97 Corvette - 327 whp- cam,exhaust,lid
#21
11 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
Has it been tuned for the cam?
My car with headers, cam, ls1 intake, 3.42 12 bolt, 2.25" duals cutouts open, stock stall unlocked only did 325rwhp/340rwtq on a dynojet. HP was falling off quick at 5600rpm due to the ls1 intake. Mail order tune.
Switched to a fast intake, larger cone filter, and yank ss 3600 and was in process of dyno tuning when the driveshaft broke. Made 360rwhp@6100rpm unlocked exhaust closed on drag radials at 14.0 a/f in winter.
Fixed the trans, new hd driveshaft, 3" pipe to muffler then 2.25" out to back, underdrive pulley, and tuned down to 13.2 a/f and made ~350 rwhp/330 rwtq unlocked exhaust capped. 28* timing no knock retard. Car was heat soaked from driving 4 hours to get the tune, it was in the 90*s and at least 70-80% humidity.
But the car runs in the 7.7-7.8 range with slight wheel spin and traps 88-89mph in the heat and humidity (2600-3000 DA) so people keep telling me I'm where I should be for a 3700+lbs race weight and spinning the drag radials out of the hole (1.79 60ft).
Try it at the track, let us know the trap speed. On stock stall that car is going to run like absolute dog **** (bet he gets 2.0 60ft dead hooking) but his speed should still be close, might gain 1-2mph with a stall though.
Unlocked autos on dynos suck. Every cammed car is not going to hit 400rwhp...I've accepted that.
But with a cam that large he needs to get an intake and most important a stall ASAP or bolt on cars will embarrass his ***.
My car with headers, cam, ls1 intake, 3.42 12 bolt, 2.25" duals cutouts open, stock stall unlocked only did 325rwhp/340rwtq on a dynojet. HP was falling off quick at 5600rpm due to the ls1 intake. Mail order tune.
Switched to a fast intake, larger cone filter, and yank ss 3600 and was in process of dyno tuning when the driveshaft broke. Made 360rwhp@6100rpm unlocked exhaust closed on drag radials at 14.0 a/f in winter.
Fixed the trans, new hd driveshaft, 3" pipe to muffler then 2.25" out to back, underdrive pulley, and tuned down to 13.2 a/f and made ~350 rwhp/330 rwtq unlocked exhaust capped. 28* timing no knock retard. Car was heat soaked from driving 4 hours to get the tune, it was in the 90*s and at least 70-80% humidity.
But the car runs in the 7.7-7.8 range with slight wheel spin and traps 88-89mph in the heat and humidity (2600-3000 DA) so people keep telling me I'm where I should be for a 3700+lbs race weight and spinning the drag radials out of the hole (1.79 60ft).
Try it at the track, let us know the trap speed. On stock stall that car is going to run like absolute dog **** (bet he gets 2.0 60ft dead hooking) but his speed should still be close, might gain 1-2mph with a stall though.
Unlocked autos on dynos suck. Every cammed car is not going to hit 400rwhp...I've accepted that.
But with a cam that large he needs to get an intake and most important a stall ASAP or bolt on cars will embarrass his ***.
Last edited by thunderstruck507; 08-30-2010 at 09:52 AM.
#22
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Why would you do that, then wonder why its down on power?
Theres a noticeable difference with an LS6 intake about 10-15 whp over the stock one but I cant say for sure about the heads. I heard the 241s arent much better than the older castings. Some A4s will dyno low but run strong numbers at the track, but still with that cam it should be much closer to 400 whp.
Theres a noticeable difference with an LS6 intake about 10-15 whp over the stock one but I cant say for sure about the heads. I heard the 241s arent much better than the older castings. Some A4s will dyno low but run strong numbers at the track, but still with that cam it should be much closer to 400 whp.
Ill tell him to check that out the next time I talk to him. I'm also thinking he needs a full tune up.
Not sure on the trap speeds nor if there has been any basic maintanence done. I'll try to get more info today if I get the chance to talk to him.
