Why not, Ill tell you how fun it is tomorrow!

 

It'll be like riding a bull on roids while on fire. good luck

 

I don't know much about FI ... but I know that 16psi in a bigger cubed car is more air (power) than 16psi in a smaller cubed car...

 

I like the cost/benifet that jim poited out. Im using the same head unit as Bryan on a motor thats at least 10k less. with the same head unit.

 

Efficiency of your dollar is all that matters. Going faster for less trumps all.

 

Brian is running a carbon fiber driveshaft as well, padding his numbers. Where Jim I believe is running a heavy duty steel driveshaft.

 

Correct, it takes more air to make the same number of PSI in a larger cubed motor vs a smaller. There for the a turbo or blower would be working harder to make x amount of boost for a 427 vs a 346. Just clarifying in case anyone was confused.

 

remember Romanss, first guy to take a T56 fbody in the nines, didnt he do it on an all stock tranny, granted it didnt last to long, but he was able to get it to the nines.

 

Wilkinson, Do you even work on your own car? It looks like you opened your wallet , got big numbers and now you want to preach to the rest of us from the peak of your mountain. Not that you can't learn a lot from the internet, but to get into a technical argument with a guy that is the tuner for a nationally reconized shop is just plain stupid. Have a nice day.

 

LOL

427 C5R vs 357 LT1 !!!!


coudl not be a worse comparison...

The LT1 has a HUGE disavantage in the efficiency to start off with.
Not to mention displacement.

 

I 100% absolutely did not build my motor, I designed it on paper and paid an expert to assemble it. I don’t see the point of learning how to build a 427 on a 6200.00 block. Does it matter if Jim built his own engine. no. I have torn down engines before, and put them back together. Big Deal. It took him (2) turbos to make is power. So how efficient is that even it is not a 427. He started this, so bringing the "SHOP" car into it, has nothing to do with anything. This is between him and I. If Jim is capable of driving his car to 9.7 @ 149 miles and hour, then he is capable of driving mine in the same capacity, your point would be what? Mine weights the exact same thing with me in it 3520 without me in it and I have all of the same interior a/c leather blah, blah, blah. The difference here is jims is a automatic. So unless I become superman, I will never be able to out shift an automatic. That point I think we can all agree on.

This has turned to something stupid. One person asked about setting up a blown application. I made some comments about engine efficiency and then Jim as usual along with some other goobers stuck their nose into it, just like he did about the whole pump gas thing. There is nothing unsafe about my setup. I designed my car to be a street legal car. He didn't. I have yet to see any "Street Legal Cars" on this forum do the same. To be street legal according to Hot Rod Magazine, you have to have cats, exhaust, and run on pump gas. Passing emissions is just a bonus. So every time one of you yahoos open your mouth we are not comparing apples to apples.

Jim said himself that he did not build his car to be emission legal. Well guess what.. In Illinois, it appears based on a little research that vehicle emissions is required as it is in NC. So I can make my HP and legally drive my car on the street whereas he cant. All his leather, and A/C and everything else. Damn man I still have my cats on the car, lets keep it even.

Boost is a deficiency. You can say whatever you want, The more boost you have to generate to make your power the less efficient your engine is. Period. Boost is not measured from inside the engine, it is measured from the manifold. He chose to make his setup at 8:7, I chose 10:1, I could be driving down the road, and my supercharger could blow up, and I could drive it home, Based on his compression numbers he might be lucky to do the same. So how reliable is that. Jim, NOT I, chose to throw out that stupid comment about his car making more power and being faster, not me. So lets make it even. He has a 350+ CI motor I have a 427. as boost is not measured from inside the engine, all he has to do is drop the boost back to 16 and we get to see the results. It is not that he claims to be reliable on race gas, he has to make that claim because, he cant make that power on pump gas. PERIOD. The guys over in australia are making 1100RWHP on pump gas, with fuel injection, they are just not street legal according to our rules.

Obviously I was wrong and Jim and the rest of you could care less about gas mileage, reliability, engine efficiency, and running on a stock computer, even though it has been said on this forum that it could not be done @800hp. That is where I messed up. All you guys care about is your track time. You built your cars on a different premise than I did. So perhaps we need a pump gas section. I can add the race gas, raise my boost to 20psi and this conversation is over. In that scenario I am over 1000 at the tires or damn close to it. I want it on pump gas, so it is taking me a little longer to work it out.

I did it to prove it could be done. Anybody can slap two turbos on a 350 small block and make a bunch of power. ANYBODY. But being able to continue for the car to be 100% street legal in the traditional since, well.......That is a whole other thing.

We can resolve this right now, being that Jim didn’t build his car to follow these guidelines, that would mean that Jim doesn’t have any practical experience in that area. Being that I designed my engine to be specifically in that area, and did it successfully, that shows that I do have practical experience in that area. Obviously any respectable engine builder could have assembled either motor. I have not run my car with slicks for the very reason mentioned earlier, about the tranny. I know that if the car were to hook up, it might be over for the tranny.

I really would like to see this 847 847 dyno graph. Not to prove that he did it or not, but just to see it, as I have never seen anything that made that much power.

