ls3 l92 cam expert needed.. opinion
07-27-2009, 12:39 PM
#22
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
We have done 4 2010 header swaps in the last week. EVERY car was dynoed bone stock and afterwards both with and without a tune. NO cold air intakes, NO other modifications. ALL dyno tests were performed on the same dyno with nearly identical weather conditons and all numbers were SAE corrected.
We've done 2 LS3 SS' both cars picked up 30-32RWHP and 35-40RWTQ.
The 2 L99 Auto cars both picked up 17RWHP and 25RWTQ w/o tune and 30RWHP 64RWTQ with the tune. From what I've seen, tuning on the stick cars doesn't make a whole lot of peak power but can make better average torque and also increase consistency from pull to pull and pass to pass.
I had 2 of these customers go to the track on Friday. BOTH picked up over half a second and 3-4MPH with these mods on street tires. I know the auto car went from 13.58 to 13.04 and 104MPH to 107MPH. The stick car ran a 13.04 at 108. This was in 96* temps and horrible air.
Dyno and track results for 2 identically prepared 2010 SS' one auto and one manual. Geoff at EPS did both tunes. Both cars were running American Racing 1 7/8" headers and 3" X pipes with stock mufflers.
This is down and dirty R&D. We've been thoroughly testing a ton of new products for these cars and will be giving real results as they are collected.
Not to hijack your thread but the mis-information out here tends to get a little deep. As far as that cam is concerned, you can contact many different vendors and get many different answers. It should produce significant gains over stock but I would need to know your complete setup and goals for the car before recommending anything.
UPDATE: One of the customers just called and went back to the track on Sat. He went 12.90.
Shane
We've done 2 LS3 SS' both cars picked up 30-32RWHP and 35-40RWTQ.
The 2 L99 Auto cars both picked up 17RWHP and 25RWTQ w/o tune and 30RWHP 64RWTQ with the tune. From what I've seen, tuning on the stick cars doesn't make a whole lot of peak power but can make better average torque and also increase consistency from pull to pull and pass to pass.
I had 2 of these customers go to the track on Friday. BOTH picked up over half a second and 3-4MPH with these mods on street tires. I know the auto car went from 13.58 to 13.04 and 104MPH to 107MPH. The stick car ran a 13.04 at 108. This was in 96* temps and horrible air.
Dyno and track results for 2 identically prepared 2010 SS' one auto and one manual. Geoff at EPS did both tunes. Both cars were running American Racing 1 7/8" headers and 3" X pipes with stock mufflers.
This is down and dirty R&D. We've been thoroughly testing a ton of new products for these cars and will be giving real results as they are collected.
Not to hijack your thread but the mis-information out here tends to get a little deep. As far as that cam is concerned, you can contact many different vendors and get many different answers. It should produce significant gains over stock but I would need to know your complete setup and goals for the car before recommending anything.
UPDATE: One of the customers just called and went back to the track on Sat. He went 12.90.
Shane
Last edited by XtraCajunSS; 07-27-2009 at 01:28 PM.
07-27-2009, 12:54 PM
#23
I find it hard to get 100whp gains with a cam and headers alone unless a major increase was because you underdriving things significantly. Especially an increase in the low end and upper end.
IF this is the case why wouldn't this be a factory option. The majority of your HP increase from a cam that small has to be removing the safety factor in the tune. Such as emission and durability related. Also keep in mind the stock head is 38mm outlet on the exhaust. How could you put 1 7/8 or 2 in headers on and make signifcantly more power?
"On average we see about 30-40 rwhp gains headers and catted x-pipe and tune." Ok what afr are you targeting, what did you do to spark and what emissions have been removed. For every 3 kpa of backpressure it is roughly 1 hp. Stock back pressure is around 54 kpa. So lets say there is absolutely no pressure now you gain 20 hp. Then lets say headers help the scavening affect and minimize flow loss 15. I could believe 30-40 at the wheels with modifying the tune, I still don't see the 100 whp gain. Tunes can increase power like i said because of emissions and other things but each engine off the line is different therefore the stock tunes are somewhat conservative until lately when sensors are sensitive enough to make the tune less conservative and have the computer cut back on things when it notices "potentially" damaging inputs.
50-60whp is reasonable and may not affect driveability. That is an insult to GM to say you can make more power across the whole power range not affect driveability and maintain durability. The LS3 is very new and with it there is much more technology to test the engine. I believe they have more money to test every component and configuration to maximize power and fuel economy while meeting guidlines. That being said no small increase in anything is worth 100whp.
IF this is the case why wouldn't this be a factory option. The majority of your HP increase from a cam that small has to be removing the safety factor in the tune. Such as emission and durability related. Also keep in mind the stock head is 38mm outlet on the exhaust. How could you put 1 7/8 or 2 in headers on and make signifcantly more power?