#23
11 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
a stall will have ZERO negative effect on highway cruising since it locks like stock and to be honest I don't notice a huge difference in town either...maybe 1-2 mpg
a tight stall like the Yank SS3600 is very efficient at low throttle, but makes a night/day difference at WOT
if he refuses to stall because he is that worried about MPG he shouldn't have cammed it, and especially not with a cam that large...it will run marginally better than if he had just done bolt ons and worse than if he used a baby cam like the ls6 cam
a tight stall like the Yank SS3600 is very efficient at low throttle, but makes a night/day difference at WOT
if he refuses to stall because he is that worried about MPG he shouldn't have cammed it, and especially not with a cam that large...it will run marginally better than if he had just done bolt ons and worse than if he used a baby cam like the ls6 cam
#25
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
a stall will have ZERO negative effect on highway cruising since it locks like stock and to be honest I don't notice a huge difference in town either...maybe 1-2 mpg
a tight stall like the Yank SS3600 is very efficient at low throttle, but makes a night/day difference at WOT
if he refuses to stall because he is that worried about MPG he shouldn't have cammed it, and especially not with a cam that large...it will run marginally better than if he had just done bolt ons and worse than if he used a baby cam like the ls6 cam
a tight stall like the Yank SS3600 is very efficient at low throttle, but makes a night/day difference at WOT
if he refuses to stall because he is that worried about MPG he shouldn't have cammed it, and especially not with a cam that large...it will run marginally better than if he had just done bolt ons and worse than if he used a baby cam like the ls6 cam
Hes not worried about MPG, he just doesn't want 10 mpg in the city. I suggested he go with a 2800 stall cause that wouldn't change much except at wot. I think he'll be considering that option soon..
Im pretty sure hes not ganna do a head swap this year cause hes also building up a dodge ram cummins duelie and hes ganna be drag racing that thing to.
#26
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,361
Likes: 0
Received 1,792 Likes
on
1,277 Posts
Not sure where people get the idea that an LS1 intake is so bad.
I made 360rwhp @6100rpm with a baby cam (221//.558), A4, and LS1 intake. Would the LS6 intake be better? Of course, agreed, no arguement there. But the LS1 intake isn't some turd that will hold all cammed engines down in the 32x range either.
I made 360rwhp @6100rpm with a baby cam (221//.558), A4, and LS1 intake. Would the LS6 intake be better? Of course, agreed, no arguement there. But the LS1 intake isn't some turd that will hold all cammed engines down in the 32x range either.
#27
11 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
Not sure where people get the idea that an LS1 intake is so bad.
I made 360rwhp @6100rpm with a baby cam (221//.558), A4, and LS1 intake. Would the LS6 intake be better? Of course, agreed, no arguement there. But the LS1 intake isn't some turd that will hold all cammed engines down in the 32x range either.
I made 360rwhp @6100rpm with a baby cam (221//.558), A4, and LS1 intake. Would the LS6 intake be better? Of course, agreed, no arguement there. But the LS1 intake isn't some turd that will hold all cammed engines down in the 32x range either.
*shrugs* that's where mine was falling off and everyone told me it was the intake
after the intake swap it didn't fall off like that so I considered that a confirmation
I felt a HUGE difference above 4k rpm with the new intake
#30
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,361
Likes: 0
Received 1,792 Likes
on
1,277 Posts
Once again, an LS1 intake is not going to hold a cammed LS1 hostage in the 32x rwhp range. Will you see a gain with an LS6 or better intake? Certainly. But you can still make 350-400rwhp below AND above 6000rpm with an LS1 intake and NA setup. People were doing this in 2000 before the LS6 intake was even produced.
#32
11 Second Club
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: WA
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think so. The older heads and LS1 intake won't hold him back *that* much. I made 360rwhp through a cammed '00 LS1 Trans Am with stock heads & LS1 intake, plus A4 trans and unlocked stall. I had headers too, but they were mids (although I had an ORY). The IRS will eat more power than an F-body solid axle, but I had a very small cam (221//.558 single pattern).
I have almost the same cam, 221 // 561 lift on a 114lsa +4 w/ 799 heads and LS6 intake/ full exhaust and put down 380whp on a mustang dyno. His cam should net him over 400whp or close to it with stock intake and heads.
#33
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,361
Likes: 0
Received 1,792 Likes
on
1,277 Posts
There seem to be two seperate possibilities happening in this situation.
- Is the car in question making lower numbers than it should for the engine setup?
or
- Was this done on a mustang dyno, thereby explaining the lower numbers. I don't think this one has been answered yet.
In the first instance, assuming these are dynojet numbers, then yes; I feel the numbers are low *even for an LS1 intake*. First off, this is a C5 which uses an IRS and therefore should always dyno a bit lower than an F-body with the same setup on a stock geared 10-bolt.
