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

is 340whp reasonable?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-15-2009, 05:06 PM
  #41  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
 
LSWHO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Elliott's94Z
^^ Let's see a dyno sheet to prove that 371 @ the wheels. I'm calling B.S. until then
Old 01-15-2009, 05:08 PM
  #42  
Banned
iTrader: (12)
 
Elliott's94Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oregon Grown
Posts: 4,370
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

So is this yours or his?
Old 01-15-2009, 05:10 PM
  #43  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
 
LSWHO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Elliott's94Z
So is this yours or his?
It's Robert's graph. I just have it saved in another thread.
Old 01-15-2009, 05:14 PM
  #44  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (36)
 
ss.slp.ls1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,184
Received 26 Likes on 24 Posts

Default

Then why doesn't he have 378 hp in is sig instead of 371?
Old 01-15-2009, 05:15 PM
  #45  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
 
LSWHO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ss.slp.ls1
Then why doesn't he have 378 hp in is sig instead of 371?
SAE is 371whp
Old 01-15-2009, 05:16 PM
  #46  
Banned
iTrader: (12)
 
Elliott's94Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oregon Grown
Posts: 4,370
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Lol...I know I was thinking the same. And I have never seen number like that with just bolt on's and a cam. Either it's a freak or that dyno is generous
Old 01-15-2009, 05:18 PM
  #47  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
 
LSWHO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Elliott's94Z
Lol...I know I was thinking the same. And I have never seen number like that with just bolt on's and a cam. Either it's a freak or that dyno is generous
Well I can attest to it not being generous as it said I had 231/270 stock.
Old 01-15-2009, 08:44 PM
  #48  
On The Tree
 
fireman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Thanks for throwing that up Scott. Its like we need to sticky my friggin' dyno graph around here.

Yeah, the AZ DynoChip dyno is definitely not generous.

You can see where my unported heads just stop flowing around 6200rpm. This CC306 would pull to the moon if my heads were ported.

The CC306/1.6 RR combo is great. It may be an old design, but it works, even with stock heads. I installed that cam back in 2003 and would buy it again tomorrow. Lots of torque, lots of horsepower, and nice curves on both.
Old 01-15-2009, 09:25 PM
  #49  
Banned
iTrader: (12)
 
Elliott's94Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oregon Grown
Posts: 4,370
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by fireman
Thanks for throwing that up Scott. Its like we need to sticky my friggin' dyno graph around here.

Yeah, the AZ DynoChip dyno is definitely not generous.

You can see where my unported heads just stop flowing around 6200rpm. This CC306 would pull to the moon if my heads were ported.

The CC306/1.6 RR combo is great. It may be an old design, but it works, even with stock heads. I installed that cam back in 2003 and would buy it again tomorrow. Lots of torque, lots of horsepower, and nice curves on both.
Hey I must say those number are great. Put some heads on that beast
Old 01-16-2009, 04:25 AM
  #50  
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
scorpion_z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

those are really nice numbers man.
Old 01-16-2009, 04:32 AM
  #51  
On The Tree
 
reaper97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

did upgrade his fuel system for that cam?
Old 01-16-2009, 05:42 AM
  #52  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (12)
 
seanaugustus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: San Marcos, TX
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I dynoed 338rwhp with the 306, 1.6/1.5 split rockers, LTs, Full bolt ons, and STOCK HEADS on a MUSTANG DYNO. Im thinking that would be around 365rwhp on DynoJet. Correct me if im wrong.
Old 01-16-2009, 06:00 AM
  #53  
Registered User
 
Formula_5.7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This thread excites me a little bit. I bought a 93 Formula with damn near exact same setup. I just haven't had a chance to try it out because it has a blown head gasket.
Old 01-16-2009, 06:06 AM
  #54  
On The Tree
 
fireman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Elliott's94Z
Hey I must say those number are great. Put some heads on that beast
Originally Posted by scorpion_z28
those are really nice numbers man.
Thanks!

Heads are in the the future. The car runs so dang perfect right now that I just don't want to mess with it though.


Originally Posted by seanaugustus
I dynoed 338rwhp with the 306, 1.6/1.5 split rockers, LTs, Full bolt ons, and STOCK HEADS on a MUSTANG DYNO. Im thinking that would be around 365rwhp on DynoJet. Correct me if im wrong.
Yeah, probably around there. Replace the 1.5s with 1.6s and get it on a Dynojet.
Old 01-16-2009, 06:08 AM
  #55  
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
scorpion_z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

My Dumb friend Just told me that the clutch was starting to slip,even on the Dyno im sure that was taking alot of Horse power.
Old 01-16-2009, 11:40 AM
  #56  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (36)
 
ss.slp.ls1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,184
Received 26 Likes on 24 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by scorpion_z28
My Dumb friend Just told me that the clutch was starting to slip,even on the Dyno im sure that was taking alot of Horse power.
Oh, yeah it could.
Old 01-16-2009, 11:45 AM
  #57  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (11)
 
infinitebird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 4,280
Received 46 Likes on 35 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by fireman
If you think 1.6 rockers and LTs are gonna net you 50-60rwhp, you're crazy.
Probably not but if you already have heads/cam it's going to get you more than it otherwise would because it's then removing the restriction in the setup.

People assume it will only get 10-15 because that's what everyone sees when it's one of the first mods they do when they're doing boltons. But if it's holding back a setup that requires more air you could see more.

From what I've read on this forum headers at least 30-35 rwhp on a stock LS7 vette.



Quick Reply: is 340whp reasonable?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:09 PM.