Lifter Problems with 346
12-22-2003, 03:39 PM
#81
there are always differences from dyno to dyno +/- hp everyone pretty much agrees with this....
we have seen that cam and different heads quite a few times and the results varybut none as high as yours at least not at our shop
what was your A/F on that set of pulls?? were you there when it made that 422hp???
and did you see the A/F???
I would get your heads flowed and see what they are doing if they are coming off its not alot of $$ to have them done and it will help find out whats going on
and i still think you will need a more agressive cam to achieve your goals of 420+
yes we all hear of that a few cars make big power cam only or H/C when all of the rest of the cars set up with the same parts dont produce those freakish #s and all seem to be about the same what do you do? there are some freaks out there
but again, i feel you should have Mikey doing the work when he says he will do it in front of you and stand behind it if something isnt right, when other people start changing tuning and parts its hard to blame the other guy when another changed things
good luck
Rob
we have seen that cam and different heads quite a few times and the results varybut none as high as yours at least not at our shop
what was your A/F on that set of pulls?? were you there when it made that 422hp???
and did you see the A/F???
I would get your heads flowed and see what they are doing if they are coming off its not alot of $$ to have them done and it will help find out whats going on
and i still think you will need a more agressive cam to achieve your goals of 420+
yes we all hear of that a few cars make big power cam only or H/C when all of the rest of the cars set up with the same parts dont produce those freakish #s and all seem to be about the same what do you do? there are some freaks out there
but again, i feel you should have Mikey doing the work when he says he will do it in front of you and stand behind it if something isnt right, when other people start changing tuning and parts its hard to blame the other guy when another changed things
good luck
Rob
12-22-2003, 03:51 PM
#82
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SC
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Man, there is a lot of bullcrap going on this post. Couple of things:
--Carsound cats are the highest flowing cats on the market. By all accounts, everything I have read and seen, they can cost 5-8rwhp, not ~20. Who cares anyhow, BOTH the 422 and 390 dyno were done WITHOUT Cats. To discuss them further just clouds the issue.
--I have dynoed on both dynos in all kinds of weather, I dont think there is a 20rwhp variance from day to day, this is really reaching in my opinion.
--If you h/c package is making under 400rwhp in today's day and age, you are either seriously, seriously behind the technological curve or there is a problem. To make under 400 is just patethic. I dont think we should try any further and pretend thats normal.
BadSS -- I think it is pointless to speculate further until the car is looked at. I personally am still confused on what basis Joe even thought you needed a new shortblock? It dynoed 422, yet that was no good?
PSJ -- I cant take you seriously with that avatar, I just keep staring at it and thinking theres something seriously wrong with you...
--Carsound cats are the highest flowing cats on the market. By all accounts, everything I have read and seen, they can cost 5-8rwhp, not ~20. Who cares anyhow, BOTH the 422 and 390 dyno were done WITHOUT Cats. To discuss them further just clouds the issue.
--I have dynoed on both dynos in all kinds of weather, I dont think there is a 20rwhp variance from day to day, this is really reaching in my opinion.
--If you h/c package is making under 400rwhp in today's day and age, you are either seriously, seriously behind the technological curve or there is a problem. To make under 400 is just patethic. I dont think we should try any further and pretend thats normal.
BadSS -- I think it is pointless to speculate further until the car is looked at. I personally am still confused on what basis Joe even thought you needed a new shortblock? It dynoed 422, yet that was no good?
PSJ -- I cant take you seriously with that avatar, I just keep staring at it and thinking theres something seriously wrong with you...
12-22-2003, 04:00 PM
#83
PSJ,
Jeff is an excellent tuner. I may have lost 2 HP over my previous peak, but he gained 20 HP over the baseline that day. If there ends up being no mechanical issue with the car, and I don't gain any power, I will feel differently. I am confident in his abilities- he made major improvements in the idle and drivability, plus he spent probably close to 6 hours tuning the car between the dyno and the street. He tried leaner, he tried richer, he tried more timing, he tried less timing...he did everything in his power to get the most power out of the car. Jumping from shop to shop creates problems, you're right. And I won't do it again. Dealing with someone local is much easier- I simply cannot keep making 8 to 10 hour trips to get the car worked on until it is right, and I cannot afford to pay someone to haul the car back and forth, either. Lifter preload (after installing the Crane duals and YT's) was 1/2 turn- before that, I don't know. Maybe Mike remembers.