There are several things that can be robbing power; less-than-ideal tune, poor compression, slipping trans, weak ignition or fuel delivery. These should be considered/checked.
Another issue are the cats. I noticed that it was mentioned this car has LT headers with cats. I've seen cats (even hi-flow ones) rob as much as 10rwhp on cammed LS1s, this is why I always recommend NOT using cats if you plan to build the engine, unless you have no other reasonable way around your state's emissions test.
Or there could be any combination of these issues all leading to lower than expected numbers.
I think before tossing any more parts at the car, two key questions need to be answered:
1) What type of dyno?
2) What were the before and after trap speeds?
I agree that the LS6 (or better) intakes will offer bigger gains with more agressive H/C setups. However, a cam in the 23x duration range should not be restricted to 32x rwhp based on an LS1 intake alone. I'm guessing there are other factors involved.
- Is the car in question making lower numbers than it should for the engine setup?
or
- Was this done on a mustang dyno, thereby explaining the lower numbers. I don't think this one has been answered yet.
In the first instance, assuming these are dynojet numbers, then yes; I feel the numbers are low *even for an LS1 intake*. First off, this is a C5 which uses an IRS and therefore should always dyno a bit lower than an F-body with the same setup on a stock geared 10-bolt.
There are several things that can be robbing power; less-than-ideal tune, poor compression, slipping trans, weak ignition or fuel delivery. These should be considered/checked.
Another issue are the cats. I noticed that it was mentioned this car has LT headers with cats. I've seen cats (even hi-flow ones) rob as much as 10rwhp on cammed LS1s, this is why I always recommend NOT using cats if you plan to build the engine, unless you have no other reasonable way around your state's emissions test.
Or there could be any combination of these issues all leading to lower than expected numbers.
I think before tossing any more parts at the car, two key questions need to be answered:
1) What type of dyno?
2) What were the before and after trap speeds?
I agree that the LS6 (or better) intakes will offer bigger gains with more agressive H/C setups. However, a cam in the 23x duration range should not be restricted to 32x rwhp based on an LS1 intake alone. I'm guessing there are other factors involved.
#34
11 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
I didn't mean to imply the intake was holding him below 350rwhp. My post was to simply outline how my car with similar mods dynoed...
Since I have thoroughly inspected the car, compression check, filters, ign, fuel, new plugs wires, ect. My numbers are still ****.
If he finds something wrong I would love to hear it because if his non-complete bolt on setup can do better it might give me some ideas. I figure if I was 350ish unlocked being locked would still only get me 370 on a good day. I was hoping to be much closer to 400 with my mods.
Since I have thoroughly inspected the car, compression check, filters, ign, fuel, new plugs wires, ect. My numbers are still ****.
If he finds something wrong I would love to hear it because if his non-complete bolt on setup can do better it might give me some ideas. I figure if I was 350ish unlocked being locked would still only get me 370 on a good day. I was hoping to be much closer to 400 with my mods.
#36
TECH Addict
iTrader: (11)
There seem to be two seperate possibilities happening in this situation.
- Is the car in question making lower numbers than it should for the engine setup?
or
- Was this done on a mustang dyno, thereby explaining the lower numbers. I don't think this one has been answered yet.
- Is the car in question making lower numbers than it should for the engine setup?
or
- Was this done on a mustang dyno, thereby explaining the lower numbers. I don't think this one has been answered yet.
In the first instance, assuming these are dynojet numbers, then yes; I feel the numbers are low *even for an LS1 intake*. First off, this is a C5 which uses an IRS and therefore should always dyno a bit lower than an F-body with the same setup on a stock geared 10-bolt.
There are several things that can be robbing power; less-than-ideal tune, poor compression, slipping trans, weak ignition or fuel delivery. These should be considered/checked.
Another issue are the cats. I noticed that it was mentioned this car has LT headers with cats. I've seen cats (even hi-flow ones) rob as much as 10rwhp on cammed LS1s, this is why I always recommend NOT using cats if you plan to build the engine, unless you have no other reasonable way around your state's emissions test.
Or there could be any combination of these issues all leading to lower than expected numbers.
There are several things that can be robbing power; less-than-ideal tune, poor compression, slipping trans, weak ignition or fuel delivery. These should be considered/checked.
