Black LS1 T/A

That was the FIRST tuning session with the new ATI F2 Blower!

I got a call from Jason just before the Super Chevy Show this weekend.

They dyno'd Clay's Trans Am with the newly arrived ATI F2 blower.

At 11 PSI, fuel starved and going lean by 5200 RPMs (they ran it up to only 6000 RPMs), it put down:

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> 693 RWHP and 611 RWTQ! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" />

And the tuning is not over yet. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" />
This cam has grater than a 7000 RPM potential (as proof, before adjusting the shift points, it banged the 6800 RPM rev limit) and 6300 to 6500 is their approximate safe goal to spin it.
They see low to mid 700 RWHP in Clay's near future. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

How's THAT for a Stroker motor and Conservative Boost? (20 and 30 PSI unneccesary to reach over 700 RWHP and STILL street drive).

Clay still slides all over the pavement with the immediate torque the 422 is putting down, so they want to get his traction solution worked out
before they try for ET and Speed goals.

This car idles tame and, except for the blower whine, no one would ever know what hit them!

Here at sea level, I'm counting on the D-1SC and this motor taking me in the low to mid-600 RWHP area at between 7 and 9 PSI of boost (I'm REALLY not sure how the new configuration will affect my boost level... that's just an uneducated guess).

With Clay at 7500 or more feet, and me near Sea Level, I may come close to his ET and Trap speed with my less aggressive 422 configuration. I hope he never brings that beast out here to show me up! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> (just joking.)

As Jason put it, "How's THAT for a day's work?"! <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" />

AlonzoVersion 1.0

That is very very impressive. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Sad]" src="gr_sad.gif" /> maybe one day for me.

jeffrey G

yes maybe some day I can have the 422 cubic beast too,

scottywheels

mike, jason said I should put down about 625hp with the built motor and 12 psi. I get confused how the bigger motor doesnt put down alot more.

Blackbird

my guess is you don't see a huge difference in the peak numbers, but overlay the graphs and the bigger motor will probably have alot more meat under the curve.

Black LS1 T/A

Keep in mind Clay's motor right now is starved for fuel by 5200 RPPMs. He's likely to see 100 to 125 more RWHP than you at lower RPMs... not to mention more RWTQ.

If I run, say 7 PSI and shift at 6000, and you run 12 PSI and shift at 6400, the larger motor is not working as hard. I think the torque comes on sooner... like with a turbo. It pulls hard all the way thru... gear changes don't matter to such a beast.

I'm just speculating... I'm no expert. Maybe we can get Jason to explain better for us. But, not too much... he's busy getting my motor prepped for shipment. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

VINCE

iTrader: (1)

Thats what I am talking about for a first tune.. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

Black LS1 T/A

I also think the compression on your built motor may have to be higher to match the power of the 422. Lower compression would make boosting the 422 motor safer... making for a more reliable engine.

Don't get me wrong... I don't think they dropped the static compression waaaay down on the 422... I'm just doing some more talking. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

scottywheels

Dont get me wrong, mike. I mean jason does great work. I just don't grasp the consept I guess. My compression is 9.2-1. I guess the torque and power are prolly srtraight across the board on that 422 compared to a 348.

makes me think abou the cast iron 383 for next year <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

and I havent even got this one back yet <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="gr_tounge.gif" />

Black LS1 T/A

OK... I got up with Kenny. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" />

It IS lower compression... safer for boost.

F-bodies are kinda heavy. The 422 has more torque. Horsepower and Torque also comes on quicker.

Using RPMs, your peak RWHP with the 346 may be only 100 or so RWHP below the 422. But, the 422 pushing more HP and TQ at earlier RPMs makes a significant difference in ET and Trap speed. And not having to spin it as high to achieve that increases the engine reliability... not to mention it's consistency.

The big issue with the Iron Block 422 that I see is the 70 extra weight up front and how you get the car (with all that torque) to hook up off the line.

It's my opinion that my stock motor won't sustain the HP levels I'm pushing it at (486 RWHP /487 RWTQ).