Chris- you're right, a dyno is just a tuning tool. If the car had ran good MPH at the track I wouldn't worry about low dyno numbers. It didn't. A T/A with only bolt-ons and a Predator tune ran me dead even, and I have heads and cam. It's embarassing- I may not be the greatest drag racer in the world, but I'm not that bad. What was odd was that the ET and MPH in the 1/8 were pretty good, but it just laid down between the 1/8th and the quarter.
Since there are dyno discrepancies, for whatever reason, it is difficult to compare results from different dynos. Each individual dyno operator knows his dyno, I would think, and Jeff expected 420-430 RWHP out of my package on his dyno. He said 415, minimum. So in his opinion, I am off 25 RWHP at least. If no mechanical issues are found and no power is gained, I will be pissed. That will mean the heads and cam package is not as good as advertised, which will be an issue to take up with JPR.
Jeff is an excellent tuner. I may have lost 2 HP over my previous peak, but he gained 20 HP over the baseline that day. If there ends up being no mechanical issue with the car, and I don't gain any power, I will feel differently. I am confident in his abilities- he made major improvements in the idle and drivability, plus he spent probably close to 6 hours tuning the car between the dyno and the street. He tried leaner, he tried richer, he tried more timing, he tried less timing...he did everything in his power to get the most power out of the car. Jumping from shop to shop creates problems, you're right. And I won't do it again. Dealing with someone local is much easier- I simply cannot keep making 8 to 10 hour trips to get the car worked on until it is right, and I cannot afford to pay someone to haul the car back and forth, either. Lifter preload (after installing the Crane duals and YT's) was 1/2 turn- before that, I don't know. Maybe Mike remembers.
Chris- you're right, a dyno is just a tuning tool. If the car had ran good MPH at the track I wouldn't worry about low dyno numbers. It didn't. A T/A with only bolt-ons and a Predator tune ran me dead even, and I have heads and cam. It's embarassing- I may not be the greatest drag racer in the world, but I'm not that bad. What was odd was that the ET and MPH in the 1/8 were pretty good, but it just laid down between the 1/8th and the quarter.
Since there are dyno discrepancies, for whatever reason, it is difficult to compare results from different dynos. Each individual dyno operator knows his dyno, I would think, and Jeff expected 420-430 RWHP out of my package on his dyno. He said 415, minimum. So in his opinion, I am off 25 RWHP at least. If no mechanical issues are found and no power is gained, I will be pissed. That will mean the heads and cam package is not as good as advertised, which will be an issue to take up with JPR.
12-22-2003, 04:21 PM
#84
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: CT
Posts: 873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It dynoed 422 RWHP at JD's
I had Mike Kleman at Rapid Motorsports install an ARE 346 shortblock in my car and dyno tune it at Performance Specialties. The car dynoed 392 RWHP
I took the car to Jeff Creech at Carolina Auto Masters for another tune.....The baseline pull at CAM was 370- somehow, I had lost another 22 RWHP since the last dyno
? It made the numbers at first and then 2 other shops work on it and the numbers get less and less? Did you ever answer Mikes question about being present during the first dyno?
12-22-2003, 04:24 PM
#85
Gomer- nope, my car is an M6. You're right, though- if it was an A4 my numbers would be fine. Stock 10 bolt, too- so no heavy drivetrain loss. 3.73 gears.
PSJ- all three tuners have said my injectors were fine. None of the professionals have recommended an injector upgrade, and I've already got 'em if they need 'em.
Chef- yes, I was there for the 422 dyno pull. A/F ratio was between 12.5-13.0:1 all the way across the board. Couldn't get it perfect because JPR was just using a MAFT with my Ed Wright tune. He was unable to tune the car using LS1 Edit that day. I figured there was MORE power in it with better tuning, honestly. Guess not.
PSJ- all three tuners have said my injectors were fine. None of the professionals have recommended an injector upgrade, and I've already got 'em if they need 'em.
Chef- yes, I was there for the 422 dyno pull. A/F ratio was between 12.5-13.0:1 all the way across the board. Couldn't get it perfect because JPR was just using a MAFT with my Ed Wright tune. He was unable to tune the car using LS1 Edit that day. I figured there was MORE power in it with better tuning, honestly. Guess not.
