Dynamometer Results & Comparisons Dyno Records | Dyno Discussion | Dyno Wars

A little disappointed...LS1+228R+PRC Stg 2.5 5.3s+FAST92 = 421/391

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-06-2012, 11:07 PM
  #21  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (16)
 
I8UR4RD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Bama
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

those are great numbers. run some race fuel, advance the timing. work on the exhaust, that can help some. but really man those numbers are awesome. you may be able to hit a high 6 if you want too. and the driveability of it (based on the tune) is alot better than more agressive setups that make more power but not throughout the entire power band like you do.
Old 03-05-2013, 10:37 AM
  #22  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
KrisR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wyoming, MN
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Bringing this back up. I was thinking up doing some upgrading.

For the same price, I can either do the PRC 227 heads and keep my existing 228R cam, or I can do the PRC 225s and go with something like a Torquer 2. I'm guessing that I could make more peak hp by going with the 225s and larger cam but driveability and average power would probably be better with the 'small' 228 cam and 227 heads?

Also, and I sort of forgot this aspect of it, the initial pre-FAST dyno numbers were with E85 fuel (the car was tuned for it before I purchased it). The current numbers are on 92 pump gas. When it got retuned after the FAST intake install, we switched to pump gas as I felt the E85 was a bit pointless. At this power/compression, is there really a hp gain going to E85? I've ran it with great success in my previously owned turbo cars but with less than 11:1 compression N/A is it really worth it?
Old 03-05-2013, 02:59 PM
  #23  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
 
DietCoke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, GA
Posts: 3,869
Received 55 Likes on 48 Posts

Default

There's no reason to change heads with a cam that small, you won't gain any power. Doesnt matter what kind of numbers the heads put up at over .6 lift, when you arent lifting the valves that high to ever see that sort of flow. Food for thought.

Also, my motor is 14.7:1. If you're going to run E85, you might as well build all the compression you can into your engine to get the maximum benefit of the fuel.
Old 03-05-2013, 03:20 PM
  #24  
TECH Addict
 
MikeWS6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,354
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Looks good to me. Its not fast enough? Ill be running that same combo soon.
Old 03-05-2013, 07:34 PM
  #25  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
KrisR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wyoming, MN
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by DietCoke
There's no reason to change heads with a cam that small, you won't gain any power. Doesnt matter what kind of numbers the heads put up at over .6 lift, when you arent lifting the valves that high to ever see that sort of flow. Food for thought.
Really? Don't the AFR 205 (for example) heads make 450+rwhp easy with small 224/228 cams with less than .600 lift?
Old 03-05-2013, 11:20 PM
  #26  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
 
DietCoke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, GA
Posts: 3,869
Received 55 Likes on 48 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by KrisR
Really? Don't the AFR 205 (for example) heads make 450+rwhp easy with small 224/228 cams with less than .600 lift?
Over a high velocity small port head like a ported 5.3? I don't see there being much if any of a gain, especially for the $2000 it costs.
Old 03-08-2013, 07:06 AM
  #27  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (14)
 
sscamaroburn02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,053
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts

Default

numbers look on par to me. I have the same intake/heads and slightly larger cam and made 435hp. I wouldn't get better heads unless you change that baby cam. Good luck!
Old 03-12-2013, 08:23 AM
  #28  
Super Hulk Smash
iTrader: (7)
 
JakeFusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pace, FL
Posts: 11,255
Received 138 Likes on 115 Posts

Default

Better heads always make more power no matter the cam. Hell put ported heads on a stock cammed car and you'll pick up a good chunk of power. The more cam you have, the more the heads can shine, but don't just look at where the cam lift is. Heads make power in the .200-.600" range; that's why heads with high mid-range lift make power, especially if they have port velocity to go with it.

However, in the OP's case, swapping heads will be an expensive change that won't be worth 20HP. A cam change could make 15HP for a lot less. However, you're going to give up some streetability to get there.
Old 03-12-2013, 11:16 AM
  #29  
LS1Tech Premium Sponsor
iTrader: (4)
 
Jason 98 TA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Texas!
Posts: 4,229
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

head design has definately made some advances in 5 years, you could benefit from something like a aftermarket casting head & new camshaft. That being said you have to decide if you want to spend extra $$$ for the extra power. A set of PRC as cast aftermarket castings & something like a Torquer v3 or Tsunami would be worth considering. If you can get 20hp from heads & 20hp from a camshaft change... It's really up to you on your overall goals & $$ your wanting to spend.
__________________
Jason
Co-Owner, Texas Speed & Performance, Ltd.
2005 Twin Turbo C6
404cid Stroker, 67mm Twins
994rwhp/902lb ft @ 22 psi (mustang dyno) www.Texas-Speed.com
Old 03-12-2013, 12:17 PM
  #30  
TECH Enthusiast
 
Austinma62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Saint Joseph, MO
Posts: 525
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

I think your numbers a pretty close to what they should be. You can check my signature to see what I have done, and my setup put down 428/400. For the amount of power your down, it could be contributed to many things, I wouldn't be worried about it if I was you. Be more worried about the things that matter, your et and mph at the track and how it feels on the street. That's a lot more important than some number a machine spits out. After all, it is just a tuning and comparison tool.
Old 03-14-2013, 12:39 AM
  #31  
Banned
iTrader: (3)
 
adamantium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: From the abyss
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by KrisR
is there really a hp gain going to E85?
Yes, e85 makes power over pump gas in any setup, compression, mods etc. Its oxygenated fuel with a higher tolerance for knock, lowers IATs etc... ofcourse its going to make more power than 93. It always makes power on even stock cars.
Old 03-15-2013, 08:02 AM
  #32  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
KrisR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wyoming, MN
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by adamantium
Yes, e85 makes power over pump gas in any setup, compression, mods etc. Its oxygenated fuel with a higher tolerance for knock, lowers IATs etc... ofcourse its going to make more power than 93. It always makes power on even stock cars.
Thanks. I do understand the general benefits of E85. I ran it most recently in the car I sold to get my current one, a 1999 Mustang GT with a built engine (still 4.6L) and 2v heads. It made just under 700whp at 24lbs of boost from a 76mm turbo. That car ran on E85 and it loved it.