"On average we see about 30-40 rwhp gains headers and catted x-pipe and tune." Ok what afr are you targeting, what did you do to spark and what emissions have been removed. For every 3 kpa of backpressure it is roughly 1 hp. Stock back pressure is around 54 kpa. So lets say there is absolutely no pressure now you gain 20 hp. Then lets say headers help the scavening affect and minimize flow loss 15. I could believe 30-40 at the wheels with modifying the tune, I still don't see the 100 whp gain. Tunes can increase power like i said because of emissions and other things but each engine off the line is different therefore the stock tunes are somewhat conservative until lately when sensors are sensitive enough to make the tune less conservative and have the computer cut back on things when it notices "potentially" damaging inputs.
50-60whp is reasonable and may not affect driveability. That is an insult to GM to say you can make more power across the whole power range not affect driveability and maintain durability. The LS3 is very new and with it there is much more technology to test the engine. I believe they have more money to test every component and configuration to maximize power and fuel economy while meeting guidlines. That being said no small increase in anything is worth 100whp.
it is not a factory option because there is more than 1 thing in mind when GM makes a car. The highest on the list is meeting the .gov standards. after that is cost effectiveness ie profit/cost ratio. Third is the will people buy it factor. Then it ranges on to avail of goods/parts. Almost last on the list is MOAR POWA!!!!! I mean come on, do you really think GM or any automake will have a vehicle that is produced in any quantity that there is nothing more you can do to it? Even ferrari has aftermarket perf parts.
the reason you can make that much more power with 1 7/8 or 2" in the new camaro case is because the engine with the higher HP becomes a more efficient air pump. You need to get those spent gasses out right? Well i rest my point on that.
THEN the tune itself. Are you saying that these engines need backpressure? Why dont you open your eyes and join the fuel injected race? I am pretty sure that most if not all GM FI engines have had knock sensors and most have O2 sensors as well as IAT and baro sensors. These not only take care of fueling, but also spark, and work to keep emissions down, keep the engine running, and keep it from running too lean and kill itself. They work in conjunction so one hand knows what the other is doing. If you increase spark to a certain point, you can also increase the power output without negatively effecting emissions. But then again im sure everyone mods their car worrying about passing a sniffer. Maybe just the peeps in cali. But then you would see less power from those, but not half as much.
And im sure that GM used all of its money on just testing the LS3 engine because it is so much more better and enhanced than say the LS2 or LS7....
You need to stop talking and start listening to people that have more proven parts under their belt than you can shake a stick at. You also need to get rid of your ego too....its is doing you no good over here. If you are still in denial, then there is no way for you to reach shore in the boat you are in, because that place gets pretty wide and right now for you it appears the shore is nowhere near in sight.
07-27-2009, 09:24 PM
#24
xtra cajun i can believe and scoggin but other things are pushing it. Thanks gectec i didn't know any of that i thought underdrive was a tune thing ****.
Fluid dynamics not only say it isn't possible to flow more by stepping from 38 mm to 50 mm but says it flows less due to sudden expansion rates that act as a restriction.
The world is modeled after all these equations. Such as bernoulli's and so on just to mention one. If this wasn't the fact auto makers such as GM, BMW and pretty much every major manufacturer would not be able to model engines on a computer that are within 5% of accuracy of the dynos.
You can push any tune because stock is limited by multiple things ca50 values, knock and mbt are a couple. You can increase easily 30-40 hp by pushing a tune to the unsafe limit such as the outer edges of mbt and leaning the afr i made 32 more whp out of my ls1 doing this. Hell i do it on all my cars. But to say its because a header swap or cam i say no. And back up your dynos with track numbers like xtra did. .5 is believable with increasing spark and changing fueling because it significantly affects burn efficiency tending towards the lean side.
You guys can say all you want and disagree with me thats fine. I would tell you the modeling I did today and the horsepower changes it made, but that would all just be heresay too. Lets trust dynos with altered inertia values, different corrected temperatures and the word of mouth from the people that make money off of us.
Fluid dynamics not only say it isn't possible to flow more by stepping from 38 mm to 50 mm but says it flows less due to sudden expansion rates that act as a restriction.
The world is modeled after all these equations. Such as bernoulli's and so on just to mention one. If this wasn't the fact auto makers such as GM, BMW and pretty much every major manufacturer would not be able to model engines on a computer that are within 5% of accuracy of the dynos.
You can push any tune because stock is limited by multiple things ca50 values, knock and mbt are a couple. You can increase easily 30-40 hp by pushing a tune to the unsafe limit such as the outer edges of mbt and leaning the afr i made 32 more whp out of my ls1 doing this. Hell i do it on all my cars. But to say its because a header swap or cam i say no. And back up your dynos with track numbers like xtra did. .5 is believable with increasing spark and changing fueling because it significantly affects burn efficiency tending towards the lean side.
