My G-tech had me trapped at just over 98 MPH. I'm quite happy with this even though I'm on my first burn (mail order) and am only using 55# injectors. I've got some 65# in the garage, but I need to pass emissions first.

And yes I know it's a G-tech, but they're pretty damn accurate enough for me. (especially considering the nearest track is 2 hours away)

 

I hate to say this....

but they are pretty acurate for ET, trap speeds are typicly 4-6mph fast.

where they are really helpfull is for tuning, when I was working on my spark, i would do back to back to back to back runs with the g-tech, and watch my MPH change as I changed my spark advance.

 

*shrugs* what can you do right? It was only one run on a road with a curve and a hill.

 

are you serious? and you expect it to be accurate?


you need a flat straight road to use it on. The MPH is going to read high compared to an actual track because the G tech gives you your MPH at the instant you cross the finish line as opposed to the trap speed at a track which is your speed averaged for the last 100 feet.

and its usually around 4 mph higher at the line

 

No track near by, so I'll take what I can get. The car is in the low 14's on the first burn and with 55#'ers and bald tires, so I'm fairly certain that it will be mid 13's when it's all said and done. Still getting 220 miles to the tank with mostly city driving.

 

What was the ET it gave you?

 

hey gunny,

congrats on getting the car running.

have to caution you on the g-tech, though. i bought one last summer at one of the year one events. i had the car's exact weight (i'd weighed it at atlanta dragway the night before) and the factory rep i bought it from helped me set it up.

now, i knew the car had run a best of 15.62 at the track, so i was pretty disappointed when it had me running everything from a 15.20 to a 14.10! i called tech support and set the unit up under their direction twice, but still got results i knew were just too fast. i saw the tech rep at the next year one saturday event; he insisted the differences were because a car with street tires hooks up better on the street. i thought there might be some truth to that, as i'd had trouble in the past with another car that launched like a monster on asphalt streets but went up in smoke on a concrete launch pad, but the 60' times were the same at the track and on the g-tech. keith and some of the other guys from year one started ragging the tech rep a bit, so he bet me a hundred bucks the car would run within a tenth on the g-tech at the track. we went there the next friday night. in 5 runs, the best it got was .25 faster, and it showed as much as 1.3 faster! he set it up, he weighed the car right there, on the spot, and i still collected my hundred bucks.

bottom line? i think the g-tech is a good tool for tuning 60' times, it was real close at the track, but it's not good for much more. i'm not nearly as concerned that it's different from the track as i am that it's inconsistent. the fastest g-tech run of the night was the second-slowest actual run. there was no correlation between being faster or slower on the track's clocks and faster or slower on the g-tech (except for 60' runs, which correlated almost perfectly)

the horsepower and torque function is way off, too. i've used the g-tech while on the dyno, and it's nowhere near what i get and again, the dyno and the g-tech have nothing in common as far as improvement or lack thereof in run-to-run comparisons.

i wish i'd saved my 250.00

and by the way, atlanta dragway isn't that far. it's only 20 bucks to run the car on the friday night test and tunes. you should definitely go. it's a blast and you'll meet a lot of nice people.

 

I'm puzzled, how would a g-tech be used while on the dyno?

RBob.

 

you do horsepower/torque rins on a g-tech from a rolling start. while you can get hp/torque numbers from a standing start run, g-tech says they're not accurate. if you'll look at the g-tech manual, it says for horsepower and torque runs, you get the car rolling in the 1:1 gear, then floor it ... the exact same procedure you use on a chassis dyno.

 

So I strap the car down to the dyno, startup the g-tech, and then floor it in a 1:1 gear from a rolling start. OK, now since the car never moves forward (it's strapped to a dyno), what is the g-tech doing? How is it being used while on the dyno?

Doesn't a g-tech use accelerometers to measure the change in vehicle speed. And uses this to calculate the various information given to the user?

Still puzzled in TGO,

RBob.

