Ok, back on topic, OP...

I had a stock bottom end LT1 with LE2 heads and a Comp Cams custom grind 220/226 camshaft. I dynoed 411 RWHP and 390 RWTQ. I ran a best of 12.99 @ 110 at Bandimere Speedway (5800+ft) with a HORRIBLE 2.1 60ft on Nitto tires and a stock 10-bolt with 3.42 gears. I LOVED the LE setup. If you are looking for ~360 RWHP, stick with the LE1's, but if you have the extra cash, dish it out for the LE2's. You will enjoy the results.

 

Yes, back to the OP's question. I always advocate putting on the best heads you can afford because they are so important in making power. Between the two, I'd recommend even if you have to forgo/delay other mods for a while to afford the difference, do the LE2's.

Many mods you'll spend money on at some point are easier to add later; when the engine will be out of the car and the heads are coming off anyway, put as good a set back on as you can and you'll thank yourself in the future even if you can't afford to run them to their full potential right away.

 

Fair enough. If this is true, then there should be other examples of folks with 35x cubes, LE2 stock castings and a 223/230 or similar cam making 406ft pounds of torque corrected to STD through a 9" because surely hes not the first. I am questioning, not calling BS.

 

I wouldn't call a day in the 60's a "really cold day" , and my car was hardly setup for the 1/4 including the gearing back then.

I also had and LE2 setup before my AI setup, and with no other changes with the exception of going from a ported intake manifold to a stock intake manifold my AI setup gained 25rwhp, dropped .2 and gained 2mph in the 1/4 with the exact same 60'.

 

^^ wrd 1972 I honestly do not know what else I can do to prove to you it made those numbers through a 355. I mean damn give me a break.

 

420 rwhp STD on some shop's Dynojet through an M6 is not so overly impressive or unbelievable. Those are supposed to be good flowing heads, and the cam is not tiny for a 355.
What track do you run? If it's one of those high desert tracks, and never run in cold air, that would explain the lack of mph to correlate to the dyno hp. And the M6 would further account for the so-so ET. What's the car weight with driver?

 

The dyno chart says Fresno which is at 370ft elevation.
A quick look around the web says Famoso is the most likely track in the area which sits at 625ft of elevation.

Far as weight, I was just assuming a reasonable 3600lbsish. I think that is reasonable for a street/strip f-body.

 

^^ track is Famoso wich I beleive your stated elevation is correct. Car weighs 3275 with me in it.

 

Jon A do you care to comment on the elevations and weight?

 

Even at the most basic level of static components, locking in a number of known variables (gear ratio, trans ratio, rpm) can still vary the outcome 3-5 MPH by changing other variables like tire heights (+/-.375") and/or converter slippage by a couple of percentage points.

If you work in a field where you're use to looking at variables and applying the scientific method... this is hardly news to you.

 

I've seen 3-5 mph variations from the same exact car on the same day/track just from the "driver mod".

Like someone else said, I'd rather have a good dyno tuned LE1 setup than a mail-order tuned LE2......but I'd probably still go with the better heads on the mail order tune until I could get a dyno tune.

 

Bingo. Me too--especially with M6's. Add weather--morning vs "mid afternoon" vs "right before they kick you out at night" and the range of et's and MPH's from the same car and driver on the same track on the same day can be quite a large one. The idea numbers from different cars, drivers, tracks, days/weather are automatically comparable without knowing any of that is really silly.
There probably are. Not sure why the focus on torque though, as the frictional and inertial losses of the 9" will tend to knock more off the top end HP than torque in the middle. Anyway, in only a couple minutes I found an even better example: a 355 with LE1 Heads and a CC306 making 403 RWHP and 387 TQ SAE through a 9". Only LE1's and the CC306 is known for a lot of things, but making lots of torque isn't one of them.
Was it actually over 60 when you ran that time in the morning? Regardless, everything is relative. 60's are "really cold" compared with what many are stuck running in most of the summer. Blindly comparing the times without taking such things into account leads to false conclusions.
Admittedly, I haven't been following the boards all that closely the last few years, but is it really the case that all F-Bodies with AI heads or any F-Body over 400 RWHP run 120+ MPH traps? All of them?
Yes. We certainly know more now, but still not nearly enough to jump to the conclusions you did.

Do you care to comment on why you thought those numbers were so meaningful when the only other data you had to go with them was 'LE' stamped on the heads?
I also see a lot of this--judging the whole thing by peak numbers alone (not just by you). You realize there's a graph that goes with it, right? See how this one falls on its face after 6200? By 6400 RPM it's down 70 HP from peak.

So if somebody else with the exact same peak numbers, but with a dyno that holds within 20 or so of peak past 65-6600 and runs a better number at the track, does that mean dynos are stupid and don't mean anything, that his dyno chart is somehow invalid?

Or does it mean you don't know how to properly read the chart?

 

Honestly, who really cares what the dyno says.... I have NEVER seen a DYNO print out a time slip!

Tune is done correctly, A/F is right etc...... the track don't lie!!!!!!!!!

Why is it when someone has a car that runs a little under par they get dogged about having issues but when someone runs good they are lying about the combination hardly anyone just says your junk runs good?