A built 346 may handle 600 RWHP for a long time, but I feel the LS1 Aluminum block and head configuration just won't take RWHP in the mid-600 range or greater for a long time (I define "long time" as ~ 3 to 5 years).

I'm counting on not continually breaking the 422 running it in the low to mid-600 RWHP range.

If I get to where I don't care about that, I also expect this motor will take me in the low to mid-700 RWHP if I upgraded the configuration.

Don't ge me wrong... a 625 RWHP 346 CID is GREAT! That, or a 382/383 was my next step befoe deciding to try the 422.

Jason and Kenny's advice are best, so go with what they say... But, I think a 625 RWHP Aluminum LS1 motor will be hard to keep together past two years. They didn't say that, but think... that's a lot of power roiling around in that aluminum block. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" />

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 scott ws6:
<strong>Dont get me wrong, mike. I mean jason does great work. I just don't grasp the consept I guess. My compression is 9.2-1. I guess the torque and power are prolly srtraight across the board on that 422 compared to a 348.

makes me think abou the cast iron 383 for next year <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

and I havent even got this one back yet <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="gr_tounge.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't take you wrong or get a bad vibe from you...

I think your questions are VERY legitimate. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

BLOWNMERO

What was the correction factor on that run do you know?

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 scott ws6:
<strong>mike, jason said I should put down about 625hp with the built motor and 12 psi. I get confused how the bigger motor doesnt put down alot more.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">fuel psi goes away, only 15 degrees timing....can spin this another 1000 rpm or so.....

you'll see what happens soon when we put the big fuel system in it.

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 BLOWNMERO:
<strong>What was the correction factor on that run do you know?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">here we go again...... I'll look it up. It's probably .19 or so.

tbone4232

I think people who dont post the correction factor suck monkey *****, dont you guys have a life? geez, your the kind of people who give the rice rockets a good name, besides you might be gay on the outher hand you still might be gay.

thanks for your time.....

<small>[ August 21, 2002, 01:02 PM: Message edited by: tbone4232 ]</small>

Currdog

Wow. those are some great numbers, and without finishing tuning and needing more fuel...

I'm impressed to say the least.

Is that running through an ls6 intake, or is this beast wearing something sheetmetal?

<img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" />

Black LS1 T/A

Well, I'm having trouble why this is an issue.

If 693 were an UNCORRECTED number and the dyno shop posted this, then, with a correction factor of 1.19, that would mean the car was making 824 RWHP. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> In this case they would be short-changing the vehicle's power to not correct it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

One common use of the dyno correction factor is to standardize the horsepower and torque readings, so that the effects of the ambient temperature and pressure are removed from the readings. By using the dyno correction factor, power and torque readings can be directly compared to the readings taken on some other day, or even taken at some other altitude.

In other words, the corrected readings are the same as the result that you would get by taking the car (or engine) to a certain temperature controlled, pressure controlled dyno where they measure "standard" power.

If the 693 is a corrected value, that simply means that is what you would expect at Sea Level in NC or 5700 feet near Denver.

Any dyno I've ever gone to considers the corrected value to be the "correct" value.

Malicious

iTrader: (1)

Those are awesome numbers. Get that motor some fuel and get it tuned in right and it's going to be a force to be reckoned with even more so than it already is <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" title="" src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" />

Mark C

The reason correction factors are an issue is that there are significant hurdles to overcome when you start to get high in power....I'm talking 650, 700, 750 rwhp. To name a few, there's the MAF limit, intake manifold, fuel line size, and injector compatability/availability.

To make crazy power, you'd have to address these issues. Not many people have the inclination and the ability to do so. Thats why you see so many different setups at about 600 rwhp. And thats why 700 rwhp is big big news, but 600 corrected to 700 is not. We are all waiting for someone to do it cheaply, so we can copy it.

Believe me, I'd love GWP, Rob, Harlan, or anyone to make 800 actual horsepower, and have a beautiful post explaining how to do it...love it.

Black LS1 T/A

I hear ya, Mark C... but, the only thing that it should take this setup to maintain those numbers where the correction factor is 1.0 should be fuel and tuning.

Do you disagree?