Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split
08-20-2002, 07:33 AM
#21
TECH Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split Not sure what day I am heading to ARE. I have a lot of stuff to take care of first. I am thinking I will probably drop by on Thursday around lunchtime.
Cheers,
Chris
ps- One benefit of the 230/230 112LSA on the aggressive lobe is that it will idle better than my current "old style" 226/234 cam. My idle so far is pretty tame considering the large exh duration but will be really smooth on the 230/230.
<small>[ August 20, 2002, 07:35 AM: Message edited by: Chris ARE 360 ]</small>
Cheers,
Chris
ps- One benefit of the 230/230 112LSA on the aggressive lobe is that it will idle better than my current "old style" 226/234 cam. My idle so far is pretty tame considering the large exh duration but will be really smooth on the 230/230.
<small>[ August 20, 2002, 07:35 AM: Message edited by: Chris ARE 360 ]</small>
08-20-2002, 11:48 AM
#22
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Objects in mirror no longer matter.
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by VINCE:
<strong>Keep us posted Chris.. I wish I knew your dyno with the 226/234 cam. If it is nice I would buy it from you.. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think it was stuck in the 38X rwhp range in a 360 cube motor. I'd shop for a different cam if I were you Vince.
<strong>Keep us posted Chris.. I wish I knew your dyno with the 226/234 cam. If it is nice I would buy it from you.. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think it was stuck in the 38X rwhp range in a 360 cube motor. I'd shop for a different cam if I were you Vince.
08-20-2002, 01:13 PM
#23
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Objects in mirror no longer matter.
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split Well put Vince. Way too many of us get caught up in good numbers and think that heads and cam is just like any other bolt-on and will result in consistant and proven power. This is not the case. Be prepared for months (or years) of trouble-shooting, tuning, changing and tweaking your setup. Not to say that all cars start acting strangely at the heads cam level, but alot do <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
08-20-2002, 01:18 PM
#24
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think it was stuck in the 38X rwhp range in a 360 cube motor. I'd shop for a different cam if I were you Vince. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That dyno was also through an automatic tranny with a stall. A similar set up 6-speed car will probably dyno about 40-50 rwhp more. Let's not forget Chris ran 122 mph with that setup in summer weather...
Josh
Josh
08-20-2002, 01:33 PM
#25
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Objects in mirror no longer matter.
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Damian:
<strong>That dyno was also through an automatic tranny with a stall. A similar set up 6-speed car will probably dyno about 40-50 rwhp more. Let's not forget Chris ran 122 mph with that setup in summer weather...
Josh</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">40-50 rwhp? Wake up dude <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> So Chris Marshes 440 rwhp 4.10 geared 4400 stalled A4 heads cam car (with only 346 cubes I might add) would have put down damn close to 500 rwhp in a M6 with stock gears huh? Sure...
<strong>That dyno was also through an automatic tranny with a stall. A similar set up 6-speed car will probably dyno about 40-50 rwhp more. Let's not forget Chris ran 122 mph with that setup in summer weather...
Josh</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">40-50 rwhp? Wake up dude <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> So Chris Marshes 440 rwhp 4.10 geared 4400 stalled A4 heads cam car (with only 346 cubes I might add) would have put down damn close to 500 rwhp in a M6 with stock gears huh? Sure...
08-20-2002, 02:00 PM
#26
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">40-50 rwhp? Wake up dude So Chris Marshes 440 rwhp 4.10 geared 4400 stalled A4 heads cam car (with only 346 cubes I might add) would have put down damn close to 500 rwhp in a M6 with stock gears huh? Sure... </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nah bro, you need to wake up....
It's obvious to me that you completely rely on dyno #'s. Another dyno *****? Seems that way because about 50% of your replies in this thread have referred to dyno #'s. Does it really matter that he dyno'd 380sih rwhp, when he actually ran 122 mph at the track. I guess you forgotten to mention that since you were so hung up on the low dyno #'s <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
BTW, I didn't say EVERY A4 setup is going to dyno 40-50 rwhp lower. However judging by what Chris runs at the track, I do believe his setup would make at least 420ish in an M6 car. I'll also add that there have been many built motors to come out of A4 cars, go into 6-speed cars, and dyno 40-50 rwhp more. Been done tons of times. Who was that guy with the 382 that swapped motors and it dyno'd about 50 rwhp more? I can't remember his name, maybe somebody else can help me out with that one....
josh<-----wide awake <img border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" title="" src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" />
It's obvious to me that you completely rely on dyno #'s. Another dyno *****? Seems that way because about 50% of your replies in this thread have referred to dyno #'s. Does it really matter that he dyno'd 380sih rwhp, when he actually ran 122 mph at the track. I guess you forgotten to mention that since you were so hung up on the low dyno #'s <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
BTW, I didn't say EVERY A4 setup is going to dyno 40-50 rwhp lower. However judging by what Chris runs at the track, I do believe his setup would make at least 420ish in an M6 car. I'll also add that there have been many built motors to come out of A4 cars, go into 6-speed cars, and dyno 40-50 rwhp more. Been done tons of times. Who was that guy with the 382 that swapped motors and it dyno'd about 50 rwhp more? I can't remember his name, maybe somebody else can help me out with that one....
josh<-----wide awake <img border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" title="" src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" />
08-20-2002, 02:16 PM
#28
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Objects in mirror no longer matter.
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Damian:
<strong>I'll also add that there have been many built motors to come out of A4 cars, go into 6-speed cars, and dyno 40-50 rwhp more. Been done tons of times. Who was that guy with the 382 that swapped motors and it dyno'd about 50 rwhp more? I can't remember his name, maybe somebody else can help me out with that one....
