LT1-LT4 Modifications 1993-97 Gen II Small Block V8

***GM Stock Shortblock Heads/Cam - 10's NA & 9's on N2o

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-11-2009, 09:00 AM
  #61  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (3)
 
T/ALT1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

The rpm must be one of the reasons the the victor and carb are on there? I was at the track this weekend and found a 95 camaro with an iron headed 355 with a victor/carb setup running 10.40's so i went talk to him. It's an old S/S car with a high rpm 355, 5,500 converter, 4.88 gear, 1.3X 60's.
Old 02-11-2009, 10:30 AM
  #62  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (6)
 
speed_demon24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ocala, FL
Posts: 4,609
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by T/ALT1
The rpm must be one of the reasons the the victor and carb are on there? I was at the track this weekend and found a 95 camaro with an iron headed 355 with a victor/carb setup running 10.40's so i went talk to him. It's an old S/S car with a high rpm 355, 5,500 converter, 4.88 gear, 1.3X 60's.
I highly doubt its turning more RPM's than the pcm is capable of with a 22x cam, 28" tires, 3.73 gears, and a 3xxx stall converter.
Old 02-17-2009, 08:35 AM
  #63  
FormerVendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Advanced Induction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Concord, NC
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Smile

Originally Posted by 95 Formula
I agree..from what I've seen the intake is marginal on a NA setup, it will give you some but the hp gain isn't the main advantage I feel. I too changed for the same reasons you did..and to be able to get away from the opti setup. My main reason was the opti or I would probably still be on a ported stocker.
I recall your car from way back if I am not mistaken. Awesome setup, nice to see how it has progressed!

Originally Posted by OutlawZ
it's doing something...... i'd bet that a BOX stock LT1 manifold untouched would kill a bit of power on that thing..... maybe not much but that car is certainly one of those deals where many have tried but nobody has succeeded to do what that car is doing wtih that little....
The stock manifold vs. this stock Vic jr. would be a nice comparison. I believe most of you guys would be surprised at the results. What if they were in the stock manifold's favor? Without an a-b test we could certain assume so just as easily as we could assume the Vic. Jr. is better in any one aspect. The stock manifold is very good. Most setups are not held back by the LT manifold.

Originally Posted by 95 Formula
I do agree there is something special going on there. What does that motor spin too?
Do you mean at the traps? That would be 67XXrpm NA, & a tick over 7 on n2o.

Originally Posted by T/ALT1
The rpm must be one of the reasons the the victor and carb are on there? I was at the track this weekend and found a 95 camaro with an iron headed 355 with a victor/carb setup running 10.40's so i went talk to him. It's an old S/S car with a high rpm 355, 5,500 converter, 4.88 gear, 1.3X 60's.
As previously mentioned, this swap is neither done for power, nor RPM. The stock parts can only handle so much. It is done for consistency and ease of tuning. There are immense differences between super stock and stock eliminator, much less super stock and guys like this.

Average guys with average parts run average numbers. Exceptional guys with average parts run above average numbers. Exceptional guys with exceptional parts...

Hope that answers some questions, guys!
Old 02-17-2009, 11:48 AM
  #64  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
 
blackz93's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: nc
Posts: 1,661
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Advanced Induction
On manifolds, I would like to do an a/b comparison on the dyno sometime. I believe you guys are thinking of super victors etc. & this is the lower capacity Vic. Jr. Regardless of what it flows, I would be willing to bet that the gains up top are minimal. The stock manifold is quite good in that area for most applications. Locals have gone from the stock mani to a single plane with the same runner dimensions as the Vic. Jr. & gained nothing NA at the track. The probability is extremely low that it would slow the car down by a significant amount if he were to have kept the stock manifold. The swap was done for tuning & consistency relative to weather, not power.
Speaking of locals with with a carbed intake, I saw a red T/A with a carbed intake at Mooresville a couple weeks ago running real good. One of your guys?
Old 02-24-2009, 01:29 AM
  #65  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (31)
 
96lt1m6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: LA$ VEGA$
Posts: 3,782
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

TTT

would love to see more owner supplied info on this car, i do understand some confidentiality but some video and underhood pics would be nice.........
Old 02-24-2009, 07:30 AM
  #66  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
 
pyro719's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: colorado springs Elevation: 6035 ft
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

X10:d:d:d:d:d
Originally Posted by 96lt1m6
ttt

would love to see more owner supplied info on this car, i do understand some confidentiality but some video and underhood pics would be nice.........:d
Old 02-24-2009, 08:35 AM
  #67  
FormerVendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Advanced Induction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Concord, NC
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Smile

