speed_demon24

iTrader: (6)

It takes one hell of a shady shop to give someone a printout of a stock a4 lt1 putting down 290rwhp. I hope you stayed far away from them after that.

96z28_lt1

iTrader: (3)

i would imagine ported heads will head greater benefits with that cam, don't most people say the biggest you want to run on stock heads is the lt4 hotcam, otherwise your just hurting your hp in a way because the stock heads don't let you flow in and out mor air/intake. Feel free to correct me if im wrong i just thought that was the impression and thats what one of the original anwers was getting at.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

Dumb-assed commments like that from clowns hiding behind made up screen named do not even deserve a response.

joelster

You can go much hotter than the hotcam for stock heads. There's tons of guys out there running cc503's with 224/230 an similar grinds from LE and AI (low 230's duration) with good results.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

Your mistaken about that. The "hot" cam is certainly not the biggest cam that makes power with stock heads. So many people have tested that repeatedly I would assume it was common knowledge. The cam Lloyd Elliot recommended is fine. Lloyd may have Bern born at night, but notblast night. LOL

96z28_lt1

iTrader: (3)

alright thanks, just some good little extra info i like to know about, i was going to get ported heads anyways, but decided i definetley should because the cam i had was 230/236 and figured id need the ported heads with a cam like that, the more you learn the better haha

SS RRR

iTrader: (2)

He's right though, Ed. If a truly stock auto LT1 car was dynoing 290rwhp the dyno was off. Most manual cars were doing that if not less.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

There are freaks that, when all production tolerances stack up the right way make more power than the norm. I have only seen one make that, and seen a couple of dogs only make 235. How the hell could you fudge numbers on a Dynojet? It made more than all but one tuned car I had seen, before I tuned it.
My black '96 TA was a tick over 280 with just cat delete and a B&B cat/back. His made almost that with a stock PCM. I figured it was tuned (other than being rich) before I read the PCM.
You probably won't believe the 305 rwhp stick car either. He used to be a member here. If he still is he may join in. He made more than some LS1 cars.i have seen those under 300. I just may have seen a couple more cars on a dyno than you guys.

SS RRR

iTrader: (2)

What I'm referencing are the multitudes of dyno sheets that used to be posted back in the mid and late 90's. The overwhelming consensus was stock manual cars were in the 260 to 280 range and autos were lower (cannot remember exact figures). These were sheets that were being posted from all over the US. Not just one dyno. Yes I know there can be factory freaks out there. Some claim going low 13's bone stock in the Maryland area. As far as fudging numbers is concerned there have been those who've posted up these "look at me" numbers only to find out later the correction factors entered were grossly wrong. When you tuned my car back in the late 90's it made a baseline of 350/350 and when you were done it made high 360's yet ran the same exact ET and MPH from there on out until I put Hooker LT's and offroad y-pipe. Then it dynoed 370 and was running 12.1's and 12.2's at 114mph. I can't explain that one for the life of me.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

Only reason somebody would fudge numbers were if you we're trying to bullshit somebody about how big gains were. Not both before & after numbers.
I never played those games. The customer was always right there watching the whole thing, looking at every pull.

SS RRR

iTrader: (2)

All I'm trying to say is different dynos will produce different numbers. It's really difficult to give a bone stock auto LT1 the benefit of the doubt running 290rwhp unless there are track numbers to back it up.
Until you would go back into your secret room to make tuning adjustments.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

Not adjustments to the dyno. Duh!

I know it ran some pretty good 13s. He wasn't local, so all I knew is what he told me. Mine was about ten behind his and ran low 13s.

Cars like that also normally gain less from the tuning since part of it is also fuel pressure regulator on the low side of spec and/or a MAF that under-reports. They often aren't as over rich as the norm.

Track changes or not from small gains or losses depend a lot of conditions. Guys that don't own and use a hand held (or pc based) weather station don't really know if the before test was a realy good day, or really bad, ditto the after-the-change testing day. The TV weather man may tell you the temp is the same, may feel the same to you, but you need a weather station at the track (most et bracket racers have one, all drag racers, from Stock through Top Fuel use one religiously) otherwise you don't see the baro changes (during the day often) or water grains which have a big effect on times. It's nothing to gain or lose over a tenth during a weekend race. Not just at night.

