AFR 205s + Thunder TRak Cam = 487rwhp/436rwtq
10-17-2005, 11:50 AM
#41
Hey Guys...
Just thought I would drop in and congratulate Pat G. on a job well done. Both of us felt there was a "470 number" somewhere in this combination and I was pleased to see these results. Once again guys....if you stick with the "recipe" and follow it thru with the dedication that Pat obviously has, the end results are well worth the trouble. In the past, many people have questioned the numbers I put down with my C5, and while few people have been able to duplicate them, few people have invested as much time and been as thorough. You dont screw some parts together, fall out of a tree and make 470+ RWHP out of stock displacement GM shortblock....especially a mild mannored one. Pat's car has the same heads, the exact same FAST intake modifications, a slightly larger cam, the same CR, and with the exception of the exhaust and EWP, is within 8 HP of my best, thru his Cats and un-optimixed exhaust (compared to the header and exhaust design in my C5). A better exhaust and the EWP would easily have him surpass the numbers my car laid down (as it should) due to the larger camshaft and the engines ability to better fill the cylinders at higher RPM. Also, I run a light inertia clutch/flywheel combo (Exedy dual) which I feel add slightly to the numbers my car puts down on an inertia style chassis dyno.....a similar clutch/flywheel set-up would skew the numbers even more in Pat's favor
This is a great test as it once again validates the AFR 205's as exceptional performers and backs up the fact that my results or better are achievable by choosing the proper components, spending the time to hit all the details, and then spending even more time dialing it all in with the proper tune. I've been preaching this for 18 months and hopefully seeing an "independent" constantly improve and refine his package helps hammer that point home. At this point Pat has at least the same amount of hours invested in his car as I invested in mine trying to showcase the small cam AFR package and it's no surprise that his end results are what they are....
Regards,
Tony M.
PS....SideStep....you're next
Just thought I would drop in and congratulate Pat G. on a job well done. Both of us felt there was a "470 number" somewhere in this combination and I was pleased to see these results. Once again guys....if you stick with the "recipe" and follow it thru with the dedication that Pat obviously has, the end results are well worth the trouble. In the past, many people have questioned the numbers I put down with my C5, and while few people have been able to duplicate them, few people have invested as much time and been as thorough. You dont screw some parts together, fall out of a tree and make 470+ RWHP out of stock displacement GM shortblock....especially a mild mannored one. Pat's car has the same heads, the exact same FAST intake modifications, a slightly larger cam, the same CR, and with the exception of the exhaust and EWP, is within 8 HP of my best, thru his Cats and un-optimixed exhaust (compared to the header and exhaust design in my C5). A better exhaust and the EWP would easily have him surpass the numbers my car laid down (as it should) due to the larger camshaft and the engines ability to better fill the cylinders at higher RPM. Also, I run a light inertia clutch/flywheel combo (Exedy dual) which I feel add slightly to the numbers my car puts down on an inertia style chassis dyno.....a similar clutch/flywheel set-up would skew the numbers even more in Pat's favor
This is a great test as it once again validates the AFR 205's as exceptional performers and backs up the fact that my results or better are achievable by choosing the proper components, spending the time to hit all the details, and then spending even more time dialing it all in with the proper tune. I've been preaching this for 18 months and hopefully seeing an "independent" constantly improve and refine his package helps hammer that point home. At this point Pat has at least the same amount of hours invested in his car as I invested in mine trying to showcase the small cam AFR package and it's no surprise that his end results are what they are....
Regards,
Tony M.
PS....SideStep....you're next
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; 10-17-2005 at 04:56 PM.
10-17-2005, 12:02 PM
#42
!LS1 11 Second Club
Originally Posted by Tony Mamo @ AFR
You dont screw some parts together, fall out of a tree and make 470+ RWHP out of stock displacement GM shortblock.
10-17-2005, 12:06 PM
#43
Originally Posted by Tony Mamo @ AFR
Pat's car has the same heads, the exact same FAST intake modifications, a slightly larger cam, the same CR, and with the exception of the exhaust and EWP, is within 8 HP of my best, thru his Cats and un-optimixed exhaust (compared to the header and exhaust design in my C5). A better exhaust and the EWP would easily have him surpass the numbers my car laid down (as it should) due to the larger camshaft and the engines ability to better fill the cylinders at higher RPM.
In summary: Street Trim = Kooks catted y-pipe, SLP dual dual, cutout and running all belts. 472rwhp/420rwtq SAE. Close to Tony's best.
Race trim = Open headers w 24" extensions and bullet mufflers (no cats), short belt/EWP. 487rwhp/436rwtq SAE. This exceeded Tony's best, but is not what I'd run 24/7. If I ran a longer header with a high velocity merge collector (like LGM makes for the Corvettes), the power would have been even better. I expect there will be many more people hitting 480-500 rwhp running the AFR 205s and mid-duration cams in the near future.
10-17-2005, 12:21 PM
#45
Originally Posted by WhiteLTone
patrick not to hijack, but could you pm me details on how you ran and tuned this "maf-less" sytem? i'm completing a swap for my friend and dont have a maf.
