucho power with a cam change.
Is this a 6 spped car ?
From 5800 to redline looks like a roller coaster on dyno sheet.
Torque drops from 5500 to 6000 then spikes up to,can't quite tell,then drops below 350fp's.
Looks like valvetrain instability.
07-24-2009, 02:40 PM
#23
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster California
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still think the dyno chart looks good. For a street car with a stock bottom end, I can't see why anyone would rev thier motor past 6K RPMs.
( just my opinion ).
As allready stated in this thread... You could go with the FAST 92/92, Larger Cam.
This is what I would add with the above modifications. ( just my opinion ).
Racetronix fuel pump kit, larger injectors, obviously another tune.
Nice to get your injectors at a lower duty cycle and eliminate any fuel issues.
Not sure what rocker arms you are using... that would be another important choice to consider. I agree with the valvetrain stability being important.
With the right setup you would really pull like a raped ape x2.
Ultimately that doesn't mean you would be happy as driveability and streetability might suffer.( my opinion again ).
For those that prefer to rev above 6K RPMS, some install the ARP rods bolts.
On my own car I would stay under 6K unless I had a completely built forged built bottom end. ( my opinion again ).
Lastly, if you have a friend with a similar setup as described above, it wouldn't hurt to get a ride or drive before pouring more money and work into your car.
Just my 2 cents ...
.
07-24-2009, 02:55 PM
#24
I still think the dyno chart looks good. For a street car with a stock bottom end, I can't see why anyone would rev thier motor past 6K RPMs.
( just my opinion ).
As allready stated in this thread... You could go with the FAST 92/92, Larger Cam.
This is what I would add with the above modifications. ( just my opinion ).
Racetronix fuel pump kit, larger injectors, obviously another tune.
Nice to get your injectors at a lower duty cycle and eliminate any fuel issues.
Not sure what rocker arms you are using... that would be another important choice to consider. I agree with the valvetrain stability being important.
With the right setup you would really pull like a raped ape x2.
Ultimately that doesn't mean you would be happy as driveability and streetability might suffer.( my opinion again ).
For those that prefer to rev above 6K RPMS, some install the ARP rods bolts.
On my own car I would stay under 6K unless I had a completely built forged built bottom end. ( my opinion again ).
Lastly, if you have a friend with a similar setup as described above, it wouldn't hurt to get a ride or drive before pouring more money and work into your car.
Just my 2 cents ...
.
( just my opinion ).
As allready stated in this thread... You could go with the FAST 92/92, Larger Cam.
This is what I would add with the above modifications. ( just my opinion ).
Racetronix fuel pump kit, larger injectors, obviously another tune.
Nice to get your injectors at a lower duty cycle and eliminate any fuel issues.
Not sure what rocker arms you are using... that would be another important choice to consider. I agree with the valvetrain stability being important.
With the right setup you would really pull like a raped ape x2.
Ultimately that doesn't mean you would be happy as driveability and streetability might suffer.( my opinion again ).
For those that prefer to rev above 6K RPMS, some install the ARP rods bolts.
On my own car I would stay under 6K unless I had a completely built forged built bottom end. ( my opinion again ).
Lastly, if you have a friend with a similar setup as described above, it wouldn't hurt to get a ride or drive before pouring more money and work into your car.
Just my 2 cents ...
.
Thanks my friend. That is the beauty of this hobby we have. We all live and learn. I think I am goin mamofied. I already got the heads.
07-24-2009, 03:07 PM
#25
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster California
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a good start.
If it wasn't for our strict emissions in California, my plans/goals would be a lot different.
I might consider a FAST 92 and/or Mamofication.
.
07-24-2009, 03:27 PM
#26
I would call tony up he knows his heads better than anyone and can recommend you a cam. In fact comp probably has some cams for the heads if you ask.
The high end torque curve is kind of strange. I would be careful and double check your springs. When i got my heads they accidentally installed springs that were over 100 pounds more than i needed.
The high end torque curve is kind of strange. I would be careful and double check your springs. When i got my heads they accidentally installed springs that were over 100 pounds more than i needed.
07-24-2009, 03:32 PM
#27
if you got the money put the fast on for sure,the cam you need to change like everbody else said but i dont think you really have to make it bigger just get one thats tried and true and you will pick up allot,tony m can spec that for ya,id say you should pick up about 50rwhp pretty easy with a little cam more set up for your combo.
07-24-2009, 03:32 PM
#28
I would call tony up he knows his heads better than anyone and can recommend you a cam. In fact comp probably has some cams for the heads if you ask.
The high end torque curve is kind of strange. I would be careful and double check your springs. When i got my heads they accidentally installed springs that were over 100 pounds more than i needed.
The high end torque curve is kind of strange. I would be careful and double check your springs. When i got my heads they accidentally installed springs that were over 100 pounds more than i needed.
07-24-2009, 05:38 PM
#35
Cam is definately on the small side and the 75mm TB is a chock-point with those heads. Fast 92 ported is around $1k or less and will wake it up, but the cam needs to be matched to everything else in the combo. Also, was the cam degreed when installed? Most just throw them in straight up on the marks and I can't remember how many times that was off a bit leaving power on the table as well. Car still responed great after the handheld tune was ditched and a real tune woke it up. 
07-24-2009, 06:40 PM
#36
Cam is definately on the small side and the 75mm TB is a chock-point with those heads. Fast 92 ported is around $1k or less and will wake it up, but the cam needs to be matched to everything else in the combo. Also, was the cam degreed when installed? Most just throw them in straight up on the marks and I can't remember how many times that was off a bit leaving power on the table as well. Car still responed great after the handheld tune was ditched and a real tune woke it up.
07-24-2009, 08:13 PM
#38
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster California
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure I'm leaving alot on horsepower on the table with the Crane hand held tuner.
Wow your afr was super rich with the hand held. I would think your gas mileage improved.
.
.
07-24-2009, 09:42 PM
#39
MEGAGETH GUY 01-You are on crack. 
I put down 463hp 414tq On a mustang dyno with a stock non ported fast intake on a 346ci and ran 11.1's@125mph in a 3,700lbs car with AFR 205 heads. AFR Heads are not the problem.
CORVET785C-Your cam is a wimp.Get an intake. You have a mess of room to produce power if you set it up right.
I put down 463hp 414tq On a mustang dyno with a stock non ported fast intake on a 346ci and ran 11.1's@125mph in a 3,700lbs car with AFR 205 heads. AFR Heads are not the problem.CORVET785C-Your cam is a wimp.Get an intake. You have a mess of room to produce power if you set it up right.