 

as i understand it, the hp/torque readings are arrived at from the rpms, the time it takes to reach those rpms and the weight of the vehicle. an accelerometer can't possibly be accurate from a 30mph rolloff, a standing start is necessary.

regardless, i can tell you the hp and torque reading on my g-tech are virtually identical on the street and on the dyno

 

Puzzled no longer. Didn't know they also monitored the RPM. All these years they advertised the use of accelerometers while they also use the engine RPM. Interesting.

RBob.

 

the accelerometers are how they measure e.t., mph and lateral g (although i've never messed with that).

everything the g-tech does is an estimate. the accelerometer technology is an offshoot of the inertial navigation systems they use in planes and submarines. in order for them to work, the plane or ship must first be at an absolute standstill at a known point to establish a point of reference. if you've ever knocked around at an airbase, you'll see parking stands with the exact coordinates and elevation marked. before taking off, all planes go to that point, come to a standstill, and enter those variables to set their ins. now, all planes have constant navigational fixes through gps systems, but the ins system is still used as a backup. if you've ver been at a ship's berthing, you'll see the same coordinates. surface ships use gps too, just like planes, but they too still use the ins as a backup. submarines, however, still rely heavily on ins, as they can only update their gps fix from the surface. when it's underwater, every move the sub makes is taken into account by the accelerometers in the ins to give a constant estimated position in relation to the last gps fix. the problem is, the longer the sub goes without updating it's position with gps, the less accurate the ins fix becomes. it is, after all, merely an estimate, arrived at by the accelerometers estimating the speed through g-loads and chronometers measuring exactly how long it moves at those loads/speeds.

that's why you'll notice the g-tech becoming more and more unreliable as you go down the track. my experience was that the 60' times were pretty close. as the car travelled further down the track, the 100' times were still pretty blose, but by the time i got to the 1/8 mile things began to diverge greatly and it was even worse by the time it got to the end of the 1/4 mile.

as far as torque and hp are concerned, the g-tech guy at year one said it would work on the dyno, and it did; or, at least it did as well/poorly as it did on the street. the g-tech never got within 20 hp of what i know the car puts out. the torque was actually not that far off, though.

 

Was the G-tech 20 hp over or under?

 

depends on the run. the last 3 runs i did on the dyno were 169, 168 and 170 hp, in that order. the g-tech corresponded with 203, 155 and 191. went to a flat, sparsely traveled road on the way home from the dyno, did about 10 runs and again was all over the place, one run as high as 220 and one as low as 155.

dynolab.com is not far from you, gunny. they run a special on thursday nights; 3 runs for 50 bucks. call arthur, he's a great guy. and keep your *** out of iraq.

 

Yeah, I've been there before and am familiar with Arthur. I didn't want to dyno the thing until I atleast datalogged the car, but I'm just no good at this kind of stuff. I've got emissions this month too. I think I just might turn down the fuel pressure and hope it passes.

 

Inertial guidance systems are a little more sophisticated then just some accelerometers. This system was first developed for space
travel (with varying gravity) and took the Apollo crews to the moon and back. Gyroscopes play an important role.

As far as calculating HP from the street there are too many variables for it to be simple: air drag, tire rolling resistance, bearing friction, brake drag, wind speed and direction, etc.

For straight line performance the use of the VSS pulse train works very well. For lateral performance the use of an accelerometer works nicely. Do I care about absolute HP? No, I care about how the vehicle accelerates and corners, relative to the last set of parameters. That is what tells me if I'm going backward or forward.

RBob.

 

i agree. my point was, (according to g-tech) this is a dumbed-down commercial version of that same technology.

again, i agree. i don't care nearly as much that the numbers are different than they are at the track and dyno as i do that they don't go in the same direction. it would be awesome to make changes to the car and go out on a deserted road to see if they helped or not. the g-tech doesn't do that.

if i go to the dragstrip and make 5 runs without changing anything, those runs will all be withing a few tenths of each other, as i'm a pretty experienced driver and my technique doesn't vary that much. if i take my car to the dyno and make three runs without making any changes, they'll all be within a few hp/lbs ft of each other. i know this for a fact, i've done both, several times.