10-17-2005, 12:24 PM
#46
10 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Texarkana,TX
Posts: 954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ahhh cool, so when you comming to Texarkana? HAHA, cause we are all alone up here when it comes to speed density tuning. Congrats on the #s, bet its a hell of a ride, now if we can get Dad's car going right we'd be set here
10-17-2005, 02:58 PM
#48
11 Second Club
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Norcal
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Patrick G
It's the duration that contributes to piston to valve clearance issues. Remember, at max lift, the piston is nearly all the way down the cylinder bore. Big duration is the problem, not lift. At 231/234 my cam is around the same size as an FMS F-14 (and those have no issues with P to V clearance with stock heads).
Bottom line, you'll have no P to V clearance issues running the TRak cam with stock heads, Also, Thunder Racing's T-Rex is about the biggest cam you can put under stock heads and still have P to V clearance. I hear that Thunder is so pleased with the new LSK lobes, they might be experimenting with a T-Rex using LSK lobes. That would be a .660" lift hydraulic cam...nice!
Bottom line, you'll have no P to V clearance issues running the TRak cam with stock heads, Also, Thunder Racing's T-Rex is about the biggest cam you can put under stock heads and still have P to V clearance. I hear that Thunder is so pleased with the new LSK lobes, they might be experimenting with a T-Rex using LSK lobes. That would be a .660" lift hydraulic cam...nice!
Also, do you see any gains to made by swtching out the R1 in my Zo to the Trak?
TIA
10-17-2005, 03:32 PM
#49
Originally Posted by Spellbound
Will the trak cam clear unmilled AFR-205's? How about 5.3's milled .010 with a 2.02 intake and a stock exhasut? I am kinda itching to change the set up on my WS6, since the cam is OLD tech lol, but it's running so good right now.
Also, do you see any gains to made by swtching out the R1 in my Zo to the Trak?
TIA
Also, do you see any gains to made by swtching out the R1 in my Zo to the Trak?
TIA
10-17-2005, 03:40 PM
#51
Originally Posted by Hennytime
did you get new injectors? fuel pump? 487 is alot of power for a stock fuel system...
10-17-2005, 03:44 PM
#52
On The Tree
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Pensacola Florida
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Patrick G
A little more mid-range power? I thought the mid-range power was pretty good. Most heads/cam combinations that make big power up high are very lazy down low. Mine's not and the mid-range punch is very nice.
As far as timing goes, I'm assuming your talking about spark timing. A WOT, my timing is as follows:
27 degrees at 3000
27 at 3500
27 at 4000
27 at 4500
As far as timing goes, I'm assuming your talking about spark timing. A WOT, my timing is as follows:
27 degrees at 3000
27 at 3500
27 at 4000
27 at 4500
Paul
10-17-2005, 04:05 PM
#53
Keep in mind my setup verses yours.
11.0 to 1 static compression.
8.2 to 1 dynamic compression (critical to keep under 8.5 if running pump gas). Stock is like 6.9 to 1.
I love mid-range as much as the other guy, but I'm throwing all the timing at the motor that it LIKES. Any more and it produces 0 more hp/tq, but will be much more prone to rattling on pump gas. This car is my daily driver so 24/7 streetability is of utmost importance to me. Oh and by the way, I am already running TR6 plugs (gapped .045").
11.0 to 1 static compression.
8.2 to 1 dynamic compression (critical to keep under 8.5 if running pump gas). Stock is like 6.9 to 1.
I love mid-range as much as the other guy, but I'm throwing all the timing at the motor that it LIKES. Any more and it produces 0 more hp/tq, but will be much more prone to rattling on pump gas. This car is my daily driver so 24/7 streetability is of utmost importance to me. Oh and by the way, I am already running TR6 plugs (gapped .045").
Last edited by Patrick G; 10-17-2005 at 04:12 PM.
10-17-2005, 04:08 PM
#54
Originally Posted by SilverLS1
whoa, not saying Im saying those arent great numbers! I am just a mid range freak, seeing as how i dont run on the track. GREAT numbers tho! And I hate to even mention this, being that your far more of a guru than I, but why not try 29-30 degrees at those rpms? Hell, we have gotten some SICK results out of LOTS of mid range timing and running a colder plug like a tr6! Again, great numbers, sorry it came out like I was putting your setup down!
Paul
Paul
10-17-2005, 04:09 PM
#55
TECH Resident
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some sick numbers out of any motor, much less a 346. Congrats.
Since you are now doing speed-density tuning(which you mentioned helped your driveability), any plans on going with a bigger cam?
Since you are now doing speed-density tuning(which you mentioned helped your driveability), any plans on going with a bigger cam?
10-17-2005, 04:17 PM
#56
Originally Posted by TroubledWine3
Some sick numbers out of any motor, much less a 346. Congrats.
Since you are now doing speed-density tuning(which you mentioned helped your driveability), any plans on going with a bigger cam?
Since you are now doing speed-density tuning(which you mentioned helped your driveability), any plans on going with a bigger cam?
10-17-2005, 06:18 PM
#58
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (28)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gongrats Pat! Attention to detail pays off 
Link in my sig will give you the basic idea of !MAF tuning.
Originally Posted by WhiteLTone
patrick not to hijack, but could you pm me details on how you ran and tuned this "maf-less" sytem? i'm completing a swap for my friend and dont have a maf.