.
12-22-2003, 04:35 PM
#87
Jim- roll your eyes all you want. Read the whole thread (I know its long)- some posts at least imply that the JPR H&C package is to blame, that it couldn't possibly be a problem with the ARE shortblock. I am sure JPR would say exactly the opposite- so I am just addressing all possibilites.
When you pick and choose quotes taken out of context, its easy to make it look like someone is contradicting themselves. Are you a lawyer?
It must be somebody's fault. I KNOW! IT'S MY FAULT! That is what alot of you guys are implying. It's okay, though- I can take the heat. 
And for the tenth time- YES, I WAS PRESENT FOR ALL DYNO PULLS. TO MY KNOWLEDGE ALL DYNO NUMBERS WERE LEGIT WITH NO TRICKS OR FUNNY BUSINESS.
When you pick and choose quotes taken out of context, its easy to make it look like someone is contradicting themselves. Are you a lawyer?
It must be somebody's fault. I KNOW! IT'S MY FAULT!
That is what alot of you guys are implying. It's okay, though- I can take the heat. And for the tenth time- YES, I WAS PRESENT FOR ALL DYNO PULLS. TO MY KNOWLEDGE ALL DYNO NUMBERS WERE LEGIT WITH NO TRICKS OR FUNNY BUSINESS.
12-22-2003, 06:49 PM
#88
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: CT
Posts: 873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont see where I put things out of context. I have read the entire thread about 3 times, even under the original title before you changed it. I just didnt want to type a whole book because I had to catch my train. You can only put so much blame on anybody when it comes to cars. Fact remains that you lost power after the new shortblock went in and you took out Eds programming. You said if there are no mechanical issues found and no power gained the heads and cam package doesnt deliver as advertised but it already did, that was me rolling my eyes. Hopefully you replace the lifters as your new person recommends (isnt that were you are now?) and the power returns. Best of luck to you.
BTW-I am not a lawyer but I have about 12 firms as customers, you start to pick up on things.
BTW-I am not a lawyer but I have about 12 firms as customers, you start to pick up on things.
12-22-2003, 07:04 PM
#90
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: CT
Posts: 873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chris- If that was directed at me, I know you guys didnt supply the lifters. Bad luck happens sometimes. I had a new cam put in, replaced all the lifters while he heads were being cleaned up and the cam lobe (COMP) came apart in the engine taking out a lifter. Too many people pointing fingers lately, just started to annoy me and I am sure you sponsers arent enjoying it either.
12-22-2003, 07:05 PM
#91
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Long Island,NY
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How JPR can be even brought up at this point is ridicoulous!! You all agree on the facts.
1. U purchased JPR heads.
2. JPR installs said heads. You dyno a nice 422 at the wheels. JPR says you bottom end may be going.
3. You go to Mikey and ARE for a new shortblock. Mikey takes JPR heads off car. He then installs old JPR heads on your new block from ARE.
If this is all correct and I think it is, then JPR is done with your motor FROM THIS POINT ON. Joe never touched your new motor. As far as having the heads flowed that is a waste of time. YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT THEY MAKE POWER. U did it once already. TAKE THE HEADS OUT OF THE EQUATION. This is your "constant" in your experiment. The rest are your variables. I am sure that this sucks for you and I wish you the best. Just "clear" your mind and things will come to you.
1. U purchased JPR heads.
2. JPR installs said heads. You dyno a nice 422 at the wheels. JPR says you bottom end may be going.
3. You go to Mikey and ARE for a new shortblock. Mikey takes JPR heads off car. He then installs old JPR heads on your new block from ARE.
If this is all correct and I think it is, then JPR is done with your motor FROM THIS POINT ON. Joe never touched your new motor. As far as having the heads flowed that is a waste of time. YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT THEY MAKE POWER. U did it once already. TAKE THE HEADS OUT OF THE EQUATION. This is your "constant" in your experiment. The rest are your variables. I am sure that this sucks for you and I wish you the best. Just "clear" your mind and things will come to you.
12-22-2003, 07:40 PM
#92
TECH Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think people are blaming the heads per se.
