Dynoed H/C AFR's. I wanted more though!!
07-26-2009, 03:47 AM
#61
Ok. You don't want a big cam, that's fine. For your goals, you don't need one anyway. To see some better results rather easily, here is what I suggest...
First off pull that cam outta there and sell it. Get with a trusted vendor or call Comp yourself and tell them you want this grind #: LS1 3724R/3725R HR114+1
Get rid of your 1.8 ratio rockers and go back to the stock 1.7s. You can send them off for a rebuild at Harland Sharpe or if they are in good shape with low miles you can use them as is. That's up to you, as there are a lot of people that have done fine with un-touched stock ones with zero issues, myself included, and others opt for the extra insurance from the upgrade.
Which head gasket did you wind up going with? The .040 Cometic that I suggested before or a GM mls set? If you don't have the .040 Cometics, I suggest those. If you don't have them and are thinking "wtf, I don't want to remove the heads AGAIN", that's why I stressed it so much when we spoke before. If you did go with them, GREAT, that's one thing already done to help with what we are trying to do here.
What about an under-drive pulley? Do you have one? They aren't a major power adder, but chalk it up as "every little bit counts".
You do have a lid correct? I don't recall hearing that mentioned.
Your exhaust is rather free flowing as far as cat backs go, and I like how you have a merge not just a shitty designed Y pipe that slams the two banks into each other, but still, get a cutout installed in the I pipe before it goes over the axle. If you want power all the time with some tone/sound from an actual muffler, go true duals.
Send me a picture of your ported TB. I port them for local guys and I'll know if it's a good job or not.
What plugs are you running and what is the gap set at? I would suggest you try some NGK TR6s gapped anywhere from .038-.042.
The LS6 intake is more than capable of getting the goals you mentioned. Stick with it for now.
Check to see how your pre-load is with your push rods with all the new parts; cam, rockers, head gaskets if they get changed. If you were running the stock lifters I could tell you with the parts I am suggesting, a 7.400 length would work great. The LS7 lifters however could and very well may vary enough to throw that off, so you'll need to check this to verify.
Make sure you have some good fuel in there. 93 octane if at all possible, but you do not need "race gas".
When you go for the tune with these new parts, check the duty cycle on the injectors and make sure it's getting the fuel it needs. If they're over 80% duty cycle, you need more injector. It wouldn't be a bad idea to look into a better fuel pump, but you can see how the stocker holds out first.
If your car is in good condition, without any issues to hinder it, with a good tuner and an average reading dyno, you should see your 450/400 goal, excellent street manners, and ~25 highway mpg with your 6 speed. I do not see gears listed, so that will help your numbers on the dyno and the fuel economy even more if you still have the stock 3.42s.
I might have missed something, but I'm pretty sure that should take care of you.
First off pull that cam outta there and sell it. Get with a trusted vendor or call Comp yourself and tell them you want this grind #: LS1 3724R/3725R HR114+1
Get rid of your 1.8 ratio rockers and go back to the stock 1.7s. You can send them off for a rebuild at Harland Sharpe or if they are in good shape with low miles you can use them as is. That's up to you, as there are a lot of people that have done fine with un-touched stock ones with zero issues, myself included, and others opt for the extra insurance from the upgrade.
Which head gasket did you wind up going with? The .040 Cometic that I suggested before or a GM mls set? If you don't have the .040 Cometics, I suggest those. If you don't have them and are thinking "wtf, I don't want to remove the heads AGAIN", that's why I stressed it so much when we spoke before. If you did go with them, GREAT, that's one thing already done to help with what we are trying to do here.
What about an under-drive pulley? Do you have one? They aren't a major power adder, but chalk it up as "every little bit counts".
You do have a lid correct? I don't recall hearing that mentioned.
Your exhaust is rather free flowing as far as cat backs go, and I like how you have a merge not just a shitty designed Y pipe that slams the two banks into each other, but still, get a cutout installed in the I pipe before it goes over the axle. If you want power all the time with some tone/sound from an actual muffler, go true duals.
Send me a picture of your ported TB. I port them for local guys and I'll know if it's a good job or not.
What plugs are you running and what is the gap set at? I would suggest you try some NGK TR6s gapped anywhere from .038-.042.