do the same thing with a g-tech and the results will vary wildly. the last time i ran my g-tech 5 times in a row, my slowest time was 15.20 and my fastest run was 14.10. same with the horsepower. before i left atlanta, i took perverse pleasure in leaving work each night and making a run down the downtown streets where i worked. day to day, with no changes made to the car, i'd get results as much as a second apart ... with no rhyme or reason. the same thing with the horsepower. every night, getting onto 75/85 right outside work, i'd get it in 4th gear at around 30mph and hammer it ... and get a different number every night, eveyr run when i did them on the same night. this negates any value in tuning the car.

there is one thing the g-tech was critical in helping me do. i was having trouble launching the car. the poor old 305 would either light them up or bog. i'd be lucky to get 4 runs in at the friday night test and tune, and i'd have to wait in line for hours. i wasn't able to get enough runs in to come to any definitive conclusions. once i decided the g-tech was accurate with 60' times, i was able to take it out on a deserted road and make dozens of runs, changing tire pressures and launch rpms until i found the best combination. i found that 24lbs in the rear tires and launching at 2500 rpm, letting the car bog a bit and run out from there was the fastest launching technique, by far. prior to that g-tech session, i was in the 2.3-2.4 range on my 60' times. the next time i went to the track, i was in the low 2.10 range with a worst of 2.2.

 

You moved? When did this happen? Was I overseas or something. . . or just drunk?

 

Just out of curiosity, what was the ET that the g-tech gave?

 

i moved home to tulsa in february. love it.

added benefit ... tulsa is the home of fastchip.com. was over there today. he has a dynojet chassis dyno. i'm going to have him do a dyno-tune and custom chip for me. once that's done, it's only another hundred bucks to get another done as i make changes.

now gunny, this advice is gonna make the chip tuners squawk, but i see you experiencing the same thing i have been for the past 2 years. i've read everything they've written on chip burning and more, and i still don't understand it. they do understand it, but they can't understand how we can't understand it, and i understand that. ha ha ha ha

it's so simple to them that they just can't see how it's not a snap to anyone else. that's a common problem between experts and novices at anything; it's called the communication gap. regardless, it still leaves guys like you and me out in the cold. i see you struggling to get your car running right, and i think you're making a mistake trying to start from scratch.

my advice is to get the car tuned and have a chip burned on a chassis dyno with a wideband 02 sensor. after you've got it right, you can experiment with chipburning all you like, but you'll be starting with a car that's running properly, and you'll always have that .bin to go back to if you screw things up.

i talked to the guys at rp motorsport about doing it (770.516.0403) awhile back. they work on ls1's almost exclusively now, but they did a lot of tbi and tpi work in the past and still have the equipment to do it. the downside is they don't have a dyno; you have to use someone else's and, at a hundred bucks an hour for the dyno, it's going to get expensive.

i also communicated with alvin at pcmforless.com in charlotte and was REALLY impressed. he has a lot of experience doing it and they regularly do "dyno days" where they do multiple cars on the same day, making it less expensive for the people whose cars need tuning.

charlotte is only 4 1/2 hours away. you can easily go over the night before, stay in a motel, get your car tuned first thing in the morning so you can drive it around charlotte for a bit and make sure it's right with enough time to take it back and get them to fix it that day, then come home. i really think that's the best way for you to go.

 

which time? i've posted a bunch of the times in this thread

 

Oops, my bad. That was directed toward gunnyhighway.

 

oh, and the role of the gyroscope is to account for bank and attitude (side to side and up and down). since the g-tech is only used in one dimension (flat roads) instead of the 3 dimensions planes and submarines operate in, the gyros are unnecessary.

 

Ya know, I really don't recall. I was fixated on the trap so much I didn't pay attention to it. I want to say 14.1x??? Which would make since given the amount of tire spin I had with my bald Kumho's. Generally 98mph=13.9ish ET if memory serves me correctly.

 

Id hazard at a trapspeed of ~95-96 at the track from what Ive seen so far with other peoples results.

 

Or when a car leans in a corner (RR g-tech), or rotates on launch, or. . .