I think they are looking at the valvetrain to be the problem. I am sure JPRs port work is fine. Spring tension, lifter problems etc are seperate from the heads. BTW I run ARE gear and am happy with the results. I am not an employee
Cheers,
Chris
I think they are looking at the valvetrain to be the problem. I am sure JPRs port work is fine. Spring tension, lifter problems etc are seperate from the heads. BTW I run ARE gear and am happy with the results. I am not an employee
Cheers,
Chris
Last edited by Chris ARE 360; 12-22-2003 at 08:16 PM.
12-23-2003, 07:18 AM
#93
Okay, Jim. Maybe I overreacted to your original post. It just seems that some people are trying to help, and some people are attacking me. But I knew that would happen when I started criticizing sponsors, so its okay. But you say alot of people are pointing fingers lately and its bugging you?? You don't think sponsors should be held accountable for the quality of their work when customers pay them alot of money? There has to be accountability, and so far I am hearing alot of excuses. Read the posts from EZSS- he has a firm grasp of my point. So does Niphilli.
The only reason I would question the JPR heads at all is because some members now seem to be questioning the validity of the 422 dyno number at JD's, Bear.
I have plenty of other reasons to be upset, some of which I haven't mentioned:
1.) JPR owes me $1500 or a JPR EWP and the remainder of my deposit for an engine I ordered, then cancelled, because he couldn't get it built in a reasonable amount of time. I gave him a deposit for the JPR EWP two years ago.
2.) Someone left a spring seat off #6- don't know if it was JPR or Rapid.
3.) JPR promised me a dyno tune with LS1 Edit and I didn't get it. He knew I had an Ed Wright program, he was supposed to have a spare PCM for me. His LS1 Edit cable was down at the time, supposedly.
4.) I have paid for tuning 4 times- it wasn't right until the fourth try. That's alot of money for tuning.
5.) Rapid's tuning wasn't particularly good- the A/F ratio was dead on, but there was too much timing and I was getting quite a bit of KR on my most recent dyno. Idle and drivability weren't what I was hoping for, either. Lots of part-throttle pinging. CAM found more power by pulling timing. I think when you pay $500 plus dyno time, you should get a perfect tune.
6.) Rapid recommended and sold me a Spohn torque arm with the assurance it would be quiet- just have a "slight increase in road noise and vibration." The thing banged and clunked and made a terrible racket. I tried everything I could to make it quiet, finally I was forced to take it off the car and sell it. Still to this day I wonder if it wasn't adjusted properly, or if they are just extremely noisy by nature. I could not live with that much noise.
It looks like the ARE engine and Rapid's mechanical work are in the clear, so I owe them an apology. However, I was not satisfied with Rapid's tuning, and he could have tried a little harder to find me the HP I was expecting. Mike is trying to help now by examining my dyno sheets, and that goes pretty far in my book- particularly when he feels he is being personally attacked.
I think Mike Kleman is a good guy and would have tried to help me with my problems if I had taken the car back to him. I should have given him that opportunity, so that was my mistake.
The only reason I would question the JPR heads at all is because some members now seem to be questioning the validity of the 422 dyno number at JD's, Bear.
I have plenty of other reasons to be upset, some of which I haven't mentioned:
1.) JPR owes me $1500 or a JPR EWP and the remainder of my deposit for an engine I ordered, then cancelled, because he couldn't get it built in a reasonable amount of time. I gave him a deposit for the JPR EWP two years ago.
2.) Someone left a spring seat off #6- don't know if it was JPR or Rapid.
3.) JPR promised me a dyno tune with LS1 Edit and I didn't get it. He knew I had an Ed Wright program, he was supposed to have a spare PCM for me. His LS1 Edit cable was down at the time, supposedly.
4.) I have paid for tuning 4 times- it wasn't right until the fourth try. That's alot of money for tuning.
5.) Rapid's tuning wasn't particularly good- the A/F ratio was dead on, but there was too much timing and I was getting quite a bit of KR on my most recent dyno. Idle and drivability weren't what I was hoping for, either. Lots of part-throttle pinging. CAM found more power by pulling timing. I think when you pay $500 plus dyno time, you should get a perfect tune.
6.) Rapid recommended and sold me a Spohn torque arm with the assurance it would be quiet- just have a "slight increase in road noise and vibration." The thing banged and clunked and made a terrible racket. I tried everything I could to make it quiet, finally I was forced to take it off the car and sell it. Still to this day I wonder if it wasn't adjusted properly, or if they are just extremely noisy by nature. I could not live with that much noise.
