New Dyno Numbers
- Thread starter OrangeL67
- Start date
BillBoost37
New member
There aren't any deleted posts. No one is picking a fight, your cocky attitude think there's a fight here?
16MustangVet
New member
Reaffirms my theory that the OMGTVS was grossly overpriced and over rated for the results that it made which I've said all along........
BWTH3LL do I know?
Damn nice numbers given the "baby cam"
LOL and last but not least here we go again ^^^^
BWTH3LL do I know?
Damn nice numbers given the "baby cam"
LOL and last but not least here we go again ^^^^
jim97regalgs
New member
what gear were the pulls done in?
OrangeL67
New member
3rd gear. he only took it to 5800rpm with the cutout open bc of the fueling issue. the other vid was to 6400rpm iirc
No reason???? Dude I am not even modded, nor do I know half as much as these guys do and I still think your eyes are turning brown. Not only for being so full of ****, but also because you talk so much **** and still remain full of ****. There for your **** maker must be working overtime..... WAIT is your **** maker built using a TVS??? That would explain it's power....
Tuner-Extraordinaire
New member
One.
Tuner-Extraordinaire
New member
You kiss your mother with that mouth?
Tuner-Extraordinaire
New member
TVS still wins. With some heads and an even more aggressive cam + true E85, it could have gone much further.
SnowFlake
Banned
Not to mention it had no intercooler either
The whole TVS thing isn't dead yet...
OP has very good numbers for his setup. I can't count how many times people came to the dyno thinking they were gonna put down 400 and left with about 310.
16MustangVet
New member
Yet what you fail to mention is the cost involved!!!
lulz do we really need to go there again????
16MustangVet
New member
Not to mention it had no intercooler either
The whole TVS thing isn't dead yet...
OP has very good numbers for his setup. I can't count how many times I to went to the dyno thinking I was gonna put down 400 and left with about 370.[/QUOTE
370 or whatever the hell your exact numbers were
Fixed the statement for ya flake
OrangeL67
New member
I don't mind a little debating. Its always good for car guys as long as it doesnt turn childish.But just for the record. My dyno pulls were no where near the cars max potential. I only ran a 3" pulley due to valve float issues after 6100rpm with the ls6 springs at 570 lift. (Xp cam + yella terra 1.7 roller rockers) So instead of getting on the record boards (like I originally intended) we tuned for max safety & efficiency in terms of head/exhaust flow, timing (21*), & boost. (Only 11.5-12 pounds through the ported heads by shift points) Any one who knows the nature of valve float knows boost is only gonna add to the problem. Maximizing my build for the mods I have will be a matter of stronger springs, and a smaller pulley at this point. The fact that most overdriven 2.55 builds don't crack 350whp lets me know I'm doing something right. & I'm not even intercooled. Not to bench race, but I feel comfortable saying that this 340horse build would gladly entertain a good race with most 360-370whp w-bodies. The powerband has been manipulated by compression & head flow dynamics to run much stronger from 0 to peak horse rpm. After adding a gen V, ported heads & roller rockers, The power curve literally improved enough for me to be happy with a less than 10 peak whp gain. But enough babbling for me. Long story short, please don't mistake these numbers for a cap on the power potential of the car(the way it sits). It would be a terrible misconception.