RBob.

 

This is why we tell folks to get started on chip burning BEFORE they install that new motor. Gives them a chance to understand and perform the basics of data logging, chip burning, and modifying the calibration data. Then once that shiny new motor goes in the chip burning is much easier.

Everyone started out as a novice.

RBob.

 

Most people can only read so much, without using the info., before they start getting confused.

Yes, for some, it's not too easy to learn, that's why there's an entire forum, just for learning about chips, ie the DIY PROM forum.

You might also research how many people have had bad luck with custom chips. For the price of some chips, you can get all the equipment to burn your own. And not be at someone's mercy about what they call close enough.

 

Or worse yet, you pay all that money, they don't really do anything, your car still runs like crap, and you can't get them to help you with it.

 

There is far to much hate going around for PROM and chip burning companies on this site. If the companies were as bad as some people on here make them out to be, then they wouldn't still be in business.

I'm not sayin' one way or another, but to me it's no different than alot of other mods we do. I know I could change out my rear end gears or camshaft if I wanted to by simply learning how to and buying the right tools, but I don't. I pay for it. I'm not saying one is better or not, I'm just pointing out the disdain that runs rampent on this board for anybody who even mentions "mail order PROMs" , yet noone has any issue with people taking their cars in to get the rear end rebuilt.

 

Theyre still in buisness because people will still pay. There is a big difference between taking your car out to get a gearset put in and having someone do a prom for you. Although 9 times out of 10 that someone works on my car they either do a crappy job or dont do what I asked, so maybe there isnt that much of a difference...

 

sigh ... i knew they'd start this when i wrote that post.

they refuse to accept the fact that there is a large contingent of third gen enthusiasts who will read the stickies on chip burning, scratch their heads and say "what????".

they are disdainful, short and even angry with people who aren't able to understand them.

they directed us to the diy board, but if you go there and post asking for help, all you get is a bunch of smartass posts directing you to the stickies or to do a search; so, you're left in an awful catch-22 where you've read the stickies and still don't understand, and all you get when you go to the people who do understand is posts directing you to the stickies you didn't understand in the first place. and around and around you go.

all the while, you'll be made to feel stupid and/or full of gall for daring to waste their time.

i actually agree that generic, mail order, off-the-shelf chips leave a lot to be desired. however, there are a number of chip burners out there who have you send them datalogs and custom burn a chip for you; all through the mail. check this thread out

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...ght=mike+crews

this is one of the most informative threads i've ever followed on here. it relates to the current discussion in that it's about a naturally aspirated 383 camaro with 323 gears and street tires and full exhaust that drives out to the track, pulls up to the line in "d" and runs low, low, low 12 second times (with no nitrous) .... and with a mail-order chip. how many of the disdainful experts can do the same?

the bottom line is everyone has different skillsets, budgets and priorities. what's the best way for one person is the worst way for someone else. the problem i have with many of the experienced chip-tuners on here is that they react with hostility towards any way other than their own, and heap scorn and derision on anyone who either disagrees with them or is unable to understand or duplicate their effots. even if you do agree to try and do it their way, they sneer at you when you can't do it.

for wot operation, there is no better way to tune a car than on a dyno with a wideband 02 sensor. period. i have many friends who've taken their efi fords to regional dyno days around the country, spent 30 minutes on the dyno and shelled out 150 bucks in order to drive away with their cars running better and faster than they ever did with months of tuning on their tweecers. i'd often wondered why there wasn't anything similar for us, but have been told there isn't enough demand to make it worthwhile for the tuners to travel around. gunny, if i were you, i'd absolutely go to see the pcmforless.com guys in charlotte. i'll be going to ed wright here in tulsa and will keep you updated on the progress ... maybe.

the truth is, after over two years of hearing this garbage, i'm so disgusted i think i'm ready to yank the tbi off and throw a carb on it. no emissions here in tulsa forcing me to stick with efi and no desire to take any more of this crap.

