yeah, I've been wanting to go to the local 1/8 mile track. I'm not upset with the numbers in the slightest. The car runs great. We must learn that not everyone will get the same numbers with similar modifications. There are very many parameters to really compare any two setups.

 

I think you have the wrong attitude: people can and should get similar numbers from similar mods. If you don't have similar #'s, then something is wrong with the dyno or something is wrong with one or more of your mods. You had a bad 02 and that is known to cause large power losses. So if you re-dynoed with the 02 fixed, you should see similar #'s to those with similar mods, assuming that both you and the one you are comparing to are tuned.

If you still don't see similar #'s at that point, you need to look and find out what is wrong, not just say "oh, well, I guess #'s don't mean anything."

I'm just trying to help you here, man.

 

he's not missing a boat load of tq, the tsp 231/237 has never been up on tq. its one reason i'd never drop one in. the ramps are really slow as well.

 

I had a vague recollection of that. Thanks for the info, JRP. I stand corrected.

 

Yes, the ramp rate is lower with this cam. I wanted it that way so I didn't have to change out springs often. It was between the 231 and the g5x3.

 

Yes, my numbers are SIMILAR, but like I said, I didn't have a ported TB, or a pulley. I also had a bad o2. Add that up, and you see what I got - 372/355. How many times do I have to repeat myself? GOSH!

 

if it runs good at the track,who cares what the dyno numbers are.dynos are a tool,plain and simple.

 

At the risk of repeating MYself:

And then you said:

So I think we are pretty much in agreement, then!

 

 

You know what Napolean? YOU can leave! lol Anyways back on topic...those numbers aren't terrible. See what your trap speed is at the track for the true indication of your power.

 

I'm not with stupid. A dyno IS a tool and if you choose to ignore what it tells you, then you're shooting yourself in the foot. 66deuce, even if my car "runs good" at the track, if I see a problem at the dyno I am sure going to dig until I find out the cause. As I said, I think we have koolaid's mystery solved, but for you to basically imply that everyone should ignore dyno numbers isn't at all right.

Dyno numbers are facts and I don't ignore facts. I can ACCOUNT for facts by seeing that they are caused by bad 02 sensors or other explanations, but I don't IGNORE facts.

 

It was never really a mystery. I knew I had a bad o2. Judging by my duno sheet, you would think that nothing was wrong with the o2. Look at the a/f. It is almost a perfect 13 all the way.

Let me set something straight. I do not ignore dyno numbers. The dyno is more often considered a bragging tool rather than a testing tool in our current times. A dyno can help you determine if you gained or lost HP, and how certain modifications respond to your car.

Let me give you an example. JRP says that the 231/237 is low on torque, and has a slow ramp rate. One might think that the 231/237 isn't a great cam because of a few ft.lbs. of torque "missing." If you do a search on this forum, you will come across many people who have this cam, and run 11's with stock heads. So should we discount that cam because it doesn't compare on the dyno to other high rate camshafts?

black_knight - I appreciate your participation in this thread. I appreciate the fact that you feel soo strongly about dyno numbers, and that you can argue your point in a civil manner. I don't think that anyone is ignoring dyno numbers, atleast I know that I am not. When I got home with my dyno sheet, I will say that I was a little distraught about the numbers since they weren't on par. I knew that I had a bad o2 and I didn't have the ported TB and pulley, so I wasn't that upset. Now, if I go back and dyno the car with everything in working order along with the ported TB and dyno similar numbers, then I will start searching.

You are right - dyno numbers are factual since they are derived from standardized measurement and trial. Let me run a scenaro by you to show where I am coming from. Say we take two people with the same exact setup. One is from Colorado, and one is from Texas. Right there, we have an altitude diference. Then one person has heavy z06 wheels on their car, and another has lightweight wheels. One person has 4.10's an the other has 3.42's. Do you think that the dyno numbers will differ? Most people want to post the highest numbers for bragging rights, which is understandable. So if one person posts a corrected graph, and the other posts an uncorrected one, there will be quite a differece. Should the guy that posted the corrected graph be alarmed? Eh, probably not.

Right now, I don't think that there is anything wrong with the car. It runs and drives great. Just for you, I will have a UD pulley installed and will dyno the car again. Then I'll post the graph for you to take a look at.

 

My numbers are in the sig. I had the stock 10 bolt at the time. I was a little dissapointed in my torque but it does run good at the track. Not sure what that would be in the 1/4 mile? Hope this helps.

 

Wow.. hes really trying to defend his car and those low numbers instead of fixing them. Hey bro.. my car made more torque then that when I was just bolt ons.... go from there and fix your ****

 

Koolaid, you don't have to re-dyno on my account.

You make a good point about people misusing dyno numbers, but it does not at all contradict what I said.

Let me explain:

Remember what I said about "accounting" for facts? Higher gears, as you said, will show lower power on the dyno. It is one thing to look at a car with gears that dynos lower and say "well, that makes sense. If we account for the gears, then everything is fine." It's another thing to look at that graph and say "AAAAA! It dynoed lower but it isn't slow at the track! Dynos are useless! I'm going to ignore dynos!"

The post by 66deuce, as I saw it, was a statement of the latter opinion. That's why I said that I was not with stupid.

You don't want to oversimplify things. I think I see the same attitude here as I was criticizing 66deuce for: You're saying that since the 231/237 has low torque but runs good #'s at the track for some, then we should all just ignore torque #'s ("torque #'s, BTW, is code for low-end power).

Just like ignoring the dyno was a bad idea, so is ignoring tq numbers.

Those people running 11's must have gears and stalls to keep them in the high powerband of that cam. Yes, you can run 11's with it. Yes, it will also be a dog on the low-end compared to other cams. If you don't put in the high stall and gears, you're going to be scratching your head and wondering why you don't run 11's.

I'm not suggesting that you would do something like that, or even necessarily that you were saying to ignore TQ (low-end power). But if someone were to take your advice at face value, that's exactly what they would do.

 

No, I really won't dyno just on your account. I'm going to have some SFC's welded up soon, so I'll probably do it then.

I think we are saying the same thing, just different ways. I know what you mean.

 

That's great. I bet it's those headlight covers huh?

 

I trapped 118mph with this cam, on stock heads, on Nitto DR's.

 

Cool, man. I thought so.

 

ok,i'm not saying you should ignore dyno numbers.i guess i should have explained my opinion better.like i said,dynos are a tool and can and should be used to properly tune a car and fix a problem if there is one.but all too often people get hung up on dyno numbers.HP numbers vary from dyno to dyno.(i've seen at least a 10rwhp and 10rwtq difference with my car between Speed Inc. in Chicago and Dynotech in Ft.Wayne,In.). i've also seen some lower HP cars beat cars that had more HP,at least on paper.all i'm saying is if your car runs good and is quick at the track then don't worry if it doesn't make as much HP or TQ on the dyno as somebody elses.thanks for calling me stupid,lol.