|
04-09-2010, 08:55 PM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
New Dyno Numbers!!!
I sent my motor to a dyno shop and they got back to me with the numbers today. 696hp/651tq on E85 and 575hp/536tq on 93OCT (at the crank). . 02 LQ4 stock botom end (exeped fo new rod bolts), cam 224/230 .612/.612 (leading edge performance), Patriot 243 Stage 3 heads and a Maggie (new style/center inlet and some pulley switching) 112 running 12psi ( for E85) 9psi (for 93).
|
04-09-2010, 09:10 PM | #2 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: washington
Posts: 274
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
thats what I call a daily driver lol
|
04-09-2010, 10:27 PM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
The truth is that it is a going to be a daily driver. Thats why i had 2 pcms made (1 for E85 and 1 of 93OCT).
|
04-09-2010, 10:55 PM | #4 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Springfield/Kansas City
Posts: 1,842
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
nice! Can we get some Pics?
|
04-10-2010, 12:39 AM | #5 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 159
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Excellent! I bet you're stoked to get that thing in and go!
So what c/r are you at now with the smaller chamber on the 243 heads? I don't think you'll have a problem with it, but you should have gone with '05+ LQ4 or LQ9 rods as they are beefed up... Also just curious, how have your IAT's been? I've heard quite a few people complain about insane IAT's with the maggie 112... I'm currently building up an LQ9, but really torn if I want to boost or not (wallet says no right now, haha!). I was leaning more towards a single front mount turbo... And looking at going with L92 heads.
__________________
get it! |
04-10-2010, 10:41 AM | #6 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Quote:
|
|
04-11-2010, 04:22 AM | #7 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 159
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Quote:
I'd like to see more on that spacer too!
__________________
get it! |
|
04-11-2010, 09:57 AM | #8 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
The 243's offered more compresion and better flow with bigger valves than the 317's. To have the 317's cc'ed and all that good stuff was about $1000. I picked this brand new Patriot Stage 3 heads up for $800. So it kinda was a no brainer.
|
04-11-2010, 10:45 AM | #9 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 159
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Quote:
I'm a bit rusty on my memory right now, but I thought for sure the 317's had the same valve size and shape and flow #'s as the 243's and 799's??? Basically the same casting, just larger volume, and yeah, with the LQ4's pistons, lower c/r... I'm pretty sure that is the case, but either way, moot point here!
__________________
get it! Last edited by ShredSled; 04-11-2010 at 10:46 AM. |
|
04-10-2010, 01:39 AM | #10 |
Big Red - Now its a SWB!
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Oroville, Ca
Posts: 1,624
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
That thing is gonna be a beast! When are you dropping it in?
__________________
68 3/4 ton (Project)-350 Small Block, .030 over, 10:1 comp, 3998993 heads, C3BX edelbrock intake, comp cams XE268, Holley 670 SA, long tube headers, dual flow 40's, E-fan, Alum rad, currently under the knife getting shortened and bagged build thread 41 3/4 ton (wife's)-flatbed, fully restored to original 01 Tahoe LT 4WD (my daily driver)-Magnaflow Muffler, Rollin on 22's 02 Ford Mustang Convertable (Wife's Car)-Flowmaster 50, Clear corners, Intake, sittin on 18's |
04-10-2010, 09:44 AM | #11 |
'67 Chevy C-50
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Monticello, IA
Posts: 62
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Did you get those figures mixed up? I would think that 93 oct would make alot more power than E85.
__________________
Bad Riv '67 C50 Flatbed Dump '98 Z71 Ext. Cab |
04-10-2010, 10:27 AM | #12 | |
just can't cover up my redneck
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Columbus OH
Posts: 11,414
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Probably not...the alcohol of the E-85 has a much higher octane rating, so it will stand a lot more timing and boost. It takes quite a bit more volume of fuel to make that kind of power though.
