I would like to know too. I think it is good learning for people getting into swaps on what gives what and to improve from there no matter how good or bad it seems.
IP: Logged
01:22 PM
THE BEAST Member
Posts: 1177 From: PORT SAINT LUCIE,FLORIDA,USA Registered: Dec 2000
Fuel Pump Failing, Trans Shifting into overdrive, and trans leaking fluid. They only ran my car to 5000 RPM, redline is 6500 RPM 317 WHP 331 Torque at 5000 RPM (3800 Series 2)
Hopefully I can get everything fixed, finish tuning, and have it back on the Dyno in a couple of weeks.
[This message has been edited by tampalinc (edited 03-26-2007).]
IP: Logged
02:36 PM
Unsafe At Any Speed Member
Posts: 2299 From: Cheyenne, WY Registered: Feb 2003
One way to keep your car from kicking down a gear when on the dyno is to disconnect your kickdown cable. I had to do this on my blazer. It dropped into second gear and made for very impressive results. Well until we found out what happened. Went from around 330whp to 202whp. junkyard 350 with a th350 3speed. the couple of times i had my car on the dyno (blazer and fiero) we used 3rd gear. 3rd in the getrag is close to 1:1 (so i was told) and same for the th 350. Can't wait to get the 327 in the blazer and hit the tumblers. I guess the small blocks were stinking it up .
------------------ HARDCORE SBC CRONIE AND PROUD OF IT ! GOT TQ ?
My numbers aren't as impressive as tampalinc's. Stock 3.4L DOHC 157.7 HP and 179.8 torque, very close to the same numbers for a 4.9L that was run on the dyno. 4.9L numbers were 154HP and 192 torque with an auto transaxle. Mine were with a 5speed. Nitrous added, 231.54 HP and 287.85 torque or 229.1 HP and 294.96 torque. Supposed to be 100 shot jet for the nitrous but only got around 70 HP increase. I hope to do some type of Turbo charging before next spring. Kris
Wow, with all those V8's you'd think that people would be dying to show those High horsepower numbers off...
For the record... I did not make it to the dyno sunday mainly due to lack of funds. That said, I already know my mildly modded 350 TPI isn't putting out any monster HP numbers (yet!) so I doubt I'd want to show them off even if I did. I wanted to run it on the dyno for the heck of it anyway, it would have been fun... I instead spent a good part of the day running the swap meet looking for '69 'Vette parts with a friend of mine who's restoring one.
Hey Chris , wasn't Tom Corey offering to pay for anyone making more hp than his 383 stroker w/ nitrous? Did he do a dyno run? Missed seeing all you guys this year. Couldn't make it. Who did the 4.9 dyno?
Tom dynoed his but didn't do a nitrous shot. I think his HP was between 240 and 250 at the wheels. The only one with higher numbers was tampalinc and his 3.8LSC with the turbo. I am bad with remembering names, but I think Charles was the first name of the guy with the 4.9L. Frank would know exactly who it was. Frank may be posting the numbers on the Space Coast site, not sure. Kris
Originally posted by ITALGT: For the record... I did not make it to the dyno sunday mainly due to lack of funds. That said, I already know my mildly modded 350 TPI isn't putting out any monster HP numbers (yet!) so I doubt I'd want to show them off even if I did. I wanted to run it on the dyno for the heck of it anyway, it would have been fun... I instead spent a good part of the day running the swap meet looking for '69 'Vette parts with a friend of mine who's restoring one.
I'm still hurting from that sunburn!
Brett
Haha, well I put a little bit of sarcasm into that post, but yeah I was expecting to see some nice V8 results...
That 3.4 with Nitrous is impressive, although I would have to say that stock I would be expecting more out of it... My cobalt SS supercharged Dynoed stock 213 at the wheels and 197 lb feet of Torque... Possibly with boost you'd be putting down 260+ at the wheels without Nitrous...
IP: Logged
03:59 AM
Dragon Member
Posts: 1352 From: Space Coast, Florida Registered: Jun 2001
It says on the link the numbers seem low, Did the dyno shop also seem to think the numbers were low? The DOHC 3.4L engines usually hit around 170 rwhp and the 3800SC's are generally around 200rwhp.
IP: Logged
07:55 AM
Alex4mula Member
Posts: 7403 From: Canton, MI US Registered: Dec 1999
This was a Dynojet and not a Mustang dyno yes? Well, I have yet to know anyone who doesn't think the dyno #s are low the first time (including myself). Some reality check. But because I see SAE in the chart it would be nice to know what was the correction factor used. It was a cool bright sunny weekend so maybe baro was high and it overcorrected. Still now all you have a good point of start to improve if you want. I like the nitrous results of the 3.4 DOHC. Many kits advertise a HP increase but at the crank. So your 70HP at the wheels is close to 100hp at crank
IP: Logged
08:23 AM
PFF
System Bot
Tom Corey Member
Posts: 838 From: Melbourne, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002
Hey Chris , wasn't Tom Corey offering to pay for anyone making more hp than his 383 stroker w/ nitrous? Did he do a dyno run? Missed seeing all you guys this year. Couldn't make it. Who did the 4.9 dyno?