 

I'm headed up to PCMforless in 2 weeks actually. I'm doing the datalogging thing for now (thanks Dimented for your help on that ) and had actually ordered a PROMinator, but there was a SNAFU with PayPal, so the order never went through. With that being said, after talking to those guys, and the info I've read about tuning with a WideBand, I said the hell with it, I'll go up there. The car does good as is with the TBIchips.com chip in right now, but I KNOW it's leaving alot of the table.

Maybe when it's all said and done I WILL actually trap at 98mph. (175mph via the GTech )

 

Believe you me; if it wasn't for the yearly test here, I would have built this thing for a nice Demon Carb. But a'lass, I knew what the situation was and went with the mild cam and smog manifold.

 

Gunny, in trying to put PROM burning into perspective. It is the one item that can make or break a setup. It is also an area that on many occasions needs to be re-visited. When upgrades are made to a vehicle, such as a higher stall, different transmission, swap heads, or even the intake manifold, this generally needs to be followed up by some chip tuning.

With the analogy of comparing chip tuning to setting up a rear, apples and onions. Sorry, but it's true. How often does a rear need to be setup? And if the induction system is changed, how often does the rear need to be re-setup? Unless it's a ratio change, it doesn't.

Comparing mail order chips to farming out a rear setup is again not a comparison that can be made. Setting up a rear is a mechanical endeavor. The pattern is set, backlash is set, bearing preload is set, all items that don't depend upon the rest of the drivetrain, or even the weight of the vehicle.

Where the tuning of the EFI system does depend upon every other facet of the vehicle. A mail order PROM is a guess, nothing more. Just like setting up a rear without a dial-indicator or marking compound. That too would be a guess. But you wouldn't let someone setup the rear for your car like that.

RBob.

 

Yes, you should put a carb on there. You are not the first I've told that to and I'm sure won't be the last. When I hear that someone has no desire to learn PROM tuning I respond with: if you are going to keep the engine stock, then just leave it stock and don't worry about it. However, if you are going to modify it then put a carb on it.

However, be warned that the local emissions testing facility may have something to say about that. Let alone the bypassing of Federally mandated emissions requirements.

To everyone else reading this thread, go see what seanof30306 is complaining about on the diy_prom board: fire up a search, put his name in as the author (seanof30306) and select diy_prom as the forum. Only a half dozen threads, read them in chronological order, very enlightening.

RBob.

 

yes, very enlightening. here's my first post on the board. i'd read something that was on point to a topic and let the original poster know. you'll notice when grumpy came on pooh-poohing that he hadn't read the aticle, just attacked on general principle. by the way, accel now sells a harness exactly like the one i mentioned as an accessory for it's gen vii dfi.

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...ht=seanof30306


here's another fun ride. i asked a simple question and got smacked down on general principle, of course, with no answer to my original question till quite a bit of back and forth.

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...ht=seanof30306


here's one that's not that bad. while i did get the normal "use the search button" at first, a little pleading actually got a few helpful replies. more importantly, they weren't condescending.

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...ht=seanof30306


here's another great example. took the time to take and upload pics to clearly outline the questions, and dependable old grumpy comes along and ridicules me for where i bought the part and the fact that i didn't make it myself.

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...ht=seanof30306


and then there's the prominator post. i don't weigh in till page three with my thoughts. amazingly, rather than being attacked, i get a number of intelligent replies, reasonably stated. maybe it's because i was talking about things i do know a lot about, instead of trying to learn more about things i don't.

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...6&pagenumber=3

if you really want an education, go back about a year on that board, then look back for a year or so prior to that. look at the posts where people ask simple, basic questions and see what happens to them. as is my habit, before i started asking questions, i went back to the beginning of the board and looked at on-point threads. over and over again, someone asks a question and gets smacked down or makes a suggestion and is ridiculed.

you don't understand, rbob .... you made my point for me. the purpose of this site is to share information. the attraction to most who sign on here is to learn more about their cars, but, let someone be stupid enough to ask a question and they're smacked down like the gopher who sticks his head up in the arcade game.

there are people who don't. dewey and jon prevost, for example. unfortunately, there are far more people like you (and even worse) on here. it's a freakin' buzzkill.

i also noticed you had no comment on the tpi camaro in the low 12s with the mail order chip. you can't refute it, so you ignore it? yup. all you're interested in is defending your agenda and trivializing anyone or anything that appears to fly in the face of it. i can't wait till gunny comes back with before and after dyno numbers from pcmforless.com. wonder how you'll dump on that?

