JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results
04-23-2003, 09:36 AM
#21
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results The TQ is sick!!!Look at how it kills a 346 H/C setup from 3000 to redline.
Get that sucker edited..
With a good tune it'll make 465RW no problem right now.I bet if u went to bigger cam u might get 480RW or more.
Your setup is real impressive
Good luck with her..
JS
Get that sucker edited..
With a good tune it'll make 465RW no problem right now.I bet if u went to bigger cam u might get 480RW or more.
Your setup is real impressive
Good luck with her..
JS
04-23-2003, 09:46 AM
#22
10 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kansas City, KS
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results good numbers!!!! thanks for the comparision to the H/C cars. I had always wanted to see that in an overlay.
04-23-2003, 09:50 AM
#23
On The Tree
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Carrollton, TX
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results The difference the HC car has in TQ vs the 388 all bore can be made up for by gearing.
The HP curves are just about the same, shift that
HP curve of the HC car to the left by 400 RPM, and they are almost the same curves, except HC curve does not appear to drop as much at the top.
Dennis
The HP curves are just about the same, shift that
HP curve of the HC car to the left by 400 RPM, and they are almost the same curves, except HC curve does not appear to drop as much at the top.
Dennis
04-23-2003, 10:11 AM
#24
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results The dyno sheet shows both cars hp/tq lines crossing at the same 5250.
What are u talking about?
The All bore KILLS the H/C all threw the run except for the very top end of the run and thats only because the cam is still smallish and there 3 degrees of KR still going on and it hasnt been edited yet.
For god sakes the GSX2 cam is bigger than this ARE cam Joe is using and guys are running the X2 cam in a 346.U wait til he retunes it using edit and or puts a REAL cam in it.I bet you'll see 480RW+ outta this etup.
This setup will crush a H/C car!!!
JS
What are u talking about?
The All bore KILLS the H/C all threw the run except for the very top end of the run and thats only because the cam is still smallish and there 3 degrees of KR still going on and it hasnt been edited yet.
For god sakes the GSX2 cam is bigger than this ARE cam Joe is using and guys are running the X2 cam in a 346.U wait til he retunes it using edit and or puts a REAL cam in it.I bet you'll see 480RW+ outta this etup.
This setup will crush a H/C car!!!
JS
04-23-2003, 10:17 AM
#25
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Jacksonville NC
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results How much more is BORING an engine compared to a H/C
Are there any draw backs? besides gas mileage <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />
Are there any draw backs? besides gas mileage <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />
04-23-2003, 10:28 AM
#26
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SC
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by HP-GURU:
<strong> The difference the HC car has in TQ vs the 388 all bore can be made up for by gearing.
The HP curves are just about the same, shift that
HP curve of the HC car to the left by 400 RPM, and they are almost the same curves, except HC curve does not appear to drop as much at the top.
Dennis </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Um, gearing doesnt shift your curve to the left -- at the same RPM you are not making more power, you are just getting to that power quicker.
For the record too, Joe's car is a 10-bolt with 3.42 gears, while my car is a 12 bolt 33 spline with 4.11 gears and a -2.5 degree pinion angle from my spohn torque arm. I still have the stock driveshaft mated to this rear in not an exactly efficient manner, and Im quite sure my drivetrain is costing me some serious rwhp right now (Id guess at least 10-12 +rwhp or around 2%+)
<strong> The difference the HC car has in TQ vs the 388 all bore can be made up for by gearing.
The HP curves are just about the same, shift that
HP curve of the HC car to the left by 400 RPM, and they are almost the same curves, except HC curve does not appear to drop as much at the top.
Dennis </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Um, gearing doesnt shift your curve to the left -- at the same RPM you are not making more power, you are just getting to that power quicker.
