427ZO6

What a source of misinformation. The facts are as follows. This ARE 427 dynoed SAE 490RWHP and 494RWTQ with open headers and LS6 heads. With the low compression heads (10.3:1) this motor dynoed through the full exhaust SAE 470 RWHP and 474 RWTQ. We scratched the SAE 737 RWHP due to wheel slippage. We have had to dyno with ET Streets and add approximately 500 pounds of weight in the trunk to prevent wheel slipage wtiht the ET's. Per ED Wright and Roger Vinci the ET's are costing approximately 12-15 HP versus a stock tire. This engine has dynoed at SAE 696 RWHP and 670 RWTQ with the ET's. The tuning for this altitude is a challenge to say the least. The latest dyno was with the AF @ 11:1. Our target is 11:9. which should easily take the numbers over 700 RWHP. One must still add the loss from the ET's to whatever the final figure is. The new program arrived today and we will redyno in the next few days. The correction factor for this altitude is 1.23. However, this motor was originally tuned in Tulsa by Ed Wright and it pulled the same numbers there. GWP has performed similar comparison test between Denver and Kansas City with virtually the same dyno results. The origanal tuning in Tulsa was too rich for this altitude. Ed has since pulled about 25% of the fuel to dial this combination in at this altitude. The latest program should be right on. The numbers are not overstated at this altitude as some have suggested. It is simply their lack of knowledge on display. Eight pounds of boost here is not the same as eight pounds of boost at sea level. Why, the lack of oxygen molecules in the air. The first time at the track was to test the systems, belt slippage, clutch, tires etc. We encounterd a leak in the intake from the intercooler to the MAF that cost us some boost. Track conditions were not the best and I saw no need to run this motor the car any harder than I was givent he track conditions were not optimal and the tuning was still off at 11:1. What is the time difference between here and sea level? The closest I can give you is 1.2 seconds and 13 MPH normally aspirated from Denver versus bowling Green, Ky. This is my own experience. I fully expect this car to run in the 10's at this altitude of 5800' which should make a 9 second pass at low altitudes a very attainable target. Many thanks to Nick and crew at ARE for building a superb motor and GWP for their dillegence in resloving the belt severe slippage inherent with the stroker motors in C5's. Special thanks to Ed Wright for his efforts in tuning two computers, one for low altitude and one for this air which is next to God. Special note, for you low landers who have no experience at this altitude. Don't make comments which you no knowledge of or have never backed up with experience. Performance at this altitude is a whole new world even for the stock, Super stock and Pro stock racers who challenge the mountain during the NHRA Mile High Nationals. Thanks,I hope this helps to calrify some or the misinformation on this thread..

Nickn20

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by 427ZO6:
<strong>What a source of misinformation. The facts are as follows. This ARE 427 dynoed SAE 490RWHP and 494RWTQ with open headers and LS6 heads. With the low compression heads (10.3:1) this motor dynoed through the full exhaust SAE 470 RWHP and 474 RWTQ. We scratched the SAE 737 RWHP due to wheel slippage. We have had to dyno with ET Streets and add approximately 500 pounds of weight in the trunk to prevent wheel slipage wtiht the ET's. Per ED Wright and Roger Vinci the ET's are costing approximately 12-15 HP versus a stock tire. This engine has dynoed at SAE 696 RWHP and 670 RWTQ with the ET's. The tuning for this altitude is a challenge to say the least. The latest dyno was with the AF @ 11:1. Our target is 11:9. which should easily take the numbers over 700 RWHP. One must still add the loss from the ET's to whatever the final figure is. The new program arrived today and we will redyno in the next few days. The correction factor for this altitude is 1.23. However, this motor was originally tuned in Tulsa by Ed Wright and it pulled the same numbers there. GWP has performed similar comparison test between Denver and Kansas City with virtually the same dyno results. The origanal tuning in Tulsa was too rich for this altitude. Ed has since pulled about 25% of the fuel to dial this combination in at this altitude. The latest program should be right on. The numbers are not overstated at this altitude as some have suggested. It is simply their lack of knowledge on display. Eight pounds of boost here is not the same as eight pounds of boost at sea level. Why, the lack of oxygen molecules in the air. The first time at the track was to test the systems, belt slippage, clutch, tires etc. We encounterd a leak in the intake from the intercooler to the MAF that cost us some boost. Track conditions were not the best and I saw no need to run this motor the car any harder than I was givent he track conditions were not optimal and the tuning was still off at 11:1. What is the time difference between here and sea level? The closest I can give you is 1.2 seconds and 13 MPH normally aspirated from Denver versus bowling Green, Ky. This is my own experience. I fully expect this car to run in the 10's at this altitude of 5800' which should make a 9 second pass at low altitudes a very attainable target. Many thanks to Nick and crew at ARE for building a superb motor and GWP for their dillegence in resloving the belt severe slippage inherent with the stroker motors in C5's. Special thanks to Ed Wright for his efforts in tuning two computers, one for low altitude and one for this air which is next to God. Special note, for you low landers who have no experience at this altitude. Don't make comments which you no knowledge of or have never backed up with experience. Performance at this altitude is a whole new world even for the stock, Super stock and Pro stock racers who challenge the mountain during the NHRA Mile High Nationals. Thanks,I hope this helps to calrify some or the misinformation on this thread..</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">could you please quote the misinformation so we can argue? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> I seriously think you missed the point of what some people on this thread are saying, you have adressed maybe one persons "the car dynoing the same at sea level" comments but added some of your own too? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" />

tell me though what was the boost level, and intake air tempature above ambient?

