KB99WS6

iTrader: (6)

I havent dyno'd it since I put on the LT's, ory and LS6 intake. I just had them installed last week. I am expecting in the 340-350rwhp range. I will be happy as long as it's at least 340.

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

That's cool. Let me know what you get.

NOBR8KSS

iTrader: (12)

I put down 340 (oops...not 430) rwhp, 340 rwtq on my 1999 with an LS1 intake and the A/F ratio was around 11.5:1
Are your duals mandrel bent?

Additionally, the dip in your graph may be caused by a dirty MAF sensor...a friend of mine had the same dip in his dyno graph and it was because the MAF sensor had some debris on the screen and some K&N filter oil on the resistors.

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

I assume you mean 340 Rwhp?!?

No mine are not mandrel bent. I'm thinking that could be costing me. Hmmm... I will check out my MAF for gunk. Any cleaning advice?

ricekillman

My flowmaster mufler is doing little to impeede my HP. I have a cutout in the I part of the Y and dynoed that way. You have true duals. I realize that you might think that would make more power, but I doubt that it would make much more over a descent cutout. Your car just like mine is a bolt ons car. No Cam, heads, etc. At some point your exhaust is no longer a bottleneck. The home ported throttle body I would think would give you less hp then a simple dyno variation between runs, esp on a boltons only car. With a cam, you would gain more. And yes I did dyno with the Ford rear, but that is also with a tune, which by the way gained me little power but did give me a better AF mixture for spray and made me sleep better. Also, when I dynoed the car, I only made one NA pull and I simply drove the car right onto the dyno from the steet with no cool down at all. From my experiance I have always gained a few hp on the dyno when doing back to back pulles the latter pulles being a bit highr. By I was trying to dyno on spray and only did one NA pull unfortunatly I realized that my bottle was only at 700 psi and spraying irratic I could see it fluctuate on the graph. I realy think that your numbers are right on. Realisticaly you could pull more hp out of it by leaning it out some, but I don't think that would be worth it right now. You don't have an actuall aftermarket TB, MAF sensor, Electric Watter pump, The LS6 is not ported, we are using the Lids and not the FIPK (which migh or might not gain power), we are not running crazy timing and a short belt. Believe me there is a lot more power in your car as well as mine with more boltons, what numbers were you expecting? 360? If you say 350, well you might be there on a different day at the dyno. Conditions play a big role. There are cars out there with cams that put out numbers like or maginally better then ours and they are happy with their number. What did your car trap at the track. Don't worry about the dyno so much. I know a guy who dynoed 330 at the wheels with a Fast Intake and full exhaust and trapped 107. I dynoed 343-350 and trapped 113.66? almoast a 7mph difference. I don't understand why people value dyno numbers so much, after all you are trying to go fast on the road and track not on a dyno. I use the dyno. The same dyno every time just to mesure and assure that a part/s are improving performance not to gudge speed. All dynos are different just like the cars. Look at the Mustang Dyno you would put out even less Hp on that, would you be even more concerned?

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

So, ricekill, to sum up what you're saying is that dyno variation and tuning would account for the kind of differances I am seeing and that I don't have anything to worry about?

ricekillman

I really think so. I mean all cars are different and some may run stronger then others, but for the mods that you have realisticaly thats good. And like you said you don't have a tune yet + all the other stuff I mentioned. Imagine if you did or when you do! Everyone else that posted, had their car put out very similer number. (almost too similar to be true ).

whitecamaross

your car is fine man. once u tune and do the rest you should be where you should be at. dont expect crazy numbers like the 01s or 02 ls1s though. they have revised heads and a smaller cam that performs a little better and therefore it puts down more power. i put down 328rwhp untuned before my ls6 intake and cam and totally untuned.
after cam, tune and intake i gained 35rwhp which is where i should be at. granted, i see many people putting down more than what i put down, but once again not all cars are the same. 99s for some reason were never strong as other years.

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

Cool. I was for some reason thinking that on the 01-02's the smaller cam would rob any gains from better heads, but that's probably not true. Now that I think about it: better heads and a smaller cam would mean similar peak #'s but better down low. Which is exactly what I'm seeing, comparing his graph to mine.

Sorry It's taking me so long to post the graphs; I just keep forgetting to bring them to work.