For the record too, Joe's car is a 10-bolt with 3.42 gears, while my car is a 12 bolt 33 spline with 4.11 gears and a -2.5 degree pinion angle from my spohn torque arm. I still have the stock driveshaft mated to this rear in not an exactly efficient manner, and Im quite sure my drivetrain is costing me some serious rwhp right now (Id guess at least 10-12 +rwhp or around 2%+)
04-23-2003, 10:33 AM
#27
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SC
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by KraZy:
<strong> How much more is BORING an engine compared to a H/C
Are there any draw backs? besides gas mileage <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, I was making about 25mpg+ on the highway, and still ended up with 21mpg after 5-6 dyno pulls and being stuck in stop and go traffic for over an hour on the way to the dyno.
The concerns for all-bore would be dropping a liner or leaking. With the darton system Joe used, the liner cant drop (because it really isnt a liner) and the car has not leaked any coolant or oil, not a drop after 500+ miles now in all types of driving conditions. So far looks good, keeping my fingers crossed <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
<strong> How much more is BORING an engine compared to a H/C
Are there any draw backs? besides gas mileage <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, I was making about 25mpg+ on the highway, and still ended up with 21mpg after 5-6 dyno pulls and being stuck in stop and go traffic for over an hour on the way to the dyno.
The concerns for all-bore would be dropping a liner or leaking. With the darton system Joe used, the liner cant drop (because it really isnt a liner) and the car has not leaked any coolant or oil, not a drop after 500+ miles now in all types of driving conditions. So far looks good, keeping my fingers crossed <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
04-23-2003, 11:18 AM
#28
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Shippensburg, PA
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results Awesome <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
That's really cool to see the h/c vs. all bore graph overlayed. Have fun!
That's really cool to see the h/c vs. all bore graph overlayed. Have fun!
04-23-2003, 11:34 AM
#29
On The Tree
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Germantown, Maryland
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results Awesome results Erik. I am glad things came together so well. It sounds like Joe really went out of his way to make this package work.
Two questions:
What did the ARE Heads flow before Joe re-ported them?
Do you think the ported intake manifold is hurting you?
<small>[ April 23, 2003, 11:35 AM: Message edited by: GTP LS1 ]</small>
Two questions:
What did the ARE Heads flow before Joe re-ported them?
Do you think the ported intake manifold is hurting you?
<small>[ April 23, 2003, 11:35 AM: Message edited by: GTP LS1 ]</small>
04-23-2003, 11:46 AM
#30
On The Tree
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Carrollton, TX
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results ezss,
despite the wording you know what I mean. The HP curves are almost identical except the all bore is shifted to left by 400rpm.
Gearing will more than make up for the diff in tq. The HC doesn't fall off as fast for last 500 rpm, so it will be interesting race if the hc car was geared appropriately.
Geard the same the all bore of course wins.
Dennis
despite the wording you know what I mean. The HP curves are almost identical except the all bore is shifted to left by 400rpm.
Gearing will more than make up for the diff in tq. The HC doesn't fall off as fast for last 500 rpm, so it will be interesting race if the hc car was geared appropriately.
Geard the same the all bore of course wins.
Dennis
04-23-2003, 01:01 PM
#31
On The Tree
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Carrollton, TX
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results ezss,
Again, you are not reading what I am saying. What I am saying, is for example the 388 all bore will need a 4.10 gear to cross finish line @ best ET/MPH, whereas the smaller motor that produce the same power, but at higher rpm will need a 4.56 gear.
With appropriate rear gears to match powerbands, it will be an interesting and a very close race.
If both vehicles have the same rear gear the one with the most torque wins.
I never said that rear gear can affect dyno results, or shift the curves as measured by the dyno. What I did say, is if you see this phenomina of a shifted HP curve that the curves are really the same and simply at different RPM points, that gearing will make up the difference.
This same topic has come up more than on this forum and I have expressed the consensous.
Dennis
Again, you are not reading what I am saying. What I am saying, is for example the 388 all bore will need a 4.10 gear to cross finish line @ best ET/MPH, whereas the smaller motor that produce the same power, but at higher rpm will need a 4.56 gear.
