650.51 rwhp, 730.49 rwtq...

[632C2]

650.51 rwhp, 730.49 rwtq... (added dyno sheet)

Finished up another round of DynoJet runs last Sunday.

My best run was 650.51 rwhp at 4815 rpm and 730.49 rwtq at 4009 rpm. The boost on this run was 22.1 psi. The A/F was just about perfect on this run.

Using a conservative 15% drivetrain loss, these numbers work out to 765.3 hp and 859.4 tq at the flywheel.

My second best run was 609.09 rwhp at 4380 rpm and 733.19 rwtq at 4113 rpm. The boost on this run was 17.5 psi. The A/F ratio was too rich on this run.

The 650.51 rwhp is good enough for me. I am going to try to get the A/F a little better at the 17.5 psi level and then call it quits for now.

Steve

 

[callaway4fun]

Those are some BIG NUMBERS way to go Steve That is an awful lot of boost to run Great HP/Tq numbers

 

[reubenmc]

650 RWHP!!!!!! Holly cow, that's awesome!!!

With that kind of power, how is the driveability??

 

[632C2]

650 RWHP!!!!!! Holly cow, that's awesome!!!

With that kind of power, how is the driveability??

Driveability is better than when it was unmodified. The car idles DEAD smooth. I am using the factory base, runners, and plenum.

Steve

 

[*89x2*]

Driveability is better than when it was unmodified. The car idles DEAD smooth. I am using the factory base, runners, and plenum.

Steve

AWESOME!!!!!!!!!! :eek

 

[632C2]

Those are some BIG NUMBERS way to go Steve That is an awful lot of boost to run Great HP/Tq numbers

You are correct. 22 psi of boost doesn't scare me. I built the motor for that amount. This motor loves it. This weekend I plan on doing another leakdown test and compression test.

Steve

 

[Ripp 73]

Impresecivo my friend. You're making the rest of our Corvettes seem obsolete. You are not only a rice burner, but a Viper eater. Keep up the good numbers.

 

[8388]

Those numbers are ba ba bad to the bone

 

[632C2]

Chris, Ripp 76, and Sam: Thanks!

 

[90Callaway]

Steve, that's nothing short of amazing. You should be damn proud. I've always believed that a properly set up (and flowed) TPI setup on one of these cars would be good for close to 600 rwhp and over 700rwtq without running crazy boost levels. Along with other mods to the fuel system, ignition, cam and exhaust of course.

I think you've proven that as your 17.5psi run didn't even have an optimal A/F ratio. Which, by the way, begs the question - What A/F ratio are your striving for? 12:1? Are you doing this all in the chip or are you also tweaking the microfueler?

Kevin

 

[SurfnSun]

I love it!!!! Thats better than A LOT of C5 TTs out there, imagine all that torque. Steve can you post a dyno sheet on here, I for one would love to see that torque curve. Is she spinning on the dyno yet?

 

[632C2]

Josh: The dyno sheet is now up.

Kevin: The A/F I want is 12.5:1. I am modifying the chip but I dumped the Micro Fueler years ago. I am using an AIC by Greddy.

Steve

 

[Mac]

Very impressive!! Congrats!!

-Mac

 

[90Callaway]

Josh: The dyno sheet is now up.

Kevin: The A/F I want is 12.5:1. I am modifying the chip but I dumped the Micro Fueler years ago. I am using an AIC by Greddy.

Steve

Interesting. So you've kept the secondary injectors in the rams horn but added a better controller. I've never thought the microfueler was very tunable. Did you stay with the 80 something lb injectors that it came with?

I've considered that it would be cool to scrap the whole secondary injector setup and go with eight right sized injectors to handle the power levels and control with a FAST or Accel DFI setup. I guess the downsides would be that you would have to scrap the stock computer and you might have a rough time tuning the A/F ratio for idle and part throttle with the large injectors required... also it wouldn't be very "stock appearing".

 

[8388]

I've considered that it would be cool to scrap the whole secondary injector setup and go with eight right sized injectors to handle the power levels and control with a FAST or Accel DFI setup. I guess the downsides would be that you would have to scrap the stock computer and you might have a rough time tuning the A/F ratio for idle and part throttle with the large injectors required... also it wouldn't be very "stock appearing".

Kevin, on my 35th, I went with a Haltech E6GM. Let me tell you, the amount of time invested in tunning is unreal, and it's still far from a factory (drivability) type tune, also, you have to start from scratch. Now going to a wide band programmable set up is a whole other deal,as it is capable of learning as you drive.

 

[WhalePirot]

Awesome. Have you modified the drivetrain?

 

[632C2]

Mac: Thanks!

Kevin: My injectors actually flow 76#/hr @ 83psi. I sent them to RC Engineering for blueprinting. I have spent a good amount of money and a great deal of time with an Accel DFI system. I eliminated the two additional injectors and tried two different sets of injectors as well as systems. The first setup consisted of Bosch 37# injectors and removing the factory ECU and replacing it with the DFI. I eventually replaced that system with one consisting of 50# injectors I bought from MSD and piggy-backing the DFI with the factory system. To make a very long story short, I was never satisfied with the driveability of the DFI so I decided to go back to the factory ECU along with the two additional injectors.

A lot of people have told me over the years that the two additional injectors were a crappy way to go and eliminating them was the best thing to do. I can tell you that nothing can beat the driveability of the factory ECU. And as far as the two additional injectors, well they seem to be working pretty well for me.

One thing I should clear up is that the last version of CalMap I used was 6.32 and I am sure that the new crop of aftermarket ECU's are greatly improved over the one I used. Irregardless of that, I am sticking with what I have.

WhalePirot: The only modification to the drivetrain is a McLeod Street Twin clutch. It is working fantastically. My previous clutch setup was a Centerforce Dual Friction. Unfortunately, it couldn't handle this kind of power/torque and slipped badly.

Steve

 

[HJV11]

632C2, those results are very impressive. The only thing I would say is that I would add some fuel. 12.5 on a FI motor is just to lean for my taste. Also consider that the loading on the dyno is significantly less than on the street so that number will go even leaner on the street. I do not have a Callaway but I do have a single turbo 383 in my 94.



Again congratulations on the great results.

 

[8388]

632C2, those results are very impressive. The only thing I would say is that I would add some fuel. 12.5 on a FI motor is just to lean for my taste. Also consider that the loading on the dyno is significantly less than on the street so that number will go even leaner on the street. I do not have a Callaway but I do have a single turbo 383 in my 94.



Again congratulations on the great results.

I agree. I would shoot for at least 11.5 With my Haltech, I was able to adjust the fuel for boosted loads separate from non boost.

 

[632C2]

Thanks for the feedback guys, but 12.0:1 to 12.5:1 is the area I like to be in.

Between data acquisition, reading spark plugs, taking leak downs and compression tests I feel real comfortable in that range.

Steve