View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 1:01 pm Post subject: Dyno Results and Track Times |
|
|
Can I get a PM from everyone on the dyno/track with your best dyno run and best track time, engine and induction?
IE: Paul (Twilightoptics) 355 FI IROC-Z - 305HP/300TQ - 13.13@107.25MPH
I'll get these in a cool spreadsheet for everyone to see. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dewey316 The Lama
Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 7295 Location: Bringing the tech
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actualy, would everyone please post them here. I can updated the members profiles with dyno numbers and track times, also.
John -- 1990 Camaro RS 305 TBI
1320 times:
N/A - 14.502 @ 94.6mph 2.246 60'
Nitrous -- 13.772 @ 103.24mph 2.336 60'
Dyno:
N/A - 203.78hp / 275.55tq*
Nitrous - 287.21hp / 444.84tq*
*SAE Corrected |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jess Administrator
Joined: 24 Nov 2003 Posts: 426 Location: Mount Vernon, WA
1988 Pontiac Formula
|
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey paul, I have a spreadsheet with some crew power numbers/track time, I'll dig it up tonight. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sellmanb Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2004 Posts: 727 Location: Tigard, OR
|
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey John, what's up with the SAE correctage of your tq readings? Would all of our torque readings be off? Or is it SAE corrected in the dyno sheet that they gave us? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dewey316 The Lama
Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 7295 Location: Bringing the tech
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It should be SAE corrected. Actualy it is a very slight correction for us, since we are pretty close to sea level. It basicly corrects for weather conditions, to make a standardation. Since it was cool the day we dyno'd, we actualy lost power convert to SAE, if you dyno'd in dever, you would gain power (because of the thin air).
Clear as mud? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
85rocZlady1 New Member
Joined: 18 Jan 2004 Posts: 3 Location: Intel, OR
|
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Stephanie stock 305 crate engine 149 hp 224 tq no track times.
We now know that was with a plugged fuel filter. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rjmcgee The Hammer
Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 2320
|
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rodney,
303.48 rwhp and 319.26 rw torque
Best 1/4 was 13.514 @ 104.17 mph |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sellmanb Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2004 Posts: 727 Location: Tigard, OR
|
Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dewey316 wrote: | It should be SAE corrected. Actualy it is a very slight correction for us, since we are pretty close to sea level. It basicly corrects for weather conditions, to make a standardation. Since it was cool the day we dyno'd, we actualy lost power convert to SAE, if you dyno'd in dever, you would gain power (because of the thin air).
Clear as mud? |
Ah. Well I'm not going to be downsizing myself when I tell my friends what CRAZY horsepower my truck made "it's barely streetable man, just look at the graph... that's 4 cylinders of tire shredding fury!" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sellmanb Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2004 Posts: 727 Location: Tigard, OR
|
Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
oh uhm... I dont know if you want only the F-body dyno results... but I'll post my truck's results just because I went
Bobby
1986 Toyota 1 ton pickup
94 horsepower
125ft/lbs of torque |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dewey316 The Lama
Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 7295 Location: Bringing the tech
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You did murder the other toyota 4 banger.
Bart put down a whopping 52hp. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jess Administrator
Joined: 24 Nov 2003 Posts: 426 Location: Mount Vernon, WA
1988 Pontiac Formula
|
Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.cascadecrew.org/ccpower.xls
Hehe, been a while since this got updated. Some of the highlights:
Bart: 2.8MPFI - 110.2Hp 149.8Tq
John: 5.0TBI - 119.95Hp 240.54Tq |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dewey316 The Lama
Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 7295 Location: Bringing the tech
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
even back then,I had the torque.
that kids, is why you don't want a clogged cat. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hah that is old! I still had 305TPI Peanut Power. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|