Heads/Intake?
#1
Heads/Intake?
Alright guys, I have a 94 Z28 M6, over the winter (2010-2011) I put in a 355 that has a GM-847 cam and stock heads/intake that were just cleaned up. no p&p at all. The car runs and drives great, it is untuned on 3:42's. Breathing through BBK shorties and a stock y-pipe with the cat removed. I know a jumbled mess of crap(flame suit on). But the motor is coming back out, the oil pan gasket had a defect when it was made(idk how the **** I missed it) so I'm pulling the motor once again to fix that, but while it's out I'm doing LT's and some sort of true duals, I should've done it the first time I just got in a hurry. But while I'm gonna have the motor out I wanna have the heads/intake done up. Ported and polished. So I was wondering who does it best/cheapest? I'd rather not ship them but I'm sure I'll have to. I'm in Kansas City, Missouri and drive to Lake Ozark and St. Louis a lot so anywhere around there would be nice, if not oh well I'll ship it. I'd just like to meet the person doing the work and be able to check on things.
Btw, I don't see how people say this cam is not good on the street. I get 26mpg hwy and 17-19 city. and can shift under 2k and be fine with the a/c running. I'm on 3:42's still..
Btw, I don't see how people say this cam is not good on the street. I get 26mpg hwy and 17-19 city. and can shift under 2k and be fine with the a/c running. I'm on 3:42's still..
#4
I've heard nothing but positive things from him lol. I think I know where I'm going..
#6
Why would I worry about a tune when the motor is coming back apart for pretty big changes? And I'm keeping 3:42's. I drive a lot on the highway and enjoy my 26mpg.
#7
We went through this in detail within the last two weeks, you are wrong about the 3.42s being responsible for your fuel economy. They keep you from effectively using 6th at reasonable speeds. Lugging an engine is NOT good for it.
Use a gear ratio calculator to EDUCATE yourself on just what the .50 D does for cruise rpm.
Beyond that people mistake higher rpm for causing mileage losses at high speeds when in reality it is aerodynamics.
With a 93 T56 I could see an argument for 3.73s since it has less OD.
Use a gear ratio calculator to EDUCATE yourself on just what the .50 D does for cruise rpm.
Beyond that people mistake higher rpm for causing mileage losses at high speeds when in reality it is aerodynamics.
With a 93 T56 I could see an argument for 3.73s since it has less OD.
Trending Topics
#8
We went through this in detail within the last two weeks, you are wrong about the 3.42s being responsible for your fuel economy. They keep you from effectively using 6th at reasonable speeds. Lugging an engine is NOT good for it.
Use a gear ratio calculator to EDUCATE yourself on just what the .50 D does for cruise rpm.
Beyond that people mistake higher rpm for causing mileage losses at high speeds when in reality it is aerodynamics.
With a 93 T56 I could see an argument for 3.73s since it has less OD.
Use a gear ratio calculator to EDUCATE yourself on just what the .50 D does for cruise rpm.
Beyond that people mistake higher rpm for causing mileage losses at high speeds when in reality it is aerodynamics.
With a 93 T56 I could see an argument for 3.73s since it has less OD.
#10
Tell you what, if you think 3.42s and an 847 cam are an appropriate match, you should not be modding the car.
Now go ahead and cry about that being off topic but that will just prove you want blind confirmation of your ideas rather than useful advise.
Now go ahead and cry about that being off topic but that will just prove you want blind confirmation of your ideas rather than useful advise.
#11
#12
How? Read my previous posts. My 6th pulls fine, as if it did stock.
#14
I'm not the original owner. It had just a cat-back. And the stock intake was mangled meaning it could have been on..off a numerous amount of times, thus making car very driveable.. What rpm should I be at in various gears?
#15
That will be your rear end ratio.
#16