You dont see me going into drag racing threads and throwing out information that I know nothing about. You also dont see me going into threads talking about building an all out race motor. I have absolutely no clue. I have openly stated to him, john and numerous others, that I am unexperienced in drag racing. The only reason that I used a 9" rear end with a locker is because no one makes a differential that will handle that much power. I used a Carbon Fiber drive shaft to make the setup more efficient. Again showing choices. I wanted the most from the engine from the least amount of effort, he didn't. If Jim is so experienced at drag racing, he is more than welcome to come down here and drive my car at Darlington or Rockingham, and show me what it is capable of, or he can come down here, I will put him up in a hotel, and he can teach me how to drive the car. With him throwing out math, calculators must not mean anything, if he drove his car to 149+ MPH, all the calcs I look at show his car not being able to do more than 9.5 @ 142. The only way I can get the calcs to do 149+ is if his car weights 3220 lbs. If you calc the other way, and it says he really should be showing 955RWHP based on his Trap speed, when you plug that number in, he should be @ 9.16 @ 148mph. So what does that say.

This should be and needs to be the end of this conversation.

 

1. I think Jim has a 6 speed.

2. I thought I saw a post where you gutted/removed the cats?

3. I extend an open invitation to you to come to our NHRA legal track At Bristol, TN ....about 3 hours from Charlotte...I'd like to see that beast run....be fun to line up with you ..but I'm only at 600rwhp through the stock cats,etc....all emissions legal.

 

Correct me if im wrong but...10psi in a 346 would be about 4-6 psi in a 427 wouldnt it? So technically 16 psi in a 427 would be about 20-22 in a 346. But you guys are comparing a turbo app to a sc app, cant really compare here.

 

JIM!? I am eagerly awaiting his response.

Just going by common sense and the obvious numbers, Jim (IMO) has a more efficient engine/FI setup than you. Just my opinion...take it or leave it. 357cid, 23-degree heads, 218 cam, two small turbo's, 850 at the wheels and it works at the track. Period. [9.7 in a 6-speed...at 3700lbs. Wow.] How can a larger motor that makes the same power be MORE efficient than a smaller, less capable one? I'm I missing something?

Oh, and if your head unit blew up...you'd be on the side of the road looking at chunks of metal on the ground. Think about it. And you could easily drive an 8.7:1 motor around. Its not like his cam is huge...throwing DCR so low that it barely runs. He'd be fine.

 

I would think a belt popping would be more of a worry for me. If that sucker goes, you have no water pump , alt ect. You sure couldn't drive around woo long with out either of these.

Bryan, I sorry but some of your so called "points" are way off and completly misinformed. I have a bigger cam and approx 8.9 to 1 and my car drives around fine n/a. By your account, no cars in the 70's and 80's would run with their pathetic 7.8 to 1 compression from the factory.

i would also be willing to bet your set-up is not near as efficient as Jim's based on fuel comsumption per hp (which is how efficiency is really defined).

You set-up is badass, you're just wrong on most of your assumptions about other a lot of stuff.

Later,
Dave

 

Let me put my .02 out there.
First off, any properly tuned motor, even a little 350, under 1000hp should be a pumpgas motor. I consider that easily attainable. I would not consider it a max effort race motor. A 427 c5r headed motor should have no problems pushing 1200 hp at the crank with pumpgas, low 20's for timing and under 18 lb of boost. I have seen it. Made 1200 hp and 980 lb/ft. torque on 93 octane. 18 lb's of boost, with 23 degrees of timing with (2) little 60-1 hi-fi's.
Both of you should stop comparing. You both have respectable setups, BUT. They are far to different to even remotly compare.
I would compare a c5r motor to that if an 18 degree SBC. Both far above and beyond any other traditional factory engine. Thats not even an apples to oranges comaprison!
Secondly one is supercharged and one is turbo'd. A turbo is typically going to make more torque. That gets way into parasitic drag loss issues.

You both know all of this already I am sure. So whats the argument?

My OPINION. One obviosly has a far superior motor, and one has a superior forced induction setup. No way to compare "who's is better". Just enjoy what you have done and learn from each other.

 

A) they are not comparing setups, only the efficiency as far as I know....and maybe ***** size.

B) Brian does not have C5R heads. The "lingo" on this site is skewed. If someone says C5R 427, they just mean it has a C5R block. Big deal.

C) Someone put 60-1 HiFi's (the ones with the 2" inlet right?) on a 427cid 11-degree headed LS1??? I didn't think they would push enough air for 1200hp. Cool. Post some more info please.

EDIT. Wait...I re-read your post. You have the 60-1's. Ok, what is your motor setup? I'm curious.

 

The 427 with 60-1's was an 18 degree sbc. The exact same motor as Prayhard's new motor. If your interested I can hook you up to a link to his site.

My setup is a "cheap"(to my standards) ls1 with all the regular bolt on crap and Twin 60-1 hi-fi's. It should have no problem making 900+ hp (crank) on pumpgas. I am limiting my power potential by having a pretty basic head(TEA stage 2). I will know in spring!

I did not know he did not have c5r heads!

With pumpgas efficiency is the most important thing because you are limited by detonation. This is where top notchheads and a matching cam come into play. With racegas, you can turn up the boost and accomodate. That is all Bryan is trying to say, I think. If bryan has turbos, I bet both his numbers would go up.

One thing I can agree with. Knobody knows everything. We all learn something everyday and apply it to our setups. That is why we are on here, to learn something new!

 

his TT boost # SFCM != your SC boost # SCFM

 

Lets be more specific. Jim makes the same or more power with LESS cfm, right? Am I wrong here? If he is using less air to get to the same point...he's more efficient, right? Are we comparing the two cars' efficiency?