It looks like the ARE engine and Rapid's mechanical work are in the clear, so I owe them an apology. However, I was not satisfied with Rapid's tuning, and he could have tried a little harder to find me the HP I was expecting. Mike is trying to help now by examining my dyno sheets, and that goes pretty far in my book- particularly when he feels he is being personally attacked.
I think Mike Kleman is a good guy and would have tried to help me with my problems if I had taken the car back to him. I should have given him that opportunity, so that was my mistake.
12-23-2003, 07:32 AM
#94
TECH Fanatic
Originally Posted by Bear
How JPR can be even brought up at this point is ridicoulous!! You all agree on the facts.
1. U purchased JPR heads.
2. JPR installs said heads. You dyno a nice 422 at the wheels. JPR says you bottom end may be going.
3. You go to Mikey and ARE for a new shortblock. Mikey takes JPR heads off car. He then installs old JPR heads on your new block from ARE.
1. U purchased JPR heads.
2. JPR installs said heads. You dyno a nice 422 at the wheels. JPR says you bottom end may be going.
3. You go to Mikey and ARE for a new shortblock. Mikey takes JPR heads off car. He then installs old JPR heads on your new block from ARE.
2.5. The car then started consuming huge amounts of oil. At that point Joe decided the 35K mile shortblock was shot. Still think JPR is in the clear?
12-23-2003, 07:51 AM
#95
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 2,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as #2, I did not remove the springs so how would that be my fault?
#3, an Ed Wright "locked" PCM is very easy to re-write.
As far as the tuning, we were on a tight time schedule to get you back to VA so I did not have the time I would have liked. I do prefer to keep the head and cam cars for a while to get all the part throttle bugs out. My mistake I guess :?. I see no WOT knock on your dyno runs from Feb. If you added cats, that will add cylinder pressure and timing needs to be decreased a little. Did you know that? As you said, the a/f was dead on. There were no cats on the car when I tuned it. I would have run a little less timing had there been cats on the car. You also mentioned torque reduction not being deleted. This is for A4 cars.
#6, This one I don't understand. I've done probably 50 of these arms. Could you tell where the "bang" was coming from? Did you have a solid end or the poly end? I don't recall. Was anything loose when you took it off? Is your car lowered? What did you replace the Spohn unit with? Is it better?
Another question, when you dynoed 422 what gear was in the car? What's in it now?
#3, an Ed Wright "locked" PCM is very easy to re-write.
As far as the tuning, we were on a tight time schedule to get you back to VA so I did not have the time I would have liked. I do prefer to keep the head and cam cars for a while to get all the part throttle bugs out. My mistake I guess :?. I see no WOT knock on your dyno runs from Feb. If you added cats, that will add cylinder pressure and timing needs to be decreased a little. Did you know that? As you said, the a/f was dead on. There were no cats on the car when I tuned it. I would have run a little less timing had there been cats on the car. You also mentioned torque reduction not being deleted. This is for A4 cars.
#6, This one I don't understand. I've done probably 50 of these arms. Could you tell where the "bang" was coming from? Did you have a solid end or the poly end? I don't recall. Was anything loose when you took it off? Is your car lowered? What did you replace the Spohn unit with? Is it better?
Another question, when you dynoed 422 what gear was in the car? What's in it now?
Last edited by mikey; 12-23-2003 at 08:23 AM.
12-23-2003, 10:02 AM
#97
Nick- actually the engine started to consume oil at more like 25K miles. I have probably close to 10K on the ARE shortblock now. I tried all manner of PCV modifications with no luck, so I don't think the PCV system was the culprit. To burn a quart every 500 miles isn't normal for a healthy engine, is it? 
Mike- I mentioned that I made a number of changes that may have thrown your tune out of whack- changed the lid, MAF, and catback in addition to putting the cats on the car. You are correct, there was no KR on the dyno run at Performance Specialties when you tuned the car. I suppose the part-throttle pinging as well may have been caused by a MAF change? Your tune wasn't that bad- I just had some issues with hunting and surging at idle, cam surge, occasional stalling, and poor tip-in throttle response. It was still a much better tune than the Ed Wright tune, that's for sure.