With appropriate rear gears to match powerbands, it will be an interesting and a very close race.
If both vehicles have the same rear gear the one with the most torque wins.
I never said that rear gear can affect dyno results, or shift the curves as measured by the dyno. What I did say, is if you see this phenomina of a shifted HP curve that the curves are really the same and simply at different RPM points, that gearing will make up the difference.
This same topic has come up more than on this forum and I have expressed the consensous.
Dennis
04-23-2003, 01:15 PM
#32
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SC
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results I understand what you are saying, but its like saying a honda s2000 has the same curves as an LS1, its just a 9000rpm instead of 6000rpm. So, ok I gear the honda up to 6.96 so it is easier to keep it up in the higher rpms..that still doesnt mean its 137 tq is going to be a match for the LS1s 350, at any level.
So how does a h/c car's like joe's with 410rwtq (which is a lot of torque for h/c, most dont have this high even) and more agressive gears equal 452rwtq? That isnt just a shift to the left, its a shift left and up. If you are talking HP, ok, yes the car needs a bigger cam probably cause it just stops doing anything at 6000rpm, so the curves overlay easier.
If that was the consensus, I missed it-- I never been much of a follow along kinda guy anyhow. Anyhow, lets drop it if we could and stick to the topic-- I see your point, I just hope you see mine. I dont want to turn this into a long post of unrelated discussions (like we usually do on this board!)
So how does a h/c car's like joe's with 410rwtq (which is a lot of torque for h/c, most dont have this high even) and more agressive gears equal 452rwtq? That isnt just a shift to the left, its a shift left and up. If you are talking HP, ok, yes the car needs a bigger cam probably cause it just stops doing anything at 6000rpm, so the curves overlay easier.
If that was the consensus, I missed it-- I never been much of a follow along kinda guy anyhow. Anyhow, lets drop it if we could and stick to the topic-- I see your point, I just hope you see mine. I dont want to turn this into a long post of unrelated discussions (like we usually do on this board!)
04-23-2003, 01:29 PM
#33
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results OK...I'll slightly change the subject:
*Cams in 388(ish) all-bore motors*
Lets talk about cams and how the added displacement, unshrouding of the valves, and addition of aftermarket pistons with valve reliefs change how we should look at cams in All bore motors like this one.
I am going for the drivability side of the compromise. I am putting MTI's X1 (230/227) on a 114 into my "being built" MTI 387/388 (also 4.125). I want very little shake, surge, and I very much want low end torque. What Im wondering is where is the power in these motors, cam wise? How much does the bigger bore "shrink" cams? How much should we raise the duration, or should we be lowering the LSA?
I dont think we have enough data to really make much of a decision...... but lets talk about it. Cams for 346's have been hashed to death. Cams for bigger motors are much more in the dark.
chris
*Cams in 388(ish) all-bore motors*
Lets talk about cams and how the added displacement, unshrouding of the valves, and addition of aftermarket pistons with valve reliefs change how we should look at cams in All bore motors like this one.
I am going for the drivability side of the compromise. I am putting MTI's X1 (230/227) on a 114 into my "being built" MTI 387/388 (also 4.125). I want very little shake, surge, and I very much want low end torque. What Im wondering is where is the power in these motors, cam wise? How much does the bigger bore "shrink" cams? How much should we raise the duration, or should we be lowering the LSA?