You guys can say all you want and disagree with me thats fine. I would tell you the modeling I did today and the horsepower changes it made, but that would all just be heresay too. Lets trust dynos with altered inertia values, different corrected temperatures and the word of mouth from the people that make money off of us.
Last edited by Radcannon; 07-27-2009 at 09:57 PM.
07-27-2009, 09:30 PM
#25
The dyno is real world, the math just doesn't add up to real world results. Stock manifolds to 1 3/4 headers gain, and 1 3/4 to 1 7/8 gains more. We've dyno'd it, we've seen it, it is a fact. Fluid dynamics doesn't tell the whole story apparently. I can't get into that as it's over my head, but I can tell you what we do and what is proven to work in the real world on real cars, and 1 3/4 and 1 7/8 headers do prove to work beyond what your math predicts.
__________________
800-456-0211 / PM / Facebook
WHIPPLE Superchargers, Procharger, Magnuson, Powerbond Sale, HPTuners packages!, Trickflow, AFR, PRC, CHE Trunion upgrade, $100 7.400" pushrod set, Custom Cam of your choice
800-456-0211 / PM / Facebook
WHIPPLE Superchargers, Procharger, Magnuson, Powerbond Sale, HPTuners packages!, Trickflow, AFR, PRC, CHE Trunion upgrade, $100 7.400" pushrod set, Custom Cam of your choice
07-27-2009, 09:51 PM
#26
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I guess I should elaborate... The 2 stick cars both picked up exactly 30RWHP and 35RWTQ WITHOUT tunes. Headers only. NO other changes. The torque and power gains were throughout the entire pulls. You're right. Anyone can post whatever they want. Anyone can alter dyno numbers and skew results to suit their agenda. One thing Thunder Racing has ALWAYS been known for is real world independently verified results. Sure, I may not be modeling these combos on a Cray but I damn well know what Scientific Method is. I'll stand by these numbers as we've seen nearly identical results from identical changes in every case. I know there are other shops here that are seeing similar gains.
Also, not all shops are created equal. Some of us do have integrity and can show repeatable results. Just because I do this for a living doesn't mean I am out to decieve anyone. I do this because I love it. It sure as hell isn't for the money...
If it looks like a duck...
Shane
Also, not all shops are created equal. Some of us do have integrity and can show repeatable results. Just because I do this for a living doesn't mean I am out to decieve anyone. I do this because I love it. It sure as hell isn't for the money...
If it looks like a duck...
Shane
Last edited by XtraCajunSS; 07-27-2009 at 09:58 PM.
07-27-2009, 10:26 PM
#27
Math has to add up physics makes the world turn there is a reason for every power gain.
I am not disputing your results. I would just like to know how every test is conducted and not just take the word of mouth of a vendor. 40-60whp is reasonable on a cam and headers i made 30 on an ls1 tune although i think the tunes have gotten more refined and better.
I can say 35/30 is nearly a 45 ft-lb increase and i stated earlier 3 kpa = roughly 1 hp so i do believe without b/p as in headers and cats and muffler swap that 30hp 35tq at the wheels is atainable with added flow from headers so 45 at flywheel is easily attainable. I assume there was no exhaust involved and no cats.
I never said you were unreliable or thief because you are a vendor. I am sorry if the came across but i have been cheated by many vendors who are out to get money at any expense and would like to know how they verify their results. Especially considering a handful of them couldn't do what I paid them for right and I ended up either fixing it myself or going to another shop. Needless to say I am wary now of what is done to my cars and how its done and do everything myself time permitting. I am more than pleased with thunder. I put a 228R in my ls1 and it was more than happy and impressed with it. Amazing fuel economy and power everything they said but the results werent posted at 80 whp with headers straight pipe, ls6 intake, and tune.
If thunder says they have results the can show you I would trust them. Scoggin from my dealings has been pretty reliable too and they seem pretty happy to answer questions.
I am not disputing your results. I would just like to know how every test is conducted and not just take the word of mouth of a vendor. 40-60whp is reasonable on a cam and headers i made 30 on an ls1 tune although i think the tunes have gotten more refined and better.
I can say 35/30 is nearly a 45 ft-lb increase and i stated earlier 3 kpa = roughly 1 hp so i do believe without b/p as in headers and cats and muffler swap that 30hp 35tq at the wheels is atainable with added flow from headers so 45 at flywheel is easily attainable. I assume there was no exhaust involved and no cats.
I never said you were unreliable or thief because you are a vendor. I am sorry if the came across but i have been cheated by many vendors who are out to get money at any expense and would like to know how they verify their results. Especially considering a handful of them couldn't do what I paid them for right and I ended up either fixing it myself or going to another shop. Needless to say I am wary now of what is done to my cars and how its done and do everything myself time permitting. I am more than pleased with thunder. I put a 228R in my ls1 and it was more than happy and impressed with it. Amazing fuel economy and power everything they said but the results werent posted at 80 whp with headers straight pipe, ls6 intake, and tune.
