EDIT: Just noticed the graph says "flywheel torque" and "flywheel horsepower". It's just mislabeled.. It was a chassis dyno; so this is actually horsepower at the wheels. I didn't take my motor out this morning ;-P.
I have the AFRs in another chart, they were getting leaner than I wanted up top and were too rich (11:1) down low where I experienced a torque decrease after changing my intake.. so I should be able to stay safe on the top end, and gain some low end torque back, after I tune it when I have time after finals.
It's a 1993 3.4 DOHC with:
.030" overbore Sealed Power hyper-eutectic pistons with coated skirts ARP rod bolts Balanced and blueprinted Ported lower intake manifold Short-runner upper intake with 3" pipe plenum 3" aluminum intake pipe to K&N cone in the fender well (with the TB all the way open its 3" of pipe directly to the runners ) Decked heads (.014") Stock cam timing Stock throttle body BCFA chip with slightly leaner fuel curve in power enrichment (similar to Ben's performance chip) 2.5" exhaust with Spintech single-inlet dual-outlet muffler and 2.5" magnaflow cat Getrag 282 with Quad 4 gears
[This message has been edited by Steven Snyder (edited 06-08-2007).]
IP: Logged
03:45 PM
PFF
System Bot
Sleeper Member
Posts: 726 From: Torrance, Ca Registered: Mar 2000
wow, thats almost exactly how I had mine setup when I ran my 13.93 at 101. the only differance is I didn't have the intake mods (completely stock intake setup). now I have an UDP and am going to be doing the 6/6 cam timing this summer and probably get into the 13.8s. great numbers for N/A!
------------------ 1986 Silver 5 speed Fiero 3.4 DOHC Bored .30, Fully balanced and blueprinted 13.93@101mph as it is on the street. ... ... ! 350ci 400hp/tq SBC, 4 bolt main Spec Stage 3, Nitrous Oxide, many extras. 87 GT, Cryo Treated 5-speed Getrag.
IP: Logged
05:20 PM
Steven Snyder Member
Posts: 3323 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: Mar 2004
Yeah I'll give you guys rides. I'll let you know when I'm back in town.
quote
The numbers look awesome!!! I love how flat the torque curve stays.
Yeah I was surprised about how flat the torque curve is because it doesnt actually feel that way, maybe just because of the torque dip from 3000 to 4000 where normally the torque comes on strong with the stock intake. The dip in the middle is due to tuning (way too rich; 11:1), I will tune that out as soon as I get back home and have time to mess with it.
quote
Originally posted by darkhorizon:
Why didnt you do the exhaust cam advance mod?
You probably mean exhaust cam retard. I've done it before. I drove it like that for a year. I did NOT like the powerband. As Emc209i hinted at, it lacks low end torque with the 13* retard so it doesn't work so well up in the canyons because even with the Quad 4 gears there is too much ratio spread. Additionally I have other plans for this motor that would not benefit from the exhaust cam retard (hint: I don't want more overlap). I hear thats suppose to be really cool, but I never saw anyone do it with dyno sheets.
quote
It seems that intake really boosted the power, I think you can attest most of the gains to that.
Yup. With the stock intake I wouldn't expect more than 190 to 200.
[This message has been edited by Steven Snyder (edited 06-09-2007).]
IP: Logged
04:57 AM
Oreif Member
Posts: 16460 From: Schaumburg, IL Registered: Jan 2000
Question, Do you know what the gearing difference's (ratio's) are in the QUAD4 gears?
Here are the ratios for my transmission: 1st: 3.50 2nd: 2.19 3rd: 1.38 4th: 1.03 5th: 0.81 Final: 3.61
Only a few of the Quad 4 transmissions had these ratios. 1st and 2nd are much tighter than the Fiero gears. 2nd to 3rd ends up a bit wider since 3rd is the same as the Fiero. 5th gear is slightler shorter but you can find these ratios with the 0.72 5th in some applications.
