L92 DynoJet Numbers Plus Plan B, C, D, E and F...
05-11-2009, 07:29 AM
#564
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chattanooga,TN
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congrats on the new numbers. My modding has been put on hold due to the economy....I just don't want to spend the money on the car right now.
There are too many other things to worry about at the moment.
I did get some L92/L76 combo though. They came on the new G8 GT I got for the wife.
There are too many other things to worry about at the moment.I did get some L92/L76 combo though. They came on the new G8 GT I got for the wife.
05-11-2009, 09:17 AM
#565
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Gladstone, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats your kpa now Kevin? I was at 102kpa in 102kpa barometric pressure filter out with ported throttle body RUSSO OTR and SD tuning. I was stuck below 100 until I pulled the MAF out.Been through the whole VE table first then scale the MAF whilst NA I was always running open loop SD with the e38 never looked back.
05-11-2009, 05:18 PM
#566
Whats your kpa now Kevin? I was at 102kpa in 102kpa barometric pressure filter out with ported throttle body RUSSO OTR and SD tuning. I was stuck below 100 until I pulled the MAF out.Been through the whole VE table first then scale the MAF whilst NA I was always running open loop SD with the e38 never looked back.
Kevin
05-12-2009, 11:54 AM
#568
I don't really know any more refinement I can do on the build. I love how it drives and the power curve is amazing. The FAST 102mm and a TB will go on it when it's out and we'll see if the L76 is really the limitation eveyrone thinks it is.
Kevin
05-12-2009, 12:22 PM
#569
05-12-2009, 08:50 PM
#570
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (32)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Vermont
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would think that a good test of the L76 intake would be to take it off and put a well ported Vic Jr. style intake on it with a 4bbl throttle body. See if it picks up any, probably gonna lose some low end but ya never know.
05-13-2009, 06:10 AM
#571
Seems to me that the aftermarket is having issues improving on the L76/LS3 (same manifold) design. If there was truly a huge improvement they would have one out already. My guess is the designs will either kill low end power at the expense of a few top end horses but the torque will suffer.
05-13-2009, 01:14 PM
#573
05-17-2009, 10:42 AM
#576
100 mm MAF Low RPM Torque Gain Looks like you had a ~24 lb/ft and 10 hp gain at 2200. This is more in the usable range for a street application. Damn nice gain.
I have a similar issue with restriction and low KPa in front of the throttle body and had already purchased a Powermax MAF from Bruce when the Katech test of the LSXR 102 was posted.
The question is now is Powermax only or Powermax/LSXR. That's a lot of $$$/hp for a manifold swap that may not be as beneficial to me as the motor in the test, since my cam is milder than the test subject. However, the LSXR runners are a bit longer, which should benefit the bottom end and it's the lower end of the spectrum that I'm interested in, say 1800-3500.
I have a similar issue with restriction and low KPa in front of the throttle body and had already purchased a Powermax MAF from Bruce when the Katech test of the LSXR 102 was posted.
The question is now is Powermax only or Powermax/LSXR. That's a lot of $$$/hp for a manifold swap that may not be as beneficial to me as the motor in the test, since my cam is milder than the test subject. However, the LSXR runners are a bit longer, which should benefit the bottom end and it's the lower end of the spectrum that I'm interested in, say 1800-3500.
Last edited by scatillac; 05-17-2009 at 10:47 AM.