__________________
You can review the site's rules here. Quote:
Bad planning on your part does not necessarily constitute an instant emergency on my part.... The great thing about being a pessimist is that you are either pleasantly surprised or right. |
|
04-10-2010, 10:47 AM | #13 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
The numbers are right. Like "LONGHAIR" said E85 will take a lot more timing and boost. I went with E85 instead of race gas because in live in MN and we have a lot of E85 stations and its way cheaper than race gas.
|
04-10-2010, 12:55 PM | #14 |
'67 Chevy C-50
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Monticello, IA
Posts: 62
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Does anyone know what the actual octane rating of E85 is? We dont have a lot of E85 stations around here but about as many stations sell race gas and if we could substitute E85 for 110 race gas at about half the price that would be tempting. Probably have to build the carb for it though or get an alky carb
__________________
Bad Riv '67 C50 Flatbed Dump '98 Z71 Ext. Cab |
04-10-2010, 07:09 PM | #15 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
I think the OCT rating for E85 is 116. You can now buy E85 carbs from Summit or Jegs that are ready to bolt on. You also my need to put a bigger fuel pump in to keep up for the extra fuel that demand.
|
04-14-2010, 07:30 PM | #16 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Wawa, Ontario
Posts: 106
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Quote:
Quoted from a source online: "the problem is that "Ethanol fuels with low moisture content will corrode the internal surface of the fuel rails." In layman's terms, ethanol causes pinpoint leaks in the fuel system;" Last edited by handsomerob; 04-14-2010 at 07:37 PM. |
|
04-11-2010, 01:12 PM | #17 |
Truck and auto performance nut
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: McKinney,Texas
Posts: 3,848
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
9 psi vs 12 psi is quite a difference. couldn't you just run a meth injection kit and stay with the 93oct, but still be able to run the smaller/higher boost pulley? And if so...wouldn't this combo likely make more power then the E85 at the same boost level?
__________________
Kurt - '68 GMC short step - NIB '09 LY6 6.0L crate motor w/mods, NIB '12 crate 4L85e w/billet 3k stall Circle D, 3.73 posi 12 bolt, DynaTech f-swap headers, 3/4 drop, handling mods, etc. - my toy '72 Chevy LWB C-10 Highlander - 350/350 ps/pb/tilt/ac - not original but close '06 Chevy TrailBlazerSS - LS2/4L70e - little black hot rod SUV - my DD '18 Kia Sorento - wife's econo-driver '95 Chevy S10 - reg cab shortbed, LS, 4.3, auto... my '68's powertrain and chassis build -links broken A surprise phase - carb to efi -links broken |
04-12-2010, 08:24 PM | #18 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Well after digging through some old Hot Rod magazines and reading an artical on a "750 HP BLOWN 6.0L" its time to send my motor to a new tunning shop!!! I got almost the same setup and Hot Rod got 683hp on 93. This may sound dumb but 575 ins't enough!!! I know it could do a lot better. 100hp difference!!! Well i already got way to much money into this motor mine as well spend a little more to get it to its full power level.
|
04-14-2010, 02:10 PM | #19 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 159
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
I didn't read the Hot Rod article, but were they going for extreme peak numbers?
Those 683hp on 93 might not be quite as usable on the road as your 575hp either, but I don't know what either power curves look like either... Might be something to think about. Whichever has the flatter curve could actually be funner, even if that means it has a lower peak... Also, were they using meth injection like 68GMCCustom was talking about above??
__________________
get it! |
04-14-2010, 07:24 PM | #20 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Quote:
|
|
04-14-2010, 02:21 PM | #21 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: sc
Posts: 1,203
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
NICE, looking forward to seeing RWHP #s!!
__________________
71 Cheyenne C10 LWB cam'd 6.0/T56 Swap |
04-14-2010, 02:29 PM | #22 |
C-10 Club Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Corona,CA
Posts: 1,001
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Its a good start.....
I was making about 475rwhp (550 @ crank) on a stock LS1 in my 04 vette with the 112 maggie on 91 octane. Standard pulley with custom tune,intake and exhaust. At that amount of boost with heads and cam I would expect a little more.(not a whole lot if its a safe tune) Not sure iif you have done it yet but make sure you pin the crank. |
04-14-2010, 07:28 PM | #23 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
Quote:
|
|
04-14-2010, 07:32 PM | #24 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 157
|
Re: New Dyno Numbers!!!
|
Bookmarks |
|
|