Originally Posted by blackz93
Speaking of locals with with a carbed intake, I saw a red T/A with a carbed intake at Mooresville a couple weeks ago running real good. One of your guys?
Ask next time you see him. Only way to know for sure


Originally Posted by 96lt1m6
TTT

would love to see more owner supplied info on this car, i do understand some confidentiality but some video and underhood pics would be nice.........
Will ask. I'm certain it looks like any other SBC in an f-body
Old 02-24-2009, 08:45 AM
  #68  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (17)
 
Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,152
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts

Default

Even though the gains NA on a small cube LT1 are minimal, a Vic JR is still way ahead of the stock intake when used with nitrous. It does not have the distribution issues of the factory LT1 intake...or the HSR as well for that matter. I have never seen a direct comparison but I still think the unported vic jr+carb will make quite a bit more then an unported factory LT1 intake+ factory EFI. I don't see how it couldn't...

I'll say it again though - very impressive combo! Must have taken a long time to dial it in that nicely.

My current build in progress is much more aggressive and has a bit more weight(~200lbs) but a lot more cam, more compression, better heads, and the same gearing/convertor and I only hope for <10.99999s on motor, let alone 10.5s! I race at a DA of sea level or below too . Maybe I will get surprised and will run better then I think .

PS: Spinning to 7K on the stock shortblock is insane!!!
Old 03-09-2009, 05:26 PM
  #69  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
 
blackz93's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: nc
Posts: 1,661
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Advanced Induction
Ask next time you see him. Only way to know for sure



As fast as this thing was, I'm sure you'd know if it was one of y'alls! Unless he was spraying... I didn't SEE any nitrous, but that doesn't mean anything.
Old 03-09-2009, 09:00 PM
  #70  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (26)
 
Jditlfm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brockport NY
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Puck
Even though the gains NA on a small cube LT1 are minimal, a Vic JR is still way ahead of the stock intake when used with nitrous. It does not have the distribution issues of the factory LT1 intake...or the HSR as well for that matter. I have never seen a direct comparison but I still think the unported vic jr+carb will make quite a bit more then an unported factory LT1 intake+ factory EFI. I don't see how it couldn't...

I'll say it again though - very impressive combo! Must have taken a long time to dial it in that nicely.

My current build in progress is much more aggressive and has a bit more weight(~200lbs) but a lot more cam, more compression, better heads, and the same gearing/convertor and I only hope for <10.99999s on motor, let alone 10.5s! I race at a DA of sea level or below too . Maybe I will get surprised and will run better then I think .

PS: Spinning to 7K on the stock shortblock is insane!!!
What distribution issues? For the amount he is spraying its a null point 200 and over is when the intake comes into a play. But what do i know I only sprayed a 175 shot on a stock long block with 140,000 miles and never burned a plug : / . I wasn't even using a plate just a shark nozzle. Do you have any experience with nitrous use on the stock lt1 manifold to back those claims up?
Old 03-10-2009, 02:09 AM
  #71  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (26)
 
Wicked94Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Spokane, Wa
Posts: 3,725
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

100, 135, 150, 400 shot I don't care it will make more hp and especially tq on that single plane just because of the more even distribution. Hell my plugs looked different from front to back when I wasn't spraying... that's great distribution Granted the NA numbers on that car are more impressive to me than the N20 numbers so who cares.
Old 03-10-2009, 05:49 AM
  #72  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (26)
 
Jditlfm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brockport NY
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Have you ever done a back to back swap to prove your claims or are you just throwing that out there? Funny all my plugs look the same all the time NA 75 100 125 150 175 for a couple of years. So i ask again are you speaking from experience by using both intakes on the same motor or not?

Last edited by Jditlfm; 03-10-2009 at 06:03 AM.
Old 05-01-2009, 05:51 PM
  #73  
Resident Racing Jerk
iTrader: (1)
 
vtec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: sc
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

i went a 6.29@108 last night......
Old 05-02-2009, 07:46 PM
  #74  
On The Tree
iTrader: (6)
 
z28camaross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice!
Old 05-02-2009, 10:40 PM
  #75  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (42)
 
Tireburnin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by vtec
i went a 6.29@108 last night......
That would be a high nine on the back end. Congrats

How much were you spraying?
Old 05-03-2009, 07:10 AM
  #76  
Resident Racing Jerk
iTrader: (1)
 
vtec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: sc
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Tireburnin
That would be a high nine on the back end. Congrats

How much were you spraying?
180 shot, but it was pretty conservative on the nitrous/fuel ratio. also, the progressive controller was setup very conservative. im thinking it may pickup another .10-.20 on this shot with some more tuning.
putting drag brakes on the front of it this week, also.



Quick Reply: ***GM Stock Shortblock Heads/Cam - 10's NA & 9's on N2o



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:51 PM.