The LS6 intake is more than capable of getting the goals you mentioned. Stick with it for now.
Check to see how your pre-load is with your push rods with all the new parts; cam, rockers, head gaskets if they get changed. If you were running the stock lifters I could tell you with the parts I am suggesting, a 7.400 length would work great. The LS7 lifters however could and very well may vary enough to throw that off, so you'll need to check this to verify.
Make sure you have some good fuel in there. 93 octane if at all possible, but you do not need "race gas".
When you go for the tune with these new parts, check the duty cycle on the injectors and make sure it's getting the fuel it needs. If they're over 80% duty cycle, you need more injector. It wouldn't be a bad idea to look into a better fuel pump, but you can see how the stocker holds out first.
If your car is in good condition, without any issues to hinder it, with a good tuner and an average reading dyno, you should see your 450/400 goal, excellent street manners, and ~25 highway mpg with your 6 speed. I do not see gears listed, so that will help your numbers on the dyno and the fuel economy even more if you still have the stock 3.42s.
I might have missed something, but I'm pretty sure that should take care of you.
07-26-2009, 12:21 PM
#65
There are no valve train issues, not sure where that is coming from. What I see is a cam that probably has high duration at 0.004" (where Crane measures) and it is bleeding off cylinder pressure due to the slower lobes. If you check a DCR calculator with your cam and then the AFR 6016 cam for comparison I think you will see this happening. The curves look really good, but the cam is the limiter and if you want more the cam unfortunately looks like what will be required.
07-26-2009, 12:34 PM
#66
There are no valve train issues, not sure where that is coming from. What I see is a cam that probably has high duration at 0.004" (where Crane measures) and it is bleeding off cylinder pressure due to the slower lobes. If you check a DCR calculator with your cam and then the AFR 6016 cam for comparison I think you will see this happening. The curves look really good, but the cam is the limiter and if you want more the cam unfortunately looks like what will be required.
07-26-2009, 01:07 PM
#67
Let's say I don't think there is anything wrong with the setup. However, if you want more power then I think if you look at the duration numbers of your current cam and one with faster lobes you are likely to find you have more duration (for the same cam size at 0.050" lift) and as a result less cylinder pressure (the intake is closing later). A prime example was my original Crane 216/224 cam with 0.551 lift and 115 LSA. My new cam is 224/228 with around 0.580 lift and 114 LSA. Even though the new cam appears to have more duration, the valve closing is actually before that of the smaller cam because it closes faster, i.e., the duration of the smaller cam was actually more.
As for the dip in your curve up top, that looks like the dyno lost signal. You will see that a lot if you look at other dyno curves.
As for the dip in your curve up top, that looks like the dyno lost signal. You will see that a lot if you look at other dyno curves.
07-26-2009, 01:52 PM
#68
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster California
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread has become interesting.
That was a nice explanation vettenuts gave regarding some of the cam dynamics involved. Lobe profile also plays a big part in performance characteristics and results.
I get the impression corvet786c is happy with his car but thinks there is more power on the table. At the same time he doesn't want to sacrifice streetability.
I think the torque curve is nice on corvet786c car. Putting in the wrong cam can make more peak numbers but also make a more peaky torque curve.
I myself at this point would be asking myself. What can I do to keep that nice torque curve but get it higher up on the graph. I would also ask myself, What would be the most cost effective way to get there.
.
That was a nice explanation vettenuts gave regarding some of the cam dynamics involved. Lobe profile also plays a big part in performance characteristics and results.
I get the impression corvet786c is happy with his car but thinks there is more power on the table. At the same time he doesn't want to sacrifice streetability.
I think the torque curve is nice on corvet786c car. Putting in the wrong cam can make more peak numbers but also make a more peaky torque curve.
I myself at this point would be asking myself. What can I do to keep that nice torque curve but get it higher up on the graph. I would also ask myself, What would be the most cost effective way to get there.
.
07-26-2009, 02:30 PM
#70
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster California
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes.
I see the 224/228 AFR 6016 in vettenuts signature too.
Talking with Tony Mamo might not be a bad idea either.
Not sure about the 224/228 cam and your current roller rockers though.
.
I see the 224/228 AFR 6016 in vettenuts signature too.
Talking with Tony Mamo might not be a bad idea either.