 

Sean your problem is you have soft skin, those are some of the nicest post I've seen grumpy leave. In almost every one of those post your question was answered, not as clearly as a text book, but they were answered. Rbob is probably one of the nicest guys on this board and he also happens to be one of the most informative guys. If he says something it's because he has a very good reason to. His comment about swapping to carb is exactly the truth, and he in no way "smacked you down" that was an honest response to an honest question. Chip tuning is HARD it's not for everyone. Yeah it comes to some quicker than others, you just have to decide if dabling in electronics and programing is your thing.

As for the guy running 12's with mail order, sure it's possible, but I assure you he has somthing to gain from a chip tuner that works on his car in person. Gunny is doing the right thing by GOING TO pcm for less those guys are actually going to do some hands on tuning, there's nothing wrong with that, if you can't diy for whatever reason thats the way you should do it, and thats fine, no one is going to loose any sleep over it, the info is here for the people willing to work for it, I did, it took me over a years worth of reading and another year worth of actually doing it to get a good handle on it, not easy by any means, but I'm a better car guy because of it.

 

I'm glad you found it enlightening, got quite defensive, now didn't we?

And I do understand. You keep lumping me in with anyone that you have had a 'misunderstanding' with. In all of your posts on diy_prom, did I once do a 'buzzkill' on you? Nope, not a one. Yet you insinuate that I did.

Regarding the 12-sec NA car that is running mid 12's (not the "low, low 12's" as you stated). I'll have to apologize for not posting an immediate response, sorry. It takes time to read a long thread such as that one (with default posts/page it is 9 pages long).

I too found it an interesting read. Since you are such the expert I'll let you explain how he managed to do that while using a 'mail order' chip.

Later,

RBob.

 

Sean,

Part of this is the way you approach things, and post your responses. I'm not going to stand here an defend certain people, I know that they can be rather blunt. I will defend RBob, I PM him questions I have regarding old posts, he sometimes has had to explain things to me 3 or 4 times, but he always does. The thing is, when you ask a technical question, you will get a technical response, thats they way it works. I the thread you are complaining about the most, you got an answer in the first post, it just wasn't the answer you wanted. As you said, these boards are for sharing information. The infomation is there, and frankly, some of us get tired of answering the same question over, and over, and over. Guys like RBob, are here to HELP, how often do you see him post asking for help? that means all those other posts, are him taking his time to help others, and share his knowledge. He doesn't have to do that, he is offering FREE help to just about anyone who is willing to actualy listen, and take his advice. That goes for almost all of the very knowedgeable people. There is also a certain amount of responsiblilty on your part, your car will not tune itself, at some point you just have to dive in there and start doing it. There was a time when I was at they point you were. in fact, if you dig thru the searches, you will find a post by me, saying the exact same thing about the DIY board. Eventauly, I just did it, got the stuff, and started doing it. Once I did, all that information that made no sense while I was just reading it, became clear. I would image there are very few people who are actualy incapable of tuning, if they put in the effort.

 

you should have read deeper. there's a reason that's one of the longest-running threads on the board. by the time he was fineshed, after swapping cams and doing some more long-distance, mail order chip tuning, the car ran a best of 12.03. that IS low, low 12s.

and that is a perfect example of why i get pissed at you. you read the first post in a 9 page thread and immediately pronounced me wrong. you don't take the time to look into it, you just shoot from the hip with a snide remark. i HAVE read that thread, and know what i'm talking about. before you go telling me i'm wrong, you should do more than take a cursory glance before passing judgement.

it doesn't take an expert, just someone who checks to be sure before he shoots his mouth off.