Another issue are the cats. I noticed that it was mentioned this car has LT headers with cats. I've seen cats (even hi-flow ones) rob as much as 10rwhp on cammed LS1s, this is why I always recommend NOT using cats if you plan to build the engine, unless you have no other reasonable way around your state's emissions test.
Or there could be any combination of these issues all leading to lower than expected numbers.
I think before tossing any more parts at the car, two key questions need to be answered:
1) What type of dyno?
2) What were the before and after trap speeds?
I agree that the LS6 (or better) intakes will offer bigger gains with more agressive H/C setups. However, a cam in the 23x duration range should not be restricted to 32x rwhp based on an LS1 intake alone. I'm guessing there are other factors involved.
1) What type of dyno?
2) What were the before and after trap speeds?
I agree that the LS6 (or better) intakes will offer bigger gains with more agressive H/C setups. However, a cam in the 23x duration range should not be restricted to 32x rwhp based on an LS1 intake alone. I'm guessing there are other factors involved.
#37
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
There seem to be two seperate possibilities happening in this situation.
- Is the car in question making lower numbers than it should for the engine setup?
or
- Was this done on a mustang dyno, thereby explaining the lower numbers. I don't think this one has been answered yet.
In the first instance, assuming these are dynojet numbers, then yes; I feel the numbers are low *even for an LS1 intake*. First off, this is a C5 which uses an IRS and therefore should always dyno a bit lower than an F-body with the same setup on a stock geared 10-bolt.
There are several things that can be robbing power; less-than-ideal tune, poor compression, slipping trans, weak ignition or fuel delivery. These should be considered/checked.
Another issue are the cats. I noticed that it was mentioned this car has LT headers with cats. I've seen cats (even hi-flow ones) rob as much as 10rwhp on cammed LS1s, this is why I always recommend NOT using cats if you plan to build the engine, unless you have no other reasonable way around your state's emissions test.
Or there could be any combination of these issues all leading to lower than expected numbers.
I think before tossing any more parts at the car, two key questions need to be answered:
1) What type of dyno?
2) What were the before and after trap speeds?
I agree that the LS6 (or better) intakes will offer bigger gains with more agressive H/C setups. However, a cam in the 23x duration range should not be restricted to 32x rwhp based on an LS1 intake alone. I'm guessing there are other factors involved.
- Is the car in question making lower numbers than it should for the engine setup?
or
- Was this done on a mustang dyno, thereby explaining the lower numbers. I don't think this one has been answered yet.
In the first instance, assuming these are dynojet numbers, then yes; I feel the numbers are low *even for an LS1 intake*. First off, this is a C5 which uses an IRS and therefore should always dyno a bit lower than an F-body with the same setup on a stock geared 10-bolt.
There are several things that can be robbing power; less-than-ideal tune, poor compression, slipping trans, weak ignition or fuel delivery. These should be considered/checked.
Another issue are the cats. I noticed that it was mentioned this car has LT headers with cats. I've seen cats (even hi-flow ones) rob as much as 10rwhp on cammed LS1s, this is why I always recommend NOT using cats if you plan to build the engine, unless you have no other reasonable way around your state's emissions test.
Or there could be any combination of these issues all leading to lower than expected numbers.
I think before tossing any more parts at the car, two key questions need to be answered:
1) What type of dyno?
2) What were the before and after trap speeds?
I agree that the LS6 (or better) intakes will offer bigger gains with more agressive H/C setups. However, a cam in the 23x duration range should not be restricted to 32x rwhp based on an LS1 intake alone. I'm guessing there are other factors involved.
So we know having the LS1 intake is holding him back 5-10 whp
The older heads are holding back another 5 whp
The cats another 5-10 whp
A tune-up could free up another 5-10 whp and lets not forget the IRS.
He may not have had the most optimal tune either.
20-40 whp equals 347-367 whp which is a little low but leaves him closer to what I thought he'd be at. I'm going to try to get a hold of him today but it might prove difficult. The guy is busy this time of year with tourism an all.
Thanks again everyone for helping me get this figured out
#40
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,361
Likes: 0
Received 1,792 Likes
on
1,277 Posts
With the revised cam specs, I would expect that car to be right around ~350 rwhp with the IRS, A4 trans, stock LS1 intake, and cats. Give or take some depending on the quality of the tune.
So he's down about ~25ish rwhp for the current setup IMO.
So he's down about ~25ish rwhp for the current setup IMO.