Not sure about the 224/228 cam and your current roller rockers though.
.
07-26-2009, 05:38 PM
#71
On one dyno it made 445rw, I went to another and it made 430ish when I went in, done some tweaks and it made 446rw there. Theoretically, I could have driven back to the first dyno for some higher bragging rights, which could have been in the 455-460rw range, all with the LS6 intake still, and with 4.10 gears. But doing that would prove nothing besides diff dynos can read different.
As far as my track results, 11.2@122, those were made with a much weaker dyno number. It was de-tuned for nitrous down to 430 through the 10 bolt, but then I later installed the M9, which would have dyno'd less, but it ran the number and mph listed. The combo was awesome, and it PERFORMED, unlike a lot of dyno queens I see that don't do **** where it counts, which is at the track.
Yea, you need to have some things to get a low ET, but look at mph with a lot of setups boasting much higher peak numbers. With a very near full weight car, weakened tune that after you throw in the fact of the 9", might not have shown but only in the 415rw range, but somehow traps consistant 122? 122.12 and 122.11 back to back to be exact. It takes a good spread of power, not just a peaky power band to do that IMO.
Here's the 446/411 graph from 06. The tune was done by a local shop. I'm sure one of the seasoned veterans that often tune some awesome combos, could have worked a little more magic and saw a bit higher numbers. I'll never know though, and I was more than satisfied with how it performed at the track with even less hp than this graph shows.
07-28-2009, 10:58 AM
#73
I saw your post a while ago and wanted to comment. Your numbers are around what they should be, they are solid for the size cam. I do agree on the other's comment that more could be had with a better chosen cam, before changing the intake (although the intake would never hurt).
I probably wouldn't have bothered with RR's, but do check the condition of the plugs, I've also had the TR6's recommended to me at a .45 gap. and they work well. A good builder would have checked pushrod length and PVC anyways.
AFR's are awesome heads and consistently put down the power for these type of streetable builds. Other consideration would be things like your exhaust, pacesetters are not the best and stepping up to a 1 7/8 would not hurt at a future point. It all adds up, underdrive pulley's, ported TB, icats, etc... I think you have those but just mentioning.
A cam swap will make a world of difference. I don't run a big cam by todays standards (when i put it in it was) 228/228/ 112, and my heads are the same "as cast" milled .024 on a stock GM gasket and ls6 intake but just a couple weeks ago it pulled 407rwhp on a mustang dyno, through an automatic and a 3.91 12 bolt.
You definately have something to work with here and the car is right where it should be with what you have done. Throw a nice yet still streetable cam in there and you will be toying with 450rwhp, along with better power under the curve, that cam just ain't cutting it.
I probably wouldn't have bothered with RR's, but do check the condition of the plugs, I've also had the TR6's recommended to me at a .45 gap. and they work well. A good builder would have checked pushrod length and PVC anyways.
AFR's are awesome heads and consistently put down the power for these type of streetable builds. Other consideration would be things like your exhaust, pacesetters are not the best and stepping up to a 1 7/8 would not hurt at a future point. It all adds up, underdrive pulley's, ported TB, icats, etc... I think you have those but just mentioning.
A cam swap will make a world of difference. I don't run a big cam by todays standards (when i put it in it was) 228/228/ 112, and my heads are the same "as cast" milled .024 on a stock GM gasket and ls6 intake but just a couple weeks ago it pulled 407rwhp on a mustang dyno, through an automatic and a 3.91 12 bolt.
You definately have something to work with here and the car is right where it should be with what you have done. Throw a nice yet still streetable cam in there and you will be toying with 450rwhp, along with better power under the curve, that cam just ain't cutting it.
Last edited by DannoWS6; 07-28-2009 at 11:04 AM.
07-28-2009, 11:32 AM
#74
^^^^^^ Thanks for your response. I do have something to wqork with and appreciate all the responses. I know what I have to do and It will start with the cam first. I know I can just throw a fast on there and call it the day, but I want my valvetran geometry to be correct first then I will throw on the Fast.
Then in a month or two when I come back to this section with my new dyno results I think everyone is goin to be surprised!!
Then in a month or two when I come back to this section with my new dyno results I think everyone is goin to be surprised!!
07-29-2009, 06:41 PM
#80