I dont think we have enough data to really make much of a decision...... but lets talk about it. Cams for 346's have been hashed to death. Cams for bigger motors are much more in the dark.
chris
04-23-2003, 01:33 PM
#34
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results Oh, and EZSS, Im sorta worried about your exhaust port. My old ARE exhaust port didnt flow very well. MTI got me over 50 (yes, 50) cfm on the exhaust side. I had previously had a hard time breaking 410 rwhp with the ARE heads and the MTI Hammer-cam. Did Joe spend time on the exhaust ports? You may have a 470 rwhp motor if it had the right exhaust ports. MTI did at one point make over 480rwhp with a 393 All-bore.
chris
chris
04-23-2003, 01:39 PM
#35
11 Second Club
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: gilbertsville, PA
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results Erik,
Killer #'s, especially w/ small (?) cam, KR, and needing tuning! Have you got your roll bar installed yet, cause I think you'll have no problems getting low 11's, maybe 10's w/ good driving/ cam/ tuning!
Killer #'s, especially w/ small (?) cam, KR, and needing tuning! Have you got your roll bar installed yet, cause I think you'll have no problems getting low 11's, maybe 10's w/ good driving/ cam/ tuning!
04-23-2003, 01:51 PM
#36
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SC
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Visceral:
<strong> Oh, and EZSS, Im sorta worried about your exhaust port. My old ARE exhaust port didnt flow very well. MTI got me over 50 (yes, 50) cfm on the exhaust side. I had previously had a hard time breaking 410 rwhp with the ARE heads and the MTI Hammer-cam. Did Joe spend time on the exhaust ports? You may have a 470 rwhp motor if it had the right exhaust ports. MTI did at one point make over 480rwhp with a 393 All-bore.
chris </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Joe and Tom tried a 230/224 or 230/227 cam in Tom's 382, and it seemed way too small according to Joe.
I am making 400rwtq at 3200 rpm, I love the low end torque, but I would sacrifice a bit of it (its too much I think-- the car lurches and bucks at part throttle and I feel like im about to pop a wheelie every time I go from first, like when Im driving out my parking space at work or stuck in stop and go traffic) to get some more top end. The cam just lies down after 6000rpm, you can definately go bigger than even I. 236/236 I think would even be conservative.
Joe did some work on the exhaust ports too, but not nearly to the extend he did on the intake. Joe could comment more on this when he gets a chance. Its quite possible that more reworking on the exhaust could also get me more hp.
<strong> Oh, and EZSS, Im sorta worried about your exhaust port. My old ARE exhaust port didnt flow very well. MTI got me over 50 (yes, 50) cfm on the exhaust side. I had previously had a hard time breaking 410 rwhp with the ARE heads and the MTI Hammer-cam. Did Joe spend time on the exhaust ports? You may have a 470 rwhp motor if it had the right exhaust ports. MTI did at one point make over 480rwhp with a 393 All-bore.
chris </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Joe and Tom tried a 230/224 or 230/227 cam in Tom's 382, and it seemed way too small according to Joe.
I am making 400rwtq at 3200 rpm, I love the low end torque, but I would sacrifice a bit of it (its too much I think-- the car lurches and bucks at part throttle and I feel like im about to pop a wheelie every time I go from first, like when Im driving out my parking space at work or stuck in stop and go traffic) to get some more top end. The cam just lies down after 6000rpm, you can definately go bigger than even I. 236/236 I think would even be conservative.
Joe did some work on the exhaust ports too, but not nearly to the extend he did on the intake. Joe could comment more on this when he gets a chance. Its quite possible that more reworking on the exhaust could also get me more hp.
04-23-2003, 01:54 PM
#37
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SC
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by mattf2:
<strong> Erik,
Killer #'s, especially w/ small (?) cam, KR, and needing tuning! Have you got your roll bar installed yet, cause I think you'll have no problems getting low 11's, maybe 10's w/ good driving/ cam/ tuning! </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thanks matt, maybe I can race your cobra buddy now <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> I have ordered a wolfe weld-in chromoly roll-bar, but it wont be here for a few weeks. Ill probably try and race before I get it, either this weekend or next. I just hope that after driving 2+ hrs to the nearest decent track I can get in more than 1 run.