KB99WS6

iTrader: (6)

I never even realized the 01-02's had revised heads. Whitecamaro, your HP seems a little low. I think a ported TB may get you to hit 370. Your track time and mph is good though so I am thinking that your dyno just reads a little lower than some others. I have seen plenty of other people with more power listed in their sig but not as good of a trap speed or e.t. I think dyno variances from one to the next and one day to the next make a big difference.

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

His numbers would be low for an M6 but not an A4... Which do you have, whitecamaro? I would assume A4 since your track #'s are good...

whitecamaross

i am m6. i dont know if it was the fact that it was 85 degrees here in fl or the fact that i drove 2 hrs and 30 min away to get tuned. car sat down for about 1 hr before going on the dyno. also, there was a kid there with a 00 trans am who got it dynoed and he put down 395rwhp with the same cam i have and heads?? i dont know, perhaps it is the a/f ratio which is set at 13.5 across the board. i have 368ft/lbs of tq which is more than my hp. i do love the tq on this cam across the board, but yes i agree that my hp is low. once again, i wouldnt buy a 99 ls1 again if i had to do it all over again. also, my e.t. is my first time out with m/t drag radials. i didnt know how hard i should launch with them, i heated them up nicely, but i have the crappy master cylinder so when i launched at 3k my clutch stayed on the floor. after it was all said and done i went around the wate box and staged. i launched at 3k and didnt spin at all, but bogged which gave me a best 60 of 1.98. that was it. that was the best 60 foot i could get all night after 8 passes. i think that if i could drop it to 1.7s i could easily go 12
12.2-12.3 which is where i should be at with this cam considering that i have full weight, stock gears.

davered00ss

iTrader: (4)

Your #'s seem good to me they are just like mine w/similar mods.

whitecamaross

your e.t. is exactly what mine was. i had the same bolt ons and cat back as well. now i just need the ***** to launch harder and get a low 12

chpmnsws6

iTrader: (70)

"and we have a new horsepower record!!!!"

NOBR8KSS

iTrader: (12)

For your consideration:

Stock with lid and loudmouth cat-back: 318 rwhp, 326 rwtq

Lid, MAC headers, 2.5" crush bent w/ x-pipe & Dynomax bullets: 308 rwhp, 311 rwtq

Lid, MAC headers, Lane's 2.5" mandrel bent duals w/ Dr. Gas x-pipe and 14" Magnaflow mufflers: 340 rwhp, 340 rwtq

PCM had stock tuning in all three cases.

As for cleaning the MAF, just get some q-tips and some carb cleaner/brake cleaner/ electric parts cleaner. Wet the q-tips with the cleaner and VERY GENTLY clean the resistors on the MAF. Than spray them with the cleaner to remove any residue. I would spray the MAF screen also in case it has oil on it.

KB99WS6

iTrader: (6)

whitecamaro, I don't know why you are singling out 99's, I think it's just the simple fact that 01' & 02's seem to perform slightly better on average than all models prior to 01'. I don't think there is anything wrong with 99's. just look at you 1/4 mile times... 12.59@113 looks pretty impressive to me for a full weight fbody with stock cam and heads. Your dyno number's are clearly low relative to your track perfromance. Where evre you take it to get dyno'd obviously reads low...similar to a mustang dyno.

NOBR8KSS,
I can't figure out your middle dyno numbers at all. Since you mentioned the MAF cleaning, was that the problem on the 2nd dyno?? Adding Headers, Y-pipe and bullets obviously should not make you lose 10rwhp and 15rwtq. Was this all the same dyno?? Either way those 2nd dyno numbers are insanely low for the mods.

big dave

I agree with whitecamaro. I started a similar post a few months back and the overwhelming responses about low dynos were from 99 owners. My m6 dynoed 296 rwhp with a lid. Very low compared to other years.

KB99WS6

iTrader: (6)

you are saying lower than 00's AND 98's?? It seems to me 98-00's are all the same but the 01' & 02's dyno higher. Not sure what would make 99's less powerful. Is there anything unique to the engine/drivetrain in 1999?

whitecamaross

nothing unique at all, but if u do a search you will see that there are quite a few more 99s with low numbers than any other year. i know that they injectors changed in 99 to a smaller one, but thats about it. i am not saying that all 99s are slow, but alot of people seem to have low numbers with them. i am not complaining about my numbers, but yes they do seem a little low for my mods. i was expecting more like 375rwhp or so with stock heads.
the only thing i have learned since owning this car is that dyno numbers dont mean ****. it is track numbers what count and right now i know i have a low 12 sec ls1 in my hands, but i just havent had the ***** to get it off the line the way i should.