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

G5X3+FAST 2007 C6 +94rwhp/+51rwtq

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-25-2008, 11:16 AM
  #21  
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (36)
 
Black02SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Kokomo, IN
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by allngn_c5
Congrats on some killer numbers using the g5x3 cam from LG Motorsports.

I was wondering though, did they (LGM) tell you about the g5x3 vII ???

g5x3 vII is a touch more aggressive then version I and makes more power everywhere. I bet you'd have made another 10-12 rwhp and 10+ rwtq. My car was a test mule for the cam, and the numbers are in my sig.

Again congrats on the huge CAM ONLY numbers. GLM really can tune !!!
The guys at GLM are great. They really go out of their way to make the customer happy.

I actually got it from Howard at Redline Motorsports as he is a good friend. I had contacted Louis but he is so hard to get in touch with I just did the normal X3. If I hear back from Louis, I am up for pulling the current headers and throwing on a set of LG's to see if I can't pick up a little more torque.... Oh Louis........

Originally Posted by allngn_c5
Did you consider running a Meziere EWP for a few more ponies and better gas mileage ??
I had one on the camaro (forgot to mention above) and don't feel it is necessary at this point for the cost. IMO an EWP is the last bolt on item that should be purchased after heads. I noticed a little difference with my camaro, but not much. This car gets around 29-31 MPG on the highway and I couldn't ask for it to be any better.
Old 08-25-2008, 11:30 AM
  #22  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
allngn_c5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Thanks for the comments bro. I was just suggesting it because on long highway trips I would routinely see 34 mpg (actual)..... Lots of time in cruise mode at 80 or less in 6th. Just sips the gas, and considering fuel prices etc etc. I also liked how the car seemed to pull harder in 4th and 5th due to the reduction in load on the motor.

Again congrats on your setup. She's a real screamer.
Old 08-25-2008, 01:36 PM
  #23  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (4)
 
s346k's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: johnson co.
Posts: 3,433
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

it looked like the cam was still carrying power when you aborted the pull, any reason you didn't ride it out farther? also, given GLM's tuning abilities, do you have plans of installing a larger cam? i'd like to see a 240/244 on a 112+0 or something. it's not like the driveability would suffer.
Old 08-25-2008, 02:00 PM
  #24  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (7)
 
PewterScreaminMach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,628
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by s346k
it looked like the cam was still carrying power when you aborted the pull, any reason you didn't ride it out farther? also, given GLM's tuning abilities, do you have plans of installing a larger cam? i'd like to see a 240/244 on a 112+0 or something. it's not like the driveability would suffer.
I was about to ask the same thing. That cam was holding pretty strong where you let off at 6600 or so. I've rarely seen a HP curve get that flat up top and it was just barely starting to creep down. I would have held it out to 7000 to see how much it fell.

That car must pull like a freight train. Those are some impressive numbers.
Old 08-25-2008, 04:38 PM
  #25  
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (36)
 
Black02SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Kokomo, IN
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by s346k
it looked like the cam was still carrying power when you aborted the pull, any reason you didn't ride it out farther? also, given GLM's tuning abilities, do you have plans of installing a larger cam? i'd like to see a 240/244 on a 112+0 or something. it's not like the driveability would suffer.
Well that is a good idea. I can assure you that Pat would strongly disagree with you as this is the 3rd cam he's put in this car since Feb... We slowly went up in size as we started with the 234.238 to see how it would do.

Before I have him pull this cam out for a bigger one, I'd do some heads at the same time. Depending if the new weind intake comes out before the car is a collectors model will determine which way I go.

For this being a street car/setup it was never tuned on the dyno... It was a full street tune and then just had two pulls to see what numbers it threw up. I know the power will continue on a few more hundred RPM's but didn't feel it was necessary to spin it that high on the dyno. The car is shifted around 6700 on the street.
Old 08-25-2008, 10:06 PM
  #26  
JPH
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (2)
 
JPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 3,776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by stevegrizzle
Good #'s.......post the afr's on that it looks like you have a big dip in the TQ there......
AFRs are fine. Headers possibly are culperate.
Old 08-25-2008, 10:46 PM
  #27  
TECH Enthusiast
 
stevegrizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: FL
Posts: 650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

was wondering if anyone saw that post.......well as long as he is happy that is all that matters.
Old 08-26-2008, 07:08 PM
  #28  
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (36)
 
Black02SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Kokomo, IN
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Even though the car does have that slight dip, the torque curve is very nice IMO. It makes 350ftlbs at 3,000 rpm. I think it could be alittle better, but its very nice.




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:37 PM.