zacht

iTrader: (18)

Dyno'd the car yesterday, finally. did good. had a few tuning issues and what not, maybe some people can help me out.

1998 WS6
2004 crate motor, around 30k
Fast 92 jantzer 95mm TB
42lb injectors, walbro 255, racetronix hotwire
stock maf and K&N KIPK
TSP stage 1 243's dual springs
Pat g cam- 231/239 .617/.623 114+4
ebay longtubes, ORY, SLP LM1 exhaust
7.4 trick flow pushrods
LS7 lifters
Katech timing chain
melling pump

stock T56
monster stage 3 clutch 18lb flywheel

MWC 9 inch 31 spline 3.89 gears
OEM C6 Z06 wheels

im sure im forgetting a few things. any questions ask.

i have a few dyno graphs.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]


i had bought a WS6 lower air box, FTP 104mm lid, 100mm MAF all that stuff, and was wanting a dyno comparison....these two graphs show the difference between the two setups....not very pleased. i was almost positive it would have been worth 5-10hp....im pretty sure the top graph is the 100mm setup.....

for some reason when we first spun the car up...around 5200 rpms it would just start leaning out....we couldnt get the VE right...so we have the MAF working to 6500....

feel free to chime in! i can post my tunes if anyone wants to take a look and help out...i almost feel like theres some left in it....

30th t/a

iTrader: (51)

Nice numbers thru the 9"

zacht

iTrader: (18)

thats what i say! and the 19x12's with 325s....

i just need help understanding why i didnt gain a thing from the stock maf to the 100mm.... like i said...its weird we made it run on the maf up to 6500....im not really digging that...

StangBanger317

Nice numbers man!!

I should be pretty close to that on my setup..

thunderstruck507

iTrader: (18)

If the stock maf and your other filter setup were not causing a restriction, then switching won't make a difference. You can do a WOT run with each set up and look at vacuum at WOT. If you aren't pulling vacuum then a bigger intake tract won't help. It could also be something else in the intake path is holding you back besides the MAF, but I doubt it.



Your numbers also seem on the high side for being the milder ported heads, especially though the 9". IMO they are high by about 20rwhp. I've only really noticed people on here gaining ~8-10rwhp from the 100mm MAF sensors on cars that make right at an honest 480-500rwhp. My guess is that your car doesn't need the bigger MAF.

The car should run hard though and I wouldn't stress about it. Either go back to stock MAF and retune for it so you can sell the bigger stuff or just keep it so you have room to grow in the future.

zacht

iTrader: (18)

your right...the maf probably isnt the restriction here...i sort of agree with you. but im not sure i think those numbers are completly out of line....i was suprised to see them numbers as well. im just going with...its a good combo all together...

i bought the heads used on here from a guy who had them with a ms4...he said they were 2.5's but after i bought them i called tsp and they said they were stage 1's... he dyno'd 473 through a t56 and 9 inch.... idk...who's to say what they are....all i know is they work out great....and for 800 bucks or whatever i paid im pretty happy with them...

i will also note i forgot i have a UDP and the A/C belt is off....
and if it matters a comp tensioner and a catch can with LS6 PCV setup....

thunderstruck507

iTrader: (18)

It is very possible then that they are some really good heads. Once you get some passes at the track you should have a good idea. For $800 I would be ecstatic with them too.

T/A KID

iTrader: (12)

When you upgraded to the 100mm MAF you shifted the entire MAF HZ range to the left, so WOT fueling could be lean. Example is before you probably didn't enter into PE until around 7500 hz, now you enter PE probably around 65-6700 hz (which where normally tuned for stoich off the 02 sensors) which would put fuel roughly 13% off (lean) at inital WOT.

From my experience the bigger MAF only helps on boosted setups that require more room in G/sec or Hz. I don't see any N/A apps that would really gain anything, if they do its because the tune was flawed initially.

Original poster good numbers, what I would expect from a combo like yours.

Sales4@Texas-Speed

iTrader: (4)

Pretty nice numbers for the setup, not often you see that kind of power through a 9". It doesn't surprise me that much that you didn't pick up that much power with that MAF. For it to properly run the tuner would have had to pretty much rebuild the MAF table which isn't an easy thing to do. Also, like previously stated, im not sure the setup really needs that large of a MAF.

zacht

iTrader: (18)

guess it just caught me off guard...lol. i thought that the K&N and stock maf was choking that car down....so i went ahead and bought all those parts and wanted that compare at the dyno....

the car is great...only thing i wanted to do was spray on the dyno...i dont feel like hitting it with the single nozzle tho...

kyphur

iTrader: (5)

A larger maf and tb/intake will actually slow the speed of the air as it comes through. The engine doesn't have to put in so much effort to pull more needed air as it did through a smaller passageway. MAF table will have to be done for the specific setup.

zacht

iTrader: (18)

shoot...i originally said my cam was 113+3...its actually 114+4...

venom ws7

iTrader: (13)

Great numbers for sure with 9" and heavy wheels
Congrats man

jmilz28

iTrader: (13)

Lots of cars, including those you think wouldn't, DO benefit from a bigger intake tract but if yours is one that will, it takes a LOT of tune work to extract the benefit and idle/crack nicely. I like your big lid and lower but you may consider the Z06 MAF. It's a sizable jump (almost 20% in area - 78mm to 85mm) but is much easier to tune with.

zacht

iTrader: (18)

we didnt have problems tuning to the 100mm maf...just simly did not pick up power at all...i can take it back and mess with it....we will see what happens...

jmilz28

iTrader: (13)

Regardless, these are stout numbers through a nine inch. Nice!