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sure, I can help you out with that one...
https://ls1tech.com/dynojet/MTI382LS6.jpg
Hmm, jumped from a baseline of 457 rwhp with the A4 to 470 rwhp with the M6. Awesome! Upon further inspection...
470-457 = *gets calculator <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> * 13 rwhp
Not a bad gain, a far cry from 50 rwhp however. Then again this is a dynamic gain, and can't be treated in a static manner, so lets use some simple division to get a better estimate...
470 / 457 = (X rwhp with M6) / 390? rwhp currently
Solving for X gets us 401 rwhp, a whopping 11 rwhp gain using the example YOU put forth. Sure we can get caught up in dyno numbers if you want to play that game, but the example you came up with is completely bogus. Yes it matters how well the car runs at the track, but playing that game you can say that there is a 120 mph bolton A4 car so chris's built motor and heads and cam didnt do ****. Now we have to take into account weight, DA and lots of other factors and now comparing track times really doesnt help too much. I personally think he would gain 15 rwhp or so going to a M6, but then would also lose some power going back to a stock bottom end for a fair comparison. Im not knocking Chris's car at all and am impressed with how its running. I was just saying that there are better cam choices for Vince out there then the ARE 226/234.
<strong>I'll also add that there have been many built motors to come out of A4 cars, go into 6-speed cars, and dyno 40-50 rwhp more. Been done tons of times. Who was that guy with the 382 that swapped motors and it dyno'd about 50 rwhp more? I can't remember his name, maybe somebody else can help me out with that one....
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sure, I can help you out with that one...
https://ls1tech.com/dynojet/MTI382LS6.jpg
Hmm, jumped from a baseline of 457 rwhp with the A4 to 470 rwhp with the M6. Awesome! Upon further inspection...
470-457 = *gets calculator <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> * 13 rwhp
Not a bad gain, a far cry from 50 rwhp however. Then again this is a dynamic gain, and can't be treated in a static manner, so lets use some simple division to get a better estimate...
470 / 457 = (X rwhp with M6) / 390? rwhp currently
Solving for X gets us 401 rwhp, a whopping 11 rwhp gain using the example YOU put forth. Sure we can get caught up in dyno numbers if you want to play that game, but the example you came up with is completely bogus. Yes it matters how well the car runs at the track, but playing that game you can say that there is a 120 mph bolton A4 car so chris's built motor and heads and cam didnt do ****. Now we have to take into account weight, DA and lots of other factors and now comparing track times really doesnt help too much. I personally think he would gain 15 rwhp or so going to a M6, but then would also lose some power going back to a stock bottom end for a fair comparison. Im not knocking Chris's car at all and am impressed with how its running. I was just saying that there are better cam choices for Vince out there then the ARE 226/234.
08-20-2002, 02:20 PM
#29
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Objects in mirror no longer matter.
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split Chris, I didn't mean to ruin your thread if I did. I think you are thinking on the right track with the 236/230, maybe you should narrow the LSA just a tad as well. A 111 LSA with a 107 ICL would probably idle just fine.
08-20-2002, 06:34 PM
#30
TECH Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split Dont forget I was running an unlocked 200R buick tranny, NOT a stock 4L60E.
Also the car trapped 122mph+ 6 times that day (best being 122.6mph)
I could give a rats *** if my car dynos less than some of the "queens" on the board. My mph at the track smokes most of those cars regardless.
Dynos are good to see your powerband, set AF ratio and timing and help determine shiftpoints.
Comparing different dynos is ridiculous anyways. A dyno variance of only 3 percent is 12RWHP on a 400RWHP car.
I could setup my car to dyno another 20RWHP higher and see about ZERO gains at the track (quite possibly slow down)
If anyone with heads and cam wants to race me feel free. I am confident my package will mph with the best of them. If you smoke me I'll buy you a beer and congratulate you.
I dont really care about ET. That is more a function of traction, chassis and gearing. On the street I enjoy the mph gain I have over Vipers and other cars.
Wait until the Fall when I hit 124-125+mph in this car. People will probably still complain LOL
Chris
Also the car trapped 122mph+ 6 times that day (best being 122.6mph)
I could give a rats *** if my car dynos less than some of the "queens" on the board. My mph at the track smokes most of those cars regardless.
Dynos are good to see your powerband, set AF ratio and timing and help determine shiftpoints.
Comparing different dynos is ridiculous anyways. A dyno variance of only 3 percent is 12RWHP on a 400RWHP car.
I could setup my car to dyno another 20RWHP higher and see about ZERO gains at the track (quite possibly slow down)
If anyone with heads and cam wants to race me feel free. I am confident my package will mph with the best of them. If you smoke me I'll buy you a beer and congratulate you.
I dont really care about ET. That is more a function of traction, chassis and gearing. On the street I enjoy the mph gain I have over Vipers and other cars.
Wait until the Fall when I hit 124-125+mph in this car. People will probably still complain LOL
Chris
08-20-2002, 08:36 PM
#32
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split The 13 HP was a converter locked 4L60E compared to an M6. That seemed to prove that an M6 was more efficent. Add another 20 - 30 HP for an unlocked converter and a 200R tranny. 40 HP was not a bad estimate. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
08-21-2002, 12:55 AM
#33
Re: Thinking about trying a BIG reverse split My comment was not to start anything. There are a bunch of people who do not post their dyno #'s and it is for numerous reasons. Some like to keep it quiet because they race for money. Some feel it is their business. Some just do not like to divulge their disappointment. Its just personal preference. I for one can care less who knows about my car. This board is suppose to be here to help those of us that need it.. I for one need the help.. My #'s are not stellar by any means, but are higher than some. If I would not have shelled out so much money to get my car back on the road. My #'s would be awesome.. Thats not the case. One day I will have one of the top cars on the board. It will not be because of track times that is for sure. I am not stripping my car.. It will have to be on the dyno... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