If thunder says they have results the can show you I would trust them. Scoggin from my dealings has been pretty reliable too and they seem pretty happy to answer questions.
07-28-2009, 10:12 AM
#28
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Actually, the test was conducted with out of the box American Racing headers, their high flow cats, their 3" X-pipe and stock 2 1/2" mufflers. One car dynoed 363 stock the other dynoed 365. In the end, the peak numbers were increased by 30 HP and 35 Lb/Ft TQ.
Sorry if I got a little defensive. It seems like more and more people are throwing out accusations of vendors being dishonest. I am sure there are those guys out there, hell, I was a customer before I came here and I have a very good memory... I know who does their homework.
BTW, that cam is not one of ours...
Shane
Sorry if I got a little defensive. It seems like more and more people are throwing out accusations of vendors being dishonest. I am sure there are those guys out there, hell, I was a customer before I came here and I have a very good memory... I know who does their homework.
BTW, that cam is not one of ours...
Shane
Last edited by XtraCajunSS; 07-28-2009 at 11:12 AM.
07-28-2009, 12:15 PM
#29
I thought you guys designed it and had comps grind it. Hmmm must be mistaken then.
No sorry if I got a little defensive you were fine. I just don't like vendors talking to me like I am an idiot and am completely wrong because I have alot of education and experience to back what I am saying. It seems like thats the trend with most service industries lately and the customer is simply just supposed to be mistreated and take their word.
Impressive results though and I do not doubt them with high flow cats and x pipe. Manuals are so superior because better power transfer and less conservative tunes because the autos can't handle the torque in lower gears so they are detuned. Thus L92 and not LS3.
God bless.
No sorry if I got a little defensive you were fine. I just don't like vendors talking to me like I am an idiot and am completely wrong because I have alot of education and experience to back what I am saying. It seems like thats the trend with most service industries lately and the customer is simply just supposed to be mistreated and take their word.
Impressive results though and I do not doubt them with high flow cats and x pipe. Manuals are so superior because better power transfer and less conservative tunes because the autos can't handle the torque in lower gears so they are detuned. Thus L92 and not LS3.
God bless.
07-28-2009, 01:45 PM
#30
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I thought you guys designed it and had comps grind it. Hmmm must be mistaken then.
No sorry if I got a little defensive you were fine. I just don't like vendors talking to me like I am an idiot and am completely wrong because I have alot of education and experience to back what I am saying. It seems like thats the trend with most service industries lately and the customer is simply just supposed to be mistreated and take their word.
Impressive results though and I do not doubt them with high flow cats and x pipe. Manuals are so superior because better power transfer and less conservative tunes because the autos can't handle the torque in lower gears so they are detuned. Thus L92 and not LS3.
God bless.
No sorry if I got a little defensive you were fine. I just don't like vendors talking to me like I am an idiot and am completely wrong because I have alot of education and experience to back what I am saying. It seems like thats the trend with most service industries lately and the customer is simply just supposed to be mistreated and take their word.
Impressive results though and I do not doubt them with high flow cats and x pipe. Manuals are so superior because better power transfer and less conservative tunes because the autos can't handle the torque in lower gears so they are detuned. Thus L92 and not LS3.
God bless.
Shane
08-20-2009, 05:29 PM
#34
I'm no physics major, but i do understand some basics. My thought to you is that you speak of fluid dynamics.....I hop you are taking into account that there is nothing "smooth" about exhaust flow. It is pulses of air from the head to the tailpipe and doesn't have a smooth flow like water. I don't know what extent this changes things, but I imagine it's something you are forgetting.
You make the example of going from a 38mm to 50mm pipe. What you aren't taking into consideration is if the pipe ALREADY is much smaller than optimum. If that's the case, a bigger pipe will increase power. Flow is NOT what you want in exhaust, it's velocity. There's a fine line in exhaust sizing when the pipes get TOO big and you lose the velocity.
You originally doubted the claims for headers, and for headers and cam. My friend, real world proof was brought to you by real world results. If that's not enough, do a search in the dyno section. Just man up and admit you were wrong.
08-20-2009, 05:33 PM
#35
his prob is....no education, no wits, and no clue.
buy a clue, its cheaper than a wasted college tuition
fluid dynamics normally includes thermal dynamics when you plug all the stupid numbers into a computer and it does the work for you. funny though how he can operate some sofisticated computer for FEA and such, but spellcheck pwns him
buy a clue, its cheaper than a wasted college tuition
fluid dynamics normally includes thermal dynamics when you plug all the stupid numbers into a computer and it does the work for you. funny though how he can operate some sofisticated computer for FEA and such, but spellcheck pwns him