 

for every thread about a guy who has success with one of those chips, how many threads are there were people are disapointed? There are always the expection to the rule, any everyone likes to point those out. Like the guy who went 13.2 on a stock 305 TPI. or the guys with 305 TBI's who go 14's without touching it, it happens, but its the expection.

 

So, you can't explain how he managed to do it with a 'mail order' chip. Hmm, OK.

And to quote you "it relates to the current discussion in that it's about a naturally aspirated 383 camaro with 323 gears and street tires and full exhaust that drives out to the track, pulls up to the line in "d" and runs low, low, low 12 second times (with no nitrous) .... and with a mail-order chip. "

When he did that he was running mid 12's. I think you are the one that needs to go back and re-read the thread. . .

(I must say too, you sure did make a mess of Gunny's thread)

RBob.

 

yes! chip tuning is hard. my point exactly. so, when someone is trying to learn how to do it, they shouldn't be made to feel stupid. yet, time and again, someone beginner asks a question on that diy board and they get pommelled.

i only posted 6 times on the diy board because i saw what happened to others when they asked beginners questions, and, when i saw the same thing happen to me, decided i didn't want to deal with it.

dewey is right, the people on here who do most of tha answering of questions are contributing much more than they benefit. what bothers me is that some of those same people see any attempt to discuss or debate anything as an attack or some kind of disrespect for their contribution. their word is final. look at the "low 12s" thing with rbob. he sneers at me for being an "expert" when i assert the tpi camaro ran "low, low 12s" because he saw that it ran 12.50s in the first post in the thread. there were 9 pages in that thread. if he'd taken the time to read just a little bit, he would've followed the ongoing story of how a guy who doesn't know all that much about cars, but who is patient, determined and VERY thorough in his research managed to get truly amazing results; way beyond what the generally accepted limits of that combination are supposed to be.

if discussion and debate are quashed, new things are never learned. one of the things i set out to do when i started messing with my car is to put some of those commonly-heald beliefs to the test when they don't make sense to me. i don't know jack about chip tuning, but i've been playing with cars for over 30 years and had an 11 second street (a real, daily-driven street car) more than 20 years ago, when that was a very, very rare thing.

one of the assumptions i challenged was header primary tube size. ask the question here or on the exhaust board about whether you should use 1 5/8" primaries or 1 3/4" primaries on a 305 tbi car and they'll emphatically assert that the bigger tube headers will kill your torque. didn't make sense to me. shorties aren't tuned, anyway, and they don't flow nearly as well as long tubes, so i didn't think that would be the case. since my plan was to only do the exhaust once and i plan to go with a 383 or 400 once the poor old 305 gives up the ghost, i decided to take a chance.

i can tell you, with absolute certainty, that big tube headers do not kill torque on a 305. i dynod the car before and after the exhaust, and i picked up horsepower AND torque throughout the entire rpm range. if i'd just accepted the commonly-held belief, i would never have learned that. when i posted the results, several people still insisted i was wrong, despite the fact that i had DONE it and had concrete results.

what i find most offensive is the need to ridicule and insult people who disagree with you. look at the tone of the discourse between rbob and i. the sneer is obvious in every word he writes? why? i'd expect it from some 16 year old determined to put a blower, twin turbos and nitrous on his tbi camaro so it can jump coke bottles at stoplights and run 9s in the quarter, but not from adults.

 

and you STILL haven't read the thread. it's all right there. explain? i did. "after swapping cams and doing some more long-distance, mail order chip tuning, the car ran a best of 12.03. that IS low, low 12s.". you didn't even bother to read my reply to your post before you resumed your attack. he did that and ran a 12.03. drove to the track. ran the same street tires he ran every day. left the full street exhaust up. pulled up to the line, stuck it in "d" and ran 12.03. what part of this are you unable to process? i personally saw him run a 12.10 at atlanta dragway. full street trim.

i don't need to re-read the thread ... you need to read it in the first place, at least, you should if you're going to shoot your mouth off and insult me.

jesus, you're supposed to be a moderator, aren't you?

 

I think We've had enough of this for now...