We have conflicting information about torque management- I have heard that it does have an affect on M6 cars. Does anyone know for sure? Does TM have any affect on an M6 or not?
As far as the Spohn torque arm is concerned, I have read alot of reports about it being noisy. Maybe I just have a lower tolerance for noise and vibration that you do, dunno. If you recall, the clearance between the front mount of the TA and the Y-pipe was very tight- in fact, tighter than you would have liked. I tried to adjust the y-pipe, but it didn't help. My TA had the poly mount. Tried tightening it up, that didn't help either. Went back to the G2 torque arm, its quiet as stock. The guy I sold it to apparently loves it- maybe that torque arm and that y-pipe just weren't meant to be together.
Gears in the car were 4.10's when it dynoed 422 and still 4.10's when it dynoed 392. Gears are now 3.73's, dynoed 390.
Mike- I mentioned that I made a number of changes that may have thrown your tune out of whack- changed the lid, MAF, and catback in addition to putting the cats on the car. You are correct, there was no KR on the dyno run at Performance Specialties when you tuned the car. I suppose the part-throttle pinging as well may have been caused by a MAF change? Your tune wasn't that bad- I just had some issues with hunting and surging at idle, cam surge, occasional stalling, and poor tip-in throttle response. It was still a much better tune than the Ed Wright tune, that's for sure.
We have conflicting information about torque management- I have heard that it does have an affect on M6 cars. Does anyone know for sure? Does TM have any affect on an M6 or not?
As far as the Spohn torque arm is concerned, I have read alot of reports about it being noisy. Maybe I just have a lower tolerance for noise and vibration that you do, dunno. If you recall, the clearance between the front mount of the TA and the Y-pipe was very tight- in fact, tighter than you would have liked. I tried to adjust the y-pipe, but it didn't help. My TA had the poly mount. Tried tightening it up, that didn't help either. Went back to the G2 torque arm, its quiet as stock. The guy I sold it to apparently loves it- maybe that torque arm and that y-pipe just weren't meant to be together.
Gears in the car were 4.10's when it dynoed 422 and still 4.10's when it dynoed 392. Gears are now 3.73's, dynoed 390.
Last edited by BADSS; 12-23-2003 at 10:18 AM.
12-23-2003, 11:54 AM
#98
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 2,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember having to use the G-Hann ball and socket joints which moved the Y back a little and put the Y portion very close to the loop. I remember being concerned about that but wasn't too much I could do because of the placement of the Y. Typically the Y portion sits further front and that's not an issue. Did you ever confirm that it was hitting there?
12-23-2003, 12:06 PM
#99
"We have conflicting information about torque management- I have heard that it does have an affect on M6 cars. Does anyone know for sure? Does TM have any affect on an M6 or not? 
"
JPR had mine totally removed for my M6; I can say it 'hits' much harder now.
I recall investigating this, and GM even on the M6's pulls timing during a shift so you don't grenade the tranny.
Perhaps a tuner will chime in.
I found great info at www.ls1tuning.com
Good luck Badss, you and I PM'd so I know your pain.
"JPR had mine totally removed for my M6; I can say it 'hits' much harder now.
I recall investigating this, and GM even on the M6's pulls timing during a shift so you don't grenade the tranny.
Perhaps a tuner will chime in.
I found great info at www.ls1tuning.com
Good luck Badss, you and I PM'd so I know your pain.
12-23-2003, 12:50 PM
#100
JPR had mine totally removed for my M6; I can say it 'hits' much harder now.
Thanks, Viper. That's what I thought.
Mikey- I cannot confirm or deny that the y-pipe was hitting the driveshaft loop. After readjusting the y, it appeared to have enough room, but I don't know how much the y-pipe actually moves around. The clunking and banging went away when I took off the Spohn TA, but now I don't have a DSL anymore. And I am sure the Spohn would have been more effective at the track, so I hated to take it off.
Thanks, Viper. That's what I thought.
Mikey- I cannot confirm or deny that the y-pipe was hitting the driveshaft loop. After readjusting the y, it appeared to have enough room, but I don't know how much the y-pipe actually moves around. The clunking and banging went away when I took off the Spohn TA, but now I don't have a DSL anymore. And I am sure the Spohn would have been more effective at the track, so I hated to take it off.