MightyMouse, yea yea Turbos rule <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

<small>[ June 12, 2002, 04:46 AM: Message edited by: Nickn20 ]</small>

Black LS1 T/A

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
could you please quote the misinformation so we can argue?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Let me take a stab at that one: <img border="0" alt="[devil]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_devil.gif" />
(no offense to the guys making the comments"

"either way, 8psi boost is the same at any altitude"

"Corrected, the dyno should be comparable, I think." <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

"Obviously, thats too much power to make uncorrected"

"another high altitude dyno queen"

"oh yea, i forgot that sc's arent cool as turbos'" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

"I remember when they were getting "542" out of a stock motor and 8psi (no headers)."

"It would never make 737 at sea level"

EuG

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That car was originally an NA ARE 422 that made something like 440 rwhp lol.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually it was an iron block 427ci and it made ~490rwHP NA, not that it matters now <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

EuG

Never mind, I see Andy already addressed it <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> ….

MIGHTYMOUSE

iTrader: (59)

no actually it is official.. turbos are in fact cooler than superchargers <img border="0" alt="[judgement]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_judge.gif" />

Jay_@_GWP

Thanks Andy. Some people have no idea.......

BLOWNMERO

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Jay_@_GWP:
<strong>Thanks Andy. Some people have no idea.......</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">At least they dont open up shops and preach their perspective to everyone else as gospel.

Nickn20

(no offense to the guys making the comments"

"either way, 8psi boost is the same at any altitude"

It's not

"Corrected, the dyno should be comparable, I think." <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

Corrected dyno numbers are what the car should dyno anywhere in the world, no matter what the altitude is, thats what a correction factor is, but I feel that boost and intake air temp changes also, so those numbers are a variable.

"Obviously, thats too much power to make uncorrected"

I don't know who said this? lol

"another high altitude dyno queen"

I said this, and I feel this way sure the car dynoes 737 corrected, not acutal, so this car will not run what 737 rwhp is at the wheels. its more like 560 uncorrected, but those are real numbers to me.

"oh yea, i forgot that sc's arent cool as turbos'" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

Turbos are pretty cool, FI rocks no matter what it is, they both have thier pros and cons.

"I remember when they were getting "542" out of a stock motor and 8psi (no headers)."

this is my friend, I feel he has been jerked around by GWP for too long. this is also another atltitude thing, no way 8 psi at sea level

"It would never make 737 at sea level"

It would, just not at the same boost level, and intake air tempature, things change.

<small>[ June 12, 2002, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: Nickn20 ]</small>

MIGHTYMOUSE

iTrader: (59)

no offense taken but you already corrected me once earlier for the same thing.. i got the point then.

I was thinking "turbo" boost because well that is what I deal with.

and i wasnt talking 'temperature' cool, i mean like sweet cool, better cool ya know?

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

Did Andy change anything, ie to drop compression for the blower?

Black LS1 T/A

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by MIGHTYMOUSE:
<strong>no offense taken but you already corrected me once earlier for the same thing.. i got the point then.

I was thinking "turbo" boost because well that is what I deal with.

and i wasnt talking 'temperature' cool, i mean like sweet cool, better cool ya know?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">MightyMouse, I'm playin' with ya! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

To me it's more fun to argue jokingly than to be pissed. I LIKED the "Turbo is cool" remark. I thought that was good, clever humor as well as a respected matter of opinion. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

Jay_@_GWP

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Pro Stock John:
<strong>Did Andy change anything, ie to drop compression for the blower?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Truck heads. That's all. still low 10's though. Fun, Fun car. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

MIGHTYMOUSE

iTrader: (59)

its all good.. what were we talking about again?

who'se car made the huge power with the huge correction factor last time? i cant remember, anyway with correction factors that big there is just inherent issues if in anything, the significant digits alone..

just bring the car down and have it dynoed..

i agree with what another said in a similar post... that the fuel tune is much less for 500hp than 700hp.. if you bring the car down to s/l with the 700 corrected hp and dyno it.. it will go lean and burn up..

thats like saying that if my car did 500 rear wheel on a 100 shot, that it WILL put down 700 rear wheel ona 300 shot... just doesnt work out that way.

Black LS1 T/A

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by MIGHTYMOUSE:
<strong>no actually it is official.. turbos are in fact cooler than superchargers <img border="0" alt="[judgement]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_judge.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yep... that's why they glow red hot! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

Black LS1 T/A

I guess we'll have to see what my car dyno's here at Sea Level after I get it tuned in. <img border="0" alt="[judgement]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_judge.gif" />

Mark C

I guess that some people do not have the necessary experience in fluid dynamics and physics to understand some of my comments, and I understand that, and its fine.

Think about some of these: How can a jet airplane be faster than the exhaust velocity of the engines? How can an ice-boat go faster than the wind? Why does a subsonic diffuser act like a nozzle at supersonic speeds?

I suppose those who know, know. And those who don't, don't. And we'll all see later on.

MIGHTYMOUSE

iTrader: (59)

#1 when it runs out of fuel in mid air and falls.
#2 an ice boat doesnt need wind, just like a soap boat and all the other boats Mr. Wizzard made on his show.
#3 because subsonic diffusers are not the union, therefore they can and do multi-task when necessary.

"said in fun"

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

Jay -

What was the compression ratio of the motor? What is it now with the truck heads?

Jay_@_GWP

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Pro Stock John:
<strong>Jay -

What was the compression ratio of the motor? What is it now with the truck heads?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If memory serves, it was 11.6:1 and now it's 10.2:1.