For the record: Archie paid half of everyone's dyno charges. Everyone was supposed to pay the other half. Lincoln had the highest hp at 317 (with a few problems like he said). He came armed for bear with 113 octane fuel and I think he could have dyno'd at 350 hp or better if not for the tranny problems - good show Lincoln! My car (345hp ZZ3) was second (which surprised me) at 243 hp, Archie was 3rd at ~237, then Kris at 231 with his 3.4 DOHC. The 4.9 was 152 hp I think. Dragon's 3800 SC had fuel mixture problems and dyno'd under 200hp. My SBC has been in 14 years with no mods other than roller tip rockers, and NOS, which as promised I did not use and I didn't do anything to prep for the run. I paid for Lincoln's other half of the Dyno fee ($23.00) and, as he requested, I also sent his dinner money to Pennock's ($25.00). I was hoping to see more folks dyno, but they didn't show. I was really impressed with the little 4 door Caddy with the 405 hp Z06 that dyno'd at 335hp - neat car!. I won't even talk about the 600+ hp Impalas that werre there! All in all, it was great fun, I enjoyed meeting Lincoln and all the other guys that were there - soory I couldn't give more rides in my SBC, but the speed limit was 30 mph and afeter the first ride I gave there were cops everywhere - I may not out dyno Linc, but I'm sure as heck louder!! Now we need to do a little side by side track time at the Michigan show next year and see what happens when the rubber meets the road. It's always great fun no matter who wins. Hope to see more of you guys there next time.
------------------ Tom Corey Melbourne, FL 87 Green T-Top GT 5Spd SBC ZZ3 V8 - NOS
[This message has been edited by Tom Corey (edited 03-27-2007).]
IP: Logged
05:47 PM
Tom Corey Member
Posts: 838 From: Melbourne, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002
Note to all: My car is NOT a 383 stroker. It is a 345hp ZZ3 with roller tip rockers, Sanderson headers and a holley carb. I WISH it were a 383 stroker and maybe some day it will be (with FI), but for now its a pretty regular SBC (with a little NOS shot).
[This message has been edited by Tom Corey (edited 03-27-2007).]
I'd say those numbers are in the same ballpark as what we've seen run at Ed's a couple of years ago. Most of the 4.9's run right around 150ish. One guy there that year put down around 275 with a Northstar. I think those are respectable numbers . At least "real world" hp.
[This message has been edited by Ronnie (edited 03-27-2007).]
IP: Logged
06:33 PM
Tom Corey Member
Posts: 838 From: Melbourne, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002
FYI, all the dyno numbers at Daytona were hp at the rear wheels. Most cars, like my ZZ3 are advertised with hp at the crank, which is significantly higher (as you can see). The trick is to get all that hp to the ground.
IP: Logged
07:05 PM
tampalinc Member
Posts: 774 From: Columbia, MO Registered: May 2001
Originally posted by Tom Corey: Now we need to do a little side by side track time at the Michigan show next year and see what happens when the rubber meets the road. It's always great fun no matter who wins.
This sounds like fun.
IP: Logged
07:06 PM
Fastback 86 Member
Posts: 7849 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: Sep 2003
FYI, all the dyno numbers at Daytona were hp at the rear wheels. Most cars, like my ZZ3 are advertised with hp at the crank, which is significantly higher (as you can see). The trick is to get all that hp to the ground.
Something's wrong with your 5spd if its loosing you 100hp at the wheels. Thats nearly a third of your supposed crank horsepower. My old 140hp 2.8 put down 115hp at the wheels with 150k miles on the clock. Just an observation.
[This message has been edited by Fastback 86 (edited 03-27-2007).]
Something's wrong with your 5spd if its loosing you 100hp at the wheels. Thats nearly a third of your supposed crank horsepower. My old 140hp 2.8 put down 115hp at the wheels with 150k miles on the clock. Just an observation.
That is not the problem. Everybody needs to read and understand that when GM rates a crate engine at certain HP (345hp for a zz3, 355hp for a ZZ4, etc.) it does so with certain intake, carb, headers and tune to maximize the output. When you change from that then most probable your HP will move down. For example some 1 5/8" long tube headers are no match for 1 1/2" shorty headers. Maybe the carb is not tuned like GM engineers will do at their dyno. Maybe you are using smaller exhaust pipe. Etc. etc. All that makes the hp/tq numbers to be usually lower. Key item here is to have a baseline and if you want (& have the $$) then adjust and change things to improve. It does not happens by itself.
IP: Logged
08:58 PM
Tom Corey Member
Posts: 838 From: Melbourne, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002
Something's wrong with your 5spd if its loosing you 100hp at the wheels. Thats nearly a third of your supposed crank horsepower. My old 140hp 2.8 put down 115hp at the wheels with 150k miles on the clock. Just an observation.
