my FFHP 408ci, Patriot, TNT results.
12-19-2005, 08:45 AM
#41
Originally Posted by 98Z28CobraKiller
I am getting ready to drop an LS2 402 in mine and I hope to see higher numbers than what he is getting. I can't see the FAST intake and throttle body being good for 40rwhp over that LS6 w/ a ported TB. Maybe 40 at the crank and 20 at the wheels. To me, the cost per HP does not warrant the $1200 that it will cost. Specially when you can have the 20HP for free w/ a bigger NOS jet 
.
Does it run smooth? Is it pulling timing on the high end. I still haven't seen the dyno graph.
.Does it run smooth? Is it pulling timing on the high end. I still haven't seen the dyno graph.
12-19-2005, 03:07 PM
#43
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Miami, Fl.
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, from my experience, yes your numbers are a bit low. AT PEAK...Im sure if you see the graph that the torque curve is flat a paris hilton's *** all the way to redline.
Repectufully, i would think that with that setup, you should be in the 470-480 range. My motor with a m6 made 537 n/a at one point. I believe its higher than that right now..... Mike K. is the member. The motor made about 591 @ the crank. however, he has changed his setup (i believe) and should be making more power.
Anyways, if you reduce the 591 by 20% for the auto that 472rwhp. Those numbers where with a ported ls1 tb and a ls6 manifold, headers, almost exact cam spec but on a 114lsa.
Im not bragging but i agree that the numbers are a bit low. With my motor, initially i made 427rwhp with a completely stock LS1 intake setup. With an upgrade to a 90 fast setup, im expecting over the 490 range... You will see gains of about 40-45rwhp with a 90 fast and a set of heads with different flow characteristics.
NOw, with that, you should be very happy with those numbers. I have seen guys runs 11'z under 400rwhp. So cna you imagine the times with the N/A and then with the spray. That is an easy 10sec car with spray..traction limited. 9'z is are your disposal if you can get the power done. SO dont feel funky, the flat torque curve is nice. You really dont get to feel it because the stall flashes high but its there when you need it!!
just be happy with what you got and i would leave the CR like that...unless you want a more radical motor....im happy with my 10.3:1....
Question..you said you have some bucking when driving? Have you hd this tuned out? I got some bucking especially when the tc is locked...it drives me nuts!!!!
Repectufully, i would think that with that setup, you should be in the 470-480 range. My motor with a m6 made 537 n/a at one point. I believe its higher than that right now..... Mike K. is the member. The motor made about 591 @ the crank. however, he has changed his setup (i believe) and should be making more power.
Anyways, if you reduce the 591 by 20% for the auto that 472rwhp. Those numbers where with a ported ls1 tb and a ls6 manifold, headers, almost exact cam spec but on a 114lsa.
Im not bragging but i agree that the numbers are a bit low. With my motor, initially i made 427rwhp with a completely stock LS1 intake setup. With an upgrade to a 90 fast setup, im expecting over the 490 range... You will see gains of about 40-45rwhp with a 90 fast and a set of heads with different flow characteristics.
NOw, with that, you should be very happy with those numbers. I have seen guys runs 11'z under 400rwhp. So cna you imagine the times with the N/A and then with the spray. That is an easy 10sec car with spray..traction limited. 9'z is are your disposal if you can get the power done. SO dont feel funky, the flat torque curve is nice. You really dont get to feel it because the stall flashes high but its there when you need it!!
just be happy with what you got and i would leave the CR like that...unless you want a more radical motor....im happy with my 10.3:1....
Question..you said you have some bucking when driving? Have you hd this tuned out? I got some bucking especially when the tc is locked...it drives me nuts!!!!
12-19-2005, 03:43 PM
#44
Originally Posted by obZidian
Personally, from my experience, yes your numbers are a bit low. AT PEAK...Im sure if you see the graph that the torque curve is flat a paris hilton's *** all the way to redline.
Repectufully, i would think that with that setup, you should be in the 470-480 range. My motor with a m6 made 537 n/a at one point. I believe its higher than that right now..... Mike K. is the member. The motor made about 591 @ the crank. however, he has changed his setup (i believe) and should be making more power.
Anyways, if you reduce the 591 by 20% for the auto that 472rwhp. Those numbers where with a ported ls1 tb and a ls6 manifold, headers, almost exact cam spec but on a 114lsa.
Im not bragging but i agree that the numbers are a bit low. With my motor, initially i made 427rwhp with a completely stock LS1 intake setup. With an upgrade to a 90 fast setup, im expecting over the 490 range... You will see gains of about 40-45rwhp with a 90 fast and a set of heads with different flow characteristics.
NOw, with that, you should be very happy with those numbers. I have seen guys runs 11'z under 400rwhp. So cna you imagine the times with the N/A and then with the spray. That is an easy 10sec car with spray..traction limited. 9'z is are your disposal if you can get the power done. SO dont feel funky, the flat torque curve is nice. You really dont get to feel it because the stall flashes high but its there when you need it!!
just be happy with what you got and i would leave the CR like that...unless you want a more radical motor....im happy with my 10.3:1....
Question..you said you have some bucking when driving? Have you hd this tuned out? I got some bucking especially when the tc is locked...it drives me nuts!!!!
Repectufully, i would think that with that setup, you should be in the 470-480 range. My motor with a m6 made 537 n/a at one point. I believe its higher than that right now..... Mike K. is the member. The motor made about 591 @ the crank. however, he has changed his setup (i believe) and should be making more power.
Anyways, if you reduce the 591 by 20% for the auto that 472rwhp. Those numbers where with a ported ls1 tb and a ls6 manifold, headers, almost exact cam spec but on a 114lsa.