If it's (for example) only a 5hp change to go to E85 over 92 pump gas in my current N/A car, I don't think it's worth it to me to be relegated to finding a gas station that sells it, even though many do in my area. I know I would never be able to feel the difference anyway. If it would pick up 10-20 (not likely) than sure, I'll run it.
Old 03-15-2013, 08:09 AM
  #33  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (41)
 
senicalj4579's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,257
Received 22 Likes on 20 Posts

Default

IDK what the problem is. This is a good gain imo. To many people expect to see unrealistic #s. My expectation for my fast 92 was to gain 5-10rwh across the board on a mustang dyno. Your #s are right on imo.
Old 03-15-2013, 08:10 AM
  #34  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
KrisR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wyoming, MN
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

So it sounds like it's not worth changing any of the major parts unless I completely revamp the whole setup and go big (e.g. PRC 227 heads and a larger cam like a Tv3). Even then, I might pick up only 30-40rwhp max for maybe $3000.

Sounds like I need to spray it! :evilgrin:

Never had a nitrous car before, maybe this is the one.....
Old 03-15-2013, 08:11 AM
  #35  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
KrisR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wyoming, MN
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by senicalj4579
IDK what the problem is. This is a good gain imo. To many people expect to see unrealistic #s. My expectation for my fast 92 was to gain 5-10rwh across the board on a mustang dyno. Your #s are right on imo.
Thank you. I'm realizing this now. Just had my hopes up I guess.
Old 03-15-2013, 01:21 PM
  #36  
Super Hulk Smash
iTrader: (7)
 
JakeFusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pace, FL
Posts: 11,255
Received 138 Likes on 115 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by KrisR
So it sounds like it's not worth changing any of the major parts unless I completely revamp the whole setup and go big (e.g. PRC 227 heads and a larger cam like a Tv3). Even then, I might pick up only 30-40rwhp max for maybe $3000.

Sounds like I need to spray it! :evilgrin:

Never had a nitrous car before, maybe this is the one.....
And here's the kicker: that setup probably won't be any faster than what you have now. The avg power probably won't be any greater say in the 3500-6000 range. 6000+ is where you'd see 20hp avg gain. Of course, if you set your car up to take advantage of the topend gain, you'd be faster. But all else being equal, you probably won't pick up much.
Old 03-15-2013, 01:56 PM
  #37  
Launching!
iTrader: (2)
 
tjwashow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Joliet, IL
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

nitrous yes!
Old 03-15-2013, 02:52 PM
  #38  
Banned
iTrader: (3)
 
adamantium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: From the abyss
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by KrisR
Thanks. I do understand the general benefits of E85. I ran it most recently in the car I sold to get my current one, a 1999 Mustang GT with a built engine (still 4.6L) and 2v heads. It made just under 700whp at 24lbs of boost from a 76mm turbo. That car ran on E85 and it loved it.

If it's (for example) only a 5hp change to go to E85 over 92 pump gas in my current N/A car, I don't think it's worth it to me to be relegated to finding a gas station that sells it, even though many do in my area. I know I would never be able to feel the difference anyway. If it would pick up 10-20 (not likely) than sure, I'll run it.
Itll be a more than 5whp, thats for sure. Ive seen 10-15whp on NA civics going from 93 to e85. Heres a dyno of a cam only 5th gen pump 92 vs e85. He picked up 11whp and 17wtrq through an auto. This is stock compression/heads.


Originally Posted by Rhino79
Well I milled an 8* angle on my throttle body to mimic what vararams power wedge does. On my 92 octane tune it bumped up to 463.

Now for the good part. I set up an E85 tune.
474rwhp 417rwtq unlocked in 4th.

Old 03-21-2013, 07:05 PM
  #39  
Launching!
iTrader: (4)
 
98z28jorge's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 264
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

I have the exact same setup as you just patriot stage 2 5.3s with the same cam and ls6 intake I'm running 7.1 7.0 @95-96 mph 1/8 that's pretty fast and nitrous all the way just hit my set up with a 125 shot and ran 6.70 @103.2 bottle is awesome and this set up loves it hope that helps
Old 04-04-2013, 10:36 AM
  #40  
TECH Addict
 
MikeWS6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,354
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by JakeFusion™
I think 15rwhp is about average gain for the FAST 92 over the LS6 even with heads/cam. Those heads aren't the greatest ever, but they are decent. 430rwhp sounds about right for that setup. To hit closer to 460, you'd need better heads, milled to hell, thinner gaskets, and all kinds of little tricks (EWP, roller rockers, etc). It adds up to a ton of cash for a few ponies.

I'm guessing the FAST had a better curve throughout (19 peak but perhaps more in the midrange?). Either way, it probably isn't super noticeable...
I was just curious how much can you really gain with an eletric water pump and roller rockers? Cant be that much right?


Quick Reply: A little disappointed...LS1+228R+PRC Stg 2.5 5.3s+FAST92 = 421/391



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:39 AM.