Bolt on 01 Z06 378rwhp, Bolt on 2002 Z06....404Rwhp
12-01-2011, 10:45 PM
#23
I've done back to back tests on 10-12 cars over the years swapping in various aluminum flywheels and lightweight clutch setups. It's always made a difference. Taking weight off the back of the crank will always equate to more power being transferred to the rear wheels.
12-01-2011, 11:25 PM
#24
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
O.k. Just sayin my experiance showed no dyno gain....and my whole clutch, flywheel and pp weights 17 lbs. I went from a 37lb spec with alum. flywheel to my current set-up and saw no definitive difference as far as dyno numbers go. Seems like a fact in my case.
On contrary to what you think, a light weight clutch set-up will not "make power". It will only allow the engine to accelerate faster do to a lower MOI.
On contrary to what you think, a light weight clutch set-up will not "make power". It will only allow the engine to accelerate faster do to a lower MOI.
12-02-2011, 08:10 PM
#26
10 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bishop,Texas
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just got off the dyno about an hour ago. Car picked up 6rwhp with the 1.8 rockers and no tuning because my laptop died. I'm sure I can squeeze 2 more hp if i wanted but the car is running very well minus the clutch getting stuck to the floor. Tick master here I come
12-02-2011, 10:39 PM
#27
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Hell Yea!! Good job!
It almost looks like it put low to mid range tq in it to.
I wonder if the 1.8 rr rockers would be much of a over my 1.7 HS rr.
These ls6's are awesome little engines. Get a ported fast 90 on it and you'll go over 420rwhp too.
It almost looks like it put low to mid range tq in it to.
I wonder if the 1.8 rr rockers would be much of a over my 1.7 HS rr.
These ls6's are awesome little engines. Get a ported fast 90 on it and you'll go over 420rwhp too.
12-25-2011, 08:02 PM
#28
TECH Resident
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montgomery, TX
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hmmm, I've been thinking about messing with some 1.8 rockers on my Z. I need a little more power for the time being. Might have to do this. Thanks for the update man. Stout Z you have there.
04-18-2012, 10:31 PM
#29
06-01-2012, 11:17 PM
#30
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Just to update the thread. I got my 1.8's on and the 102 on of which I'm having some idle issues with, but only when the car is moving really.
The 1.8's made my car sound like it has a cam in it. Should be getting it tuned next week hopefully.
The 1.8's made my car sound like it has a cam in it. Should be getting it tuned next week hopefully.
06-09-2012, 06:43 AM
#33
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
I don't think most people have "full" bolt-ons like I do. If they do then 400+rwhp should not be a problem. My car did 399 first pull on the dyno still on the ls1 tune after the ls6 went in and made 405 that day after the tune. That was with poopy mac headers, udp, granitelli MA, airlid.
I've been working to much to mess with this thing. Hopefully I get some time today or tomorrow to mess with my idle issue. Hopefully with I'll pick up 8-10 with these mods.
I've been working to much to mess with this thing. Hopefully I get some time today or tomorrow to mess with my idle issue. Hopefully with I'll pick up 8-10 with these mods.
08-01-2012, 10:49 AM
#34
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
I figure I would post up my results from yesterday. Changes from the last time was installing 1.8rr and a fast 102(had a fast 90) This fast 102 I port matched the base and blended into the runners. It looked to be much better than the 90 but I don't think it was. The 102 may have cost a little power but I don't think it would be much. The 90 on my set-up would probably be optimal.
These are Dyno Dynamics #'s. For those Dynojet fans it would have made about 431rwhp. There is about a 3.5% difference in the way they read. I made 413whp on the last Dynojet I was on. That was before the fast intakes and the rocker swap.
These are Dyno Dynamics #'s. For those Dynojet fans it would have made about 431rwhp. There is about a 3.5% difference in the way they read. I made 413whp on the last Dynojet I was on. That was before the fast intakes and the rocker swap.
08-01-2012, 12:27 PM
#37
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
It's got all that. It's about as far as you can take a bolt-on engine. my maf is the slp 85mm. I don't know if a 100mm would really do it any good at this point. If I did anything else it would be put the fast 90 back on it.
08-01-2012, 08:42 PM
#39
10 Second Club
I'm ready for a ride Doug! I can't wait to take some back roads and beat the **** out your car for a change an give mine a break hahahaha
08-01-2012, 08:50 PM
#40
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
LOL....go fix your fuel pump. It's definitely something we could swap out and try.
Yours would probally like the 102 better. But you would need injectors and a fuel rail to make it work for keeping.
Sure, let me get the koni's on it and the new springs.
Yours would probally like the 102 better. But you would need injectors and a fuel rail to make it work for keeping.