I think one of the unknowns here is that we don't know how they set up the dyno. A lot of input settings can make a big difference, like barometric pressure for example, or the type of dyno - a Mustang dyno for example probably would have given different results. Note that the 405hp Z06 Caddy dyno'd at 335 hp and the owner did a LOT of computer tweaking during his runs to get it that high. So I think we basically compared apples to apples. The point I'm trying to make is that all the cars were run off with basically the same dyno input settings and the end result was as expected. Turbos can generate some pretty serious horsepower. I was satisfied that the results were representative. Lincoln has a great setup on his 3800 and turbos definitely rule when it comes to generating hp.
IP: Logged
09:00 PM
I wear pants Member
Posts: 579 From: Columbus, IN Registered: Jun 2005
I really don't want to start a flame war, but after all the V8 superiority opinions on this forum, I have to say I'm none too impressed with the results.
It's great you guys all went out to the dyno though.
IP: Logged
09:24 PM
Fastback 86 Member
Posts: 7849 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: Sep 2003
Was your engine dyno'd prior to installation? I'm not trying to pick on you, but really, its inaccurate to refer to it as a 345hp engine when evidence shows that its not making nearly that much. It would be very difficult for dyno settings to create such a massive discrepancy. Alex is right, a baseline is a good start, but only if all you're concerned about is how much power has been gained or lossed in reference to said baseline. I can't comment on the Z06 because I know nothing about his car, or how Vette's typically dyno.
IP: Logged
10:11 PM
Archie Member
Posts: 9436 From: Las Vegas, NV Registered: Dec 1999
I notice on your results page that the "3800 s/c Sample from last year..." that it has 2 pages. It has the Chart Page & the Data page. Can you contact the Dyno guys and get our copies of the Data page?
Thanks Archie
IP: Logged
10:19 PM
Dragon Member
Posts: 1352 From: Space Coast, Florida Registered: Jun 2001
Was your engine dyno'd prior to installation? I'm not trying to pick on you, but really, its inaccurate to refer to it as a 345hp engine when evidence shows that its not making nearly that much. It would be very difficult for dyno settings to create such a massive discrepancy. Alex is right, a baseline is a good start, but only if all you're concerned about is how much power has been gained or lossed in reference to said baseline. I can't comment on the Z06 because I know nothing about his car, or how Vette's typically dyno.
Do you know the difference between an engine dyno and chassis dyno?
The stock Fiero 2.8 engine is rated at 140 HP (give or take between years). Typical stock 2.8 engines put out about 110 HP on a chassis dyno.
So is it inaccurate to refer to the Fiero 2.8 as a 140 HP engine "when evidence shows that its not making nearly that much"?
Do you know the difference between an engine dyno and chassis dyno?
The stock Fiero 2.8 engine is rated at 140 HP (give or take between years). Typical stock 2.8 engines put out about 110 HP on a chassis dyno.
So is it inaccurate to refer to the Fiero 2.8 as a 140 HP engine "when evidence shows that its not making nearly that much"?
I think everyone knows the difference between Wheel HP and Crank HP here, in this thread. What is disputed is the fact that through a Fiero drivetrain you shouldn't lose more than 15% power from the crank to the wheels. If the Engine is built to make 330 at the crank, it should be about 280 at the wheels. not 230, or whatever he got.
Anyways, it's all unimpressive.
[This message has been edited by Leafy (edited 03-27-2007).]
IP: Logged
11:15 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Just so I understand, you're saying you shouldn't quote the factory rated power of an engine because the dyno readings show more than a 15% power loss from the crank? So, where did the 15% figure come from?
Don't tell me you're going to argue against the factory rating of an engine compared to it's rear wheel dyno output based on a rule of thumb?
Do you know what correction factor the dyno used? Do you know what correction factor GM used on the ZZ3?
Surly you won't draw conclusions based on part fact (dyno results) and part guess (15%) and call it a conclusion? That's as bad as saying an engine is rated at 345 HP, so it must be putting 290 HP to the rear wheels because there's a 15% drivetrain loss.
Just so I understand, you're saying you shouldn't quote the factory rated power of an engine because the dyno readings show more than a 15% power loss from the crank? So, where did the 15% figure come from?
Don't tell me you're going to argue against the factory rating of an engine compared to it's rear wheel dyno output based on a rule of thumb?
Do you know what correction factor the dyno used? Do you know what correction factor GM used on the ZZ3?
Surly you won't draw conclusions based on part fact (dyno results) and part guess (15%) and call it a conclusion? That's as bad as saying an engine is rated at 345 HP, so it must be putting 290 HP to the rear wheels because there's a 15% drivetrain loss.
Typically speaking, as a rule of thumb based on MILLIONS of front wheel drive dyno pulls, there should be an expected power loss of about10 to 15% at the wheels.
It then is expected that, if an engine is rated at around 330 at the crank, it should be putting down at least 280 at the wheels.
You are correct as these are only estimates, and no I don't know the variables GM put on the engine... Speculatively putting down 243 at the wheels is a low number compared to the 345 at the crank.
That either means that GM overrated the ZZ3, or the dyno's correction factor was WAY off.