SS RRR

iTrader: (2)

Whatever the case may be, the dynosheet I received from you did not explain the track times. At the time the car was tuned by you it was taken to Ennis every street night possible in all kinds of different weather conditions. It ran consistent of how the weather was. Same thing happened once the headers were put in. Car was then ran in all sorts of conditions and the results were consistent.
Whatever the case may be, auto cars that dyno as much as you claim were extremely few and far between back when there were such cars racing that were factory stock.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

I never said they were common, as I mentioned, they are freaks. Nowhere did I say they were common.
If I was going into my office to make tuning changes it must have been a long time ago. Was I flashing it with a laptop, or scan tool?

speed_demon24

iTrader: (6)

If a shop is saying a stock auto lt1 dyno'd 290rwhp they are full of ****, and it's a shame someone would lower themselves to fudging dyno #'s trying to get customers. It's bad enough when shops give people uncorrected #'s in the middle of winter, or use the STD correction factor to give them another 2-3% hp. There isn't going to be a 55rwhp variance in a modern production engine, 5-10 hp sure, but not 55hp. And I hope that 305rwhp stick car was trapping close to 110mph full weight when it was stock.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

If you don't think there is that much difference in production cars you need to get off that key board and get out in the real world. How do you explain 12 & high 13 second stock LS1s? The 13 second & mid-14 second LT1s?
Why would anybody fudge both the before & after numbers? Why mention the 235 rwhp LT1s? Seen more than one of those. I sure as hell couldn't take credit for that one making nearly 280 before I touched it.

I never had to lie about numbers to generate work. The majority of my work has always been customer referrals and shops. If they didn't perform on the track I would have been sitting around all these years. Anybody that has been to my shop knows how busy we stayed.

marc97taws6

iTrader: (6)

There are some shops out there that can fudge up dyno info.

These are the same ones that usually do it to get huge hype because they are making stupid power for the mods and use it as an advertising tool to set themselves apart from the other shops

Thankfully Iowa doesn't have any of these to my knowledge. I've heard of a few experiences in Illinois having these issues though

I never got bent up on dyno numbers though. When people asked me what my old LT1 WS6 dynoed, I would say it ran X@X in XDA. Never been dynoed. A dyno is only a tool in my eyes. Chasing numbers doesn't mean anything if it doesn't back them up at the track

SS RRR

iTrader: (2)

IIRC, you had a laptop, would make a pull then pull the PCM and take it along with the laptop into a different room. I had my car dynoed at your shop I want to say in '98 or '99. Had LPE heads/cam. You said (at least then) you were going to use my program as a base for anything remotely close to that kind of setup because of being impressed with the numbers through the stock exhaust. I was a bit underwhelmed at the ET/MPH outcome, but the car did get better MPG.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

If there was a problem with voltage levels or communications with your car I would have done that. Otherwise I used the laptop at the car.
Did you have good tires? I have seen wheel spin kill et gains, but MPH go up. What were your 60's like?

Nobody has seen me post up any dyno numbers or graphs. I never have tried to drum up business that way. Anybody that has spent any time around my place knows how busy we stayed. Anybody that saw a dyno sheet from my place was posted by somebody else. Any showing un corrected cold day numbers was also given one with the correction. Often they would ask me to print one like that, but they were given both. My shop was heated anyway, doors opened during a pull didn't effect it that much anyway. I didn't book dyno work during very cold weather anyway. Too cold or 100 degrees=I stayed in my office. LOL

SS RRR

iTrader: (2)

Tires were good. Was in the 1.8 range at that point in time. I was not really disappointed and always recommended you whenever someone was looking for a dyno tune. I just excused the numbers for yet another dyno misnomer. I'd still use your services if you were still dyno tuning. I have no faith in dyno numbers anyway. There was a shop called Area51 in Dallas years ago that was a "flavor of the month" type of joint. They had a dyno and after my tune I went to their shop to have a dyno pull or two. I received a dyno sheet saying I was down more than 50rwhp. Shop owner tried to tell me my car had problems. That same week he was at Ennis running his ls1 SS which supposedly dynoed the same as what I was putting down on his dyno. I had the privilege of destroying his best effort. Went up to him and said "problems, eh?" and he turned around and walked off. Those were the days...