ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

i was waiting for that lmao

2000 Tran Zam

iTrader: (2)

Hmmm, so you get twice the gas milage of a stock f body, which is by far better then Ive seen any one make (iv es seen maybe 28/29 on an f body and 32 on a vette), on a stock restrictive ls1 intake and 700rwhp on the Factory long block? For how long? Meaning stock bottom end or with pistons or what?

I made 830rwhp on 13.5 lbs, and you made 700rwhp on less then 6? basically 2.5 times the boost you made, with a stroker on a bigger turbo, and your that close?

Im sorry I just dont see that happening... Thats just my opinion

prostock_bigblock

iTrader: (11)

well you made 830 rwhp ,but what is your compression?? from what i know an extra point of compression is roughly worth 4% in power, another thing like i said earlier that i am running tublar turbo headers 1 3/4", 2.5" collectors and a 5" dumped downpipe, a custom vertical flow intercooler good for about 1200-1300 hp, the other thing is the my turbo sits in front of the radiator. there is no intercooler piping behind the radiator only over the radiator. is there something special about my turbo, or is it my turbo setup/configiration that is giving me the extra power i dont know. but all i know is my car is still running a stock crank pulley,stock water pump, stock cam, stock rockers,stock 241 heads (unported),ported stock throttle body,ls1 intake. but the only change is valve springs and pushrods. i am running a steel flywheel and a spec stage 4 clutch. 3.42 gears (10bolt). the engine was never rebuilt.
how am i making the extra power, well i will have to say may be its the cooler air i get, the higher flowing exhaust and my intercooler setup.
my turbo is an s400 with an upgraded extended tip compressor wheel 80mm. with what some might call a race compressor housing/cover. standerd turbine wheel with 1.32 a/r turbine housing. i have nothing to hide. all i know is that i am making the power to the wheels. is the dyno lying. i will redyno, i might be wrong or in that case the dyno is wrong.

DrTurbo

iTrader: (3)

Take it to the track....that will tell the story.

prostock_bigblock

iTrader: (11)

on the mpg issue i am running almost 17:1 air/fuel ratio under cruise @60mph.
i will recalculate. just to get things streight . i want to confirm a few things
what does a stock gas tank from a 2000 camaro take in gallons, ( i know it takes 15.8 gallons) correct me if i am wrong.

and the other thing is how precise is the fuel level gauge on 2000 camaros?

answer those questions and i will recalculate my mpg.

2000 Tran Zam

iTrader: (2)

Not that I dont believe you... It just doesnt make any sense to me... But with other people questioning it at least I dont feel like im taking crazy pills .

prostock_bigblock

iTrader: (11)

still saving up some money for a nice suspension setup and a 9". i don't wanna break the 10 bolt then i wont have anything to drive to college. Btw this is my daily driver (i am serious). cant wait for the underdrive pulley,ls6 intake manifold and camshaft.

prostock_bigblock

iTrader: (11)

Tran zam i will be honest with you the car more then exceeded my expectations.
the car keeps surprising me every time, on the low boost setup(2.8 psi spring) 2.5 psi on the gauge it made 511 rwhp with a stock maf with no screen. and now its blowing my mind. i personaly can't see it happening compared with all the dyno sheets of similar setup i have seen on this forum.
to the point i thought my boost gauge is lying. or that i had ordered the wrong wastegate spring. i can only prove my point by posting a dyno sheet showing the boost curve. btw i am still runing 93 octane pump gas. there is no hint of knock. one thing i noticed while logging the runs is that my IAT reading were pretty close to ambient temps.(note IAT is placed between intercooler and throttle body)

ABeasst

iTrader: (5)

What shop did you dyno at?

engineermike

This just gets better as we go. Keep posting - This is entertaining.

17/1 AF ratio, huh? You sure?

Also, you DO realize that you NEVER use the gas gauge or tank size to calculate fuel mileage, right?

You fill the tank to the top and re-set the odometer. Drive it 200 miles or so, then fill it to the top again. The odometer reading divided by the amount of fuel it took on the 2nd fillup is the gas mileage.

Mike

BigBronco

iTrader: (2)

Wow, I thought I would never in my life, would see someone EXPLAIN here on Tech on HOW to check your fuel mileage consumption.

smokinHawk

iTrader: (48)

PSBB: in another thread you say your car makes 514rwhp and 414rwtq on 2.9 psi tial spring (not necessarily 2.9psi, do they even have that spring?)
and of coarse in your sig you say "crappy base tune 640rwhp 555rwhp 5.8psi"
how is that around 700rwhp? oh on a stock engine...pftt

https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...525&highlight=

NicD

iTrader: (7)

This post reminds me of a discussion I had with somebody the other day. They claimed they tuned a bone stock C6 with TTs running 6-7 psi on 91 oct pump gas and it made mid 700 rwhp all day long.

Firechikn

iTrader: (15)

According to my wide band, under boost I'm getting 5gallons to 1 mile.

ABeasst

iTrader: (5)

I love how he said that 18-degrees of timing is low....I mean really I run 30-degrees on pump gas all day making 1000AWHP.

2000 Tran Zam

iTrader: (2)

so he can install, tune and understand the phsyics of a turbo kit but cant calculate gas milage?




Edit: read in the other thread hes got a tuner.

Zombie

iTrader: (2)

Guys, arguing over "HP" (notice the quotes) from a dyno is silly. It's like claiming you took the biggest **** in the world. There is no way to prove how big your **** is unless you dig and get your hands dirty pulling it out to prove it. The best dyno in the world has a 1320 foot roller and times how long it takes you to make a pull and tells you what speed you got to in that given time. The best part is it's an average of all your gears so parasitic loss, etc don't even matter. It doesn't give you a graph but it does give you a little slip with all the numbers on it.

Dynos are used for tuning.

I've sent an e-mail to all the dyno manufacturers asking them to change all their measuring units to Garflabs and to have every unit read differently to help prevent the silly "dyno HP" arguments. That way your dynosheet is only comparable to other cars on the same dyno.

engineermike

Take a look at the power curves in the other thread. Something definitely going on with the dyno. The power curve is a straight line, increasing linearly with rpm until they shut off the run. Would have made much more if they hadn't shut it off at 6600 rpm (remember... stock heads and cam).

Mike

prostock_bigblock

iTrader: (11)

you know how much gas is where i am from , before i moved to the states. 64 cents per gallon. do you think i ever cared? heck its cheaper then water. so you can't drag race or build an engine untill you know how to calculate mpg. i heard thats what they ask you before they issue an nhra lisence?

gas only became an issue when i came here . and excuse my math. i am not a cool bad *** professional engine builder/drag racer/mpg computer like you are. may be someday i will grow up to be a cool guy just like you guys are.

bottom line is:
pm me and i will tell you where to find me. wanna race? may be put some money on it.
no more internet for me , you can trash talk all you want. so its all for free.
be a real man and put your money where your mouth is

Big Geek

iTrader: (2)

Maybe he is making the power he says but sh*t why the big deal? It doesn't belong to any of us, nor were we there when he says he did so. I am more interested in the original subject of what turbo is better to replace the "76" with.......

Jim C.