Im not bragging but i agree that the numbers are a bit low. With my motor, initially i made 427rwhp with a completely stock LS1 intake setup. With an upgrade to a 90 fast setup, im expecting over the 490 range... You will see gains of about 40-45rwhp with a 90 fast and a set of heads with different flow characteristics.
NOw, with that, you should be very happy with those numbers. I have seen guys runs 11'z under 400rwhp. So cna you imagine the times with the N/A and then with the spray. That is an easy 10sec car with spray..traction limited. 9'z is are your disposal if you can get the power done. SO dont feel funky, the flat torque curve is nice. You really dont get to feel it because the stall flashes high but its there when you need it!!
just be happy with what you got and i would leave the CR like that...unless you want a more radical motor....im happy with my 10.3:1....
Question..you said you have some bucking when driving? Have you hd this tuned out? I got some bucking especially when the tc is locked...it drives me nuts!!!!
BTW- heres a 408 with stock 6.0L heads, bigger cam, higher compression, LS6 intake, not sure if its an A4 or not, but im assuming it is. Put down 425, thats 15 less then mine, & the only difference is the heads. So makes me wonder if mine arre close to what it should be with the fast 90/90.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...24#post3955424
Last edited by Z'mnypit; 12-19-2005 at 03:59 PM.
12-19-2005, 07:53 PM
#46
Ok guys, Ive got the graphs for the N/A pull & the TNT 200 pull, the others are all combined on 1 sheet so Ill post these first. Sorry bout the quality but all I have here is a digital camera. Ill will try to sacn them at work tommorow. These graphs are SAE corrected so here ya go. Is it me or does the cam look like it peaks a little soon?
N/A
TNT F1 200 shot (Bottle pressure 950psi)
N/A
TNT F1 200 shot (Bottle pressure 950psi)
12-29-2005, 12:52 PM
#48
It's a bit hard to gauge much from the way the graph's axes are set up and the small window that is being shown (5200-7000rpm). From what I see the cam peaks around 6400? Doesn't look like it peaks too early to me. If anything, it could peak *maybe* a couple hundred rpm later but I wouldn't worry about that too much. If you want it to peak later, retard it a degree or two, you definitely have enough torque/hp under the curve to make up for it, especially with the 200 shot. I believe your cam's powerband is something like 2500-6800 (being that it has the same duration as mine, although a bit lower lift).
12-29-2005, 02:10 PM
#49
Originally Posted by ArcticZ28
It's a bit hard to gauge much from the way the graph's axes are set up and the small window that is being shown (5200-7000rpm). From what I see the cam peaks around 6400? Doesn't look like it peaks too early to me. If anything, it could peak *maybe* a couple hundred rpm later but I wouldn't worry about that too much. If you want it to peak later, retard it a degree or two, you definitely have enough torque/hp under the curve to make up for it, especially with the 200 shot. I believe your cam's powerband is something like 2500-6800 (being that it has the same duration as mine, although a bit lower lift).
12-29-2005, 02:37 PM
#50
11 Second Club
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: The Confederacy
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Z'mnypit
Right, all motor the cam was fine, but on the jug it just goes down hill after 5200rpm. Ive got a fast 90mm intake & NW 90mm on the way, so in a month or two Im going to re-dyno. Im not sure why they did the graphs that way. Ill try to get them emailed to me from the dyno & see if they are any different.
12-29-2005, 03:28 PM
#51
That is true, I didnt think about that. It was running pig rich on the bottle. Ive got a bottle warmer for next time. So the pressure should hold alot better. I just know there is more power there, I just have to find it. Im also working on a SD tune, well I was now Im waiting on my intake. So Ill be ready to dyno again in a month or so.
01-09-2006, 02:12 PM
#53
TECH Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: At the office
Posts: 3,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Z'mnypit
It did once.
I was thinking they were a little low also, but with the CR being 10.7-1, & having the LS6 intake, stock ported TB & no underive pulleys it seemed to be about right.
I was thinking they were a little low also, but with the CR being 10.7-1, & having the LS6 intake, stock ported TB & no underive pulleys it seemed to be about right.
01-09-2006, 03:39 PM
#54
Originally Posted by 98Z28CobraKiller
Did you get the Fast and the NW on the car? Can you FEEL any difference?
The heads may be holding it back a smudge but not much. The car needs a full out tune.
The map sensor was reading 87kpa at idle & 101kpa WOT with the ls6 intake, & with the Fast 90 & the NW 90 it reads 46kpa at idle & I havent pulled the log yet to see what it was reading WOT. Ill post that tonight. I plan on re-dynoing very soon. Ill keep ya'll posted.
01-09-2006, 08:03 PM
#55
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (36)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wayne, MI
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just a quick question. What size headers do you have? Are they 1 3/4?. I have a 408 I'm trying to work the bugs out of and I was told I need to go to 1 7/8 headers. Of course money dictates everything. Just worndering. By the way nice set-up.
01-09-2006, 08:20 PM
#56
Originally Posted by Shoulder Shaker
just a quick question. What size headers do you have? Are they 1 3/4?. I have a 408 I'm trying to work the bugs out of and I was told I need to go to 1 7/8 headers. Of course money dictates everything. Just worndering. By the way nice set-up.
01-10-2006, 09:09 AM
#58
Originally Posted by Shoulder Shaker
Would your numbers go up if you went to 1 7/8's headers?
01-10-2006, 04:53 PM
#59
Originally Posted by Z'mnypit
Anytime you can get more air in & out faster you'l make more power. I just done see it being worth my effort to spend $700-800 on another set of headers to gain 5-10hp.