<strong> Erik,
Killer #'s, especially w/ small (?) cam, KR, and needing tuning! Have you got your roll bar installed yet, cause I think you'll have no problems getting low 11's, maybe 10's w/ good driving/ cam/ tuning! </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thanks matt, maybe I can race your cobra buddy now <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> I have ordered a wolfe weld-in chromoly roll-bar, but it wont be here for a few weeks. Ill probably try and race before I get it, either this weekend or next. I just hope that after driving 2+ hrs to the nearest decent track I can get in more than 1 run.
04-23-2003, 02:06 PM
#38
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by ezss:
<strong>Joe and Tom tried a 230/224 or 230/227 cam in Tom's 382, and it seemed way too small according to Joe.
I am making 400rwtq at 3200 rpm, I love the low end torque, but I would sacrifice a bit of it (its too much I think-- the car lurches and bucks at part throttle and I feel like im about to pop a wheelie every time I go from first, like when Im driving out my parking space at work or stuck in stop and go traffic) to get some more top end. The cam just lies down after 6000rpm, you can definately go bigger than even I. 236/236 I think would even be conservative.
Joe did some work on the exhaust ports too, but not nearly to the extend he did on the intake. Joe could comment more on this when he gets a chance. Its quite possible that more reworking on the exhaust could also get me more hp. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, thats kinda what Im worried about. When I had my old ARE heads on, I made 370 lb/ft at 3000 rpm. Great low end torque. But it wasnt because of the hammer-cam. It was because my heads were way intake-biased. The exhaust ports were creating torque at the expense of falling off high up. Hopefully you will find that Joe did great things on your heads exhaust-wise, and that with just the right cam, you are going to be having big 6000+ fun. My old h/c setup totally died at around 5800-6000 too ;-)Im still interested to hear form Joe on his experiences with those other cams though. Joe? Cams in 388 thoughts?
chris
<strong>Joe and Tom tried a 230/224 or 230/227 cam in Tom's 382, and it seemed way too small according to Joe.
I am making 400rwtq at 3200 rpm, I love the low end torque, but I would sacrifice a bit of it (its too much I think-- the car lurches and bucks at part throttle and I feel like im about to pop a wheelie every time I go from first, like when Im driving out my parking space at work or stuck in stop and go traffic) to get some more top end. The cam just lies down after 6000rpm, you can definately go bigger than even I. 236/236 I think would even be conservative.
Joe did some work on the exhaust ports too, but not nearly to the extend he did on the intake. Joe could comment more on this when he gets a chance. Its quite possible that more reworking on the exhaust could also get me more hp. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, thats kinda what Im worried about. When I had my old ARE heads on, I made 370 lb/ft at 3000 rpm. Great low end torque. But it wasnt because of the hammer-cam. It was because my heads were way intake-biased. The exhaust ports were creating torque at the expense of falling off high up. Hopefully you will find that Joe did great things on your heads exhaust-wise, and that with just the right cam, you are going to be having big 6000+ fun. My old h/c setup totally died at around 5800-6000 too ;-)Im still interested to hear form Joe on his experiences with those other cams though. Joe? Cams in 388 thoughts?
chris
04-23-2003, 02:12 PM
#39
Launching!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Clinton Twp. Mi
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results Good work Joe, looks like another happy customer!!
Glad to see our pistons in it!
Thanks,
Chris Gelineau
Diamond Pistons
877-552-2112 toll free
Glad to see our pistons in it!
Thanks,
Chris Gelineau
Diamond Pistons
877-552-2112 toll free
04-23-2003, 05:49 PM
#40
TECH Resident
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: here, ny
Posts: 859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: JPR 388ci all-bore initial dyno results some of u brought up the fact that both cars hp/tq curves crossed at 5250... any and all engines curves cross at that rpm (actually 5252)... what they meant was that the hp numbers for the h/c car were about 400rpm behind, so if the bored car made X hp at 4000rpm, the h/c car would make X hp at 4400rpm, needing more gear to make equal hp...