IP: Logged
01:25 PM
Fierobsessed Member
Posts: 4782 From: Las Vegas, NV Registered: Dec 2001
I have yet to drive with the 3.4 DOHC and these gears, but I can tell you that with the 3.4 Pushrod, I should have stuck with the 3.50 first and the 2.05 second. It might be alright to have the 3.77 / 2.19 first second with the 3.4 DOHC. We'll see.
But I have to say, the 1.38 third and 1.03 fourth and the 0.72 fifth are perfect. Third and fourth pull like crazy. Fifth is economy like it should be.
I bet Stevesnyder loves his third and fourth
[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 06-09-2007).]
IP: Logged
04:05 PM
Jun 10th, 2007
Steven Snyder Member
Posts: 3323 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: Mar 2004
Actually I wish 3rd and 4th were shorter! The gap between 2nd and 3rd is larger than it should be. 3rd to 4th shift is perfect, and 4th goes up to 140mph. If 3rd and 4th were a bit shorter so they could be closer to 2nd overall, the gears would be absolutely perfect.
IP: Logged
01:17 AM
PaulJK Member
Posts: 6638 From: Los Angeles Registered: Oct 2001
Church Automotive Testing in Wilmington. The phone # is at the top of the dyno sheet. I don't know if they offer chip-burning services.. I burn my own chips. Give 'em a call and make sure you talk to Shawn.
IP: Logged
05:47 AM
Jul 13th, 2007
bluefiero Member
Posts: 465 From: Wheaton, Ill, USA Registered: Jun 2005
I'm pretty sure that is referred to BHP or Brake Horsepower if you remove just the wheels.
Wheels cost horsepower, some people say that a manual transmission has a 15% loss, but believe it or not, accelerating the mass of the wheels themselves is a big part of the loss.
RWHP, FWHP or WHP refers to the power delivered from the wheels to the ground.
Just a little nit pic that I have with horse power numbers.
IP: Logged
09:42 PM
Jul 14th, 2007
AquaHusky Member
Posts: 1234 From: Sedalia, Mo Registered: Dec 2006
That dyno looks interesting. It looks like you take off the wheels of the car for it? Does it attach to the axles of the vehicle? Or what?
The wheels come off and it bolts to the hubs.
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
Wheels cost horsepower, some people say that a manual transmission has a 15% loss, but believe it or not, accelerating the mass of the wheels themselves is a big part of the loss.
The drivetrain loss is significantly more than the wheel mass. Do the calculations. You'll come up with ~5-7 ft lbs (depending on wheel/tire size) at the rate they are accelerating at on the dyno in fourth gear (which is what gear the testing was done in). The shop I dynoed my car at also has a Dynojet roller dyno. They have tested both dynos to compare readings. A car that put down 196 hp on the Dynojet put down 206 on the Dynapack.. That's close to the same power I put down. I estimate my "Dynojet" power is probably somewhere around 210. It's not a percentage loss since we're just talking about wheel mass.. they require a static amount of power to accelerate. Note that the Dynapack load is varied to keep acceleration rate the same. This makes it easier to work out the interial losses if you want to correct for them.
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
I'm pretty sure that is referred to BHP or Brake Horsepower if you remove just the wheels.
BHP is horsepower at the crankshaft. There is significant power loss through the transmission gears and differential. To be absolutely technical I should be referring to this as "HHP" (hub horsepower). But it really doesn't matter... every dyno out there, even all the roller dynos, produce results that vary +/- 20 hp or so.
quote
Originally posted by AquaHusky: How hard is it to burn your own chips and what's involved?
You need a chip burner ($50), an EEPROM ($10), software (I use TunerPro, there is a free version), and a definition file for your ECM's software which is specific to the motor. I put together a definition file from a list of parameters I downloaded from 60degreev6.com. Browse around moates.net, they sell most of the stuff. You'll also need to understand how all the parameters work, and how to understand the diagnostic data you get so you know what to tune. Here's some good reading: http://www.customefis.com/GMEFI.html
[This message has been edited by Steven Snyder (edited 07-18-2007).]
... 
... 
!
