wahoo

Hi Guys,
I ve never seen a dyno chart concerning the stock 1992 LO3.
So I'm looking for a test drive article of a 1992 TBI camaro with a dyno chart of this engine.
If someone can help me.

travishenry

Not sure of the dyno chart but i know that the lo3 has like 175ish hp and 230ish pds of TQ.

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

your going to be dissapointed LOL .... they only did what a crossfire car or an LG-4 car could ... Did see one article though about racing one on foot the LO-3 lost for the first 50 feet but managed to come out ahead in the long run J/K

they were only good for maybe high 15's to mid to low 16's ... governed to maybe 105mph ... 170hp ... 240 ft lbs of torque ... just a good torquey V-8 is all that got decent MPG and was in the middle of good engine-bad engine

racer J

Unless you find someone that did a baseline run on their car prior to any mods I doubt you're going to see one. Some engine simulation software MIGHT get you close.


HOWEVER, there is a dyno chart at the motor for a low compresison carbed 305 (LG4 I beleive) vs the same engine with a cam and Vortec heads. They may have swapped the carb and intake as well.

CLICK ME

The LO3 at the motor should be fairly similar as far as the curves go. Maybe worse in some spots thanks to crappy heads and exhaust.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

The L03 is a great engine, it's just not a performance engine.

Kevin91Z

iTrader: (1)

I dont remember what RPMs, but my old 92 RS when it was stock with a T5 tranny dynoed at 150 HP and 200 TQ. With a stock IROC 2.75" exhaust it went up to 158 HP and 220 TQ. Automatics usually dyno about 145 HP when stock.

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

This is why I love vettes ... You don't find taxi cab engines in them .... They are in a league of there own.

travishenry

do they have governor in them??/ Cuz i had mine up to like 135 on the highway 99 B 4. mine i know is all stock sept the msd and polished intake, tbi, exhaust. I know cus my friend james has an rx7 and i was curious to see how fast it would go. he said between 130-135. Its all stock.

flaming-ford

iTrader: (7)

i dyno'd my old l03 car with open element and catback and i got a 151hp to the wheels (automatic). Can't remember the torque but, it peaks at 3900 rpms for hp and tq was flat 2k up.

mine was running realy rich due to some unknown condition + it was on a mustang dyno that may or may not have been dialed in perfectly at the time so take it with a grain of salt.

Next time i take my new camaro out to have it dyno'd i'll print the chart and photo copy it up here.

Al Hasse

You are correct. I dynoed mine last year to get a baseline for a bone stock motor. I forget offhand what the peak RPM was, but peak HP was 142 to the wheels and max torque was about 225 lb/ft. I'll dig up the CD later and check it out. BTW, it is governed at 112 mph, at least that's where mine hit the limiter.

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

drop a 7747 ecm with a 5.7 suburban chip and the governer will be gone

Al Hasse

I found the CD from that dyno run. I have a graph of all three runs superimposed on each other. A little hard to read, the HP and TQ numbers are at the top left.

My bone stock LO3 1989 RS Camaro...

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

gutless wonder ... but hey, it was consistant hahaha

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

That is with the help of headers and DIY prom tuning. Still just a little stock swirl port head, peanut cammed 305 TBI though, with the stock TBI and stock Intake manifold.



I was in the left lane in a 5,500 lbs G20 van with 3.08 gears and 29" tall tires (gutless combo)

BronYrAur

iTrader: (1)

Yep, Fast355 shows it best, see what exhaust work and some tuning can do to these motors, they aren't THAT bad of motors, they were just crippled from the factory.

That dyno sheet shown by "Al Hasse" is a bone stock, from the factory configuration. Look at the AFR, it's wayy richer than it should be to make the most power, throughout the entire RPM range of the dyno, not just a few spots. I also know for a fact the ignition timing is way less than optimal from the factory. This is why so many of us preach diy tuning. Tune that bone stock car at WOT and I guarantee it picks up a TON of power.

kdrolt

The factory rates the LO3 at 170 fwhp @ 4000 rpm IIRC. A stock LO3 in good condition and in good tune will dyno 140-150 rwhp through a 700R4 or 4L60 in either an Fcar or Bcar (same exact engine and cam; both used crappy quiet exhausts). The above dyno plots agree well with these #s. An LO3 driving through a manual trans would have a slightly higher output.

The civvy LO5, rated at 180 fwhp, again in good condition & tune, will dyno 165-170 rwhp in the Bcar with the 700R4 (4L60). The 9C1 LO5 will dyno 175-185 rwhp depending on what year: 1989-1990 were 190 fwhp, 1991 was 195 fwhp, and 92-93 were 205 fwhp.

I agree completely that better (non factory tuning) and a better exhaust will improve any of the above. HTH.

Codename 47

iTrader: (4)

Seriously, what the hell.

First off, spelling and grammar. What's with all this slang ****. Good lord.

Second, good job on getting your 305 to go 135 on a public road; you're the man. I don't recall this thread topic being top speed.

travishenry

Why start gettin on me i didnt say nething to you so worry about you self. And it was on a highway so your wrong.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

Hey man, HIGHWAY = PUBLIC ROAD.

Codename 47

iTrader: (4)

Because I'm sick of people like you on this site. You're all 15, you have no grammar knowledge, and you all post stupid stuff. That's great that you got your Camaro up to 135. It's like you guys are posting to try and be "cool". Why don't you tell us some sweet stories about how you street raced with your buddies. This is why I don't come to this site much anymore. It's filled with a bunch of 15 year old kids who think their stock 80s Camaro is hot ****.

Poppa Chubby

Just be glad he was in a 305 TBI car and not something quicker/faster.
Darwin has a way of clearing things up.

BTW - I owned a '90 305 TBI Camaro. What a slug.
A friend of mine owned one as well.
We used to race each other at the strip and all of our races were pretty close - I'd usually edge him with my '01 4.7L Dakota.
We both ran LOW 16s all night long.
Impressive, I know.

corky9491

You are a ****ing retard.

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

I think some of you are brutal on TBI ... Thats not the downfall of the LO-3 it's mearly a minute factor .... everything below it is the cause from it's 6 banger type exhaust to lousy cam, heads, intake.

My L-98 runs pretty strong with LO-3 induction however it has TPI 350 exhaust.

I personally think with TPI exhaust and better cam and a edelbrock intake a LO-3 could stay with a TPI car relatively easy. TPI in itself isn't about horsepower it's 305 only made what 190-230 through the years but no changes were done to the tpi to achieve this. It was all about cam/exhaust/compression/prom changes. Another thing that kept TPI's in another league then TBI's was the gearing itself.

So take a LO-3 add a edelbrock manifold, TPI exhaust, TPI cam, TPI heads, and some 3.42's and I will bet it can stay with and stock TPI car simple as that.

Kevin91Z

iTrader: (1)

And for the money you spend converting a TBI car to TPI specs you can buy another car that came with TPI.

Ovrclck350

So, only exhaust, heads, cam, and intake is the problem. You just named 3/4 of the engine right there.

Ovrclck350

Your first sentence should have an "a" before governor and "do" should be capitalized.

Because.
Before.
Mine should be capitalized.
Except.
"MSD, polished intake, TBI, and exhaust." Learn how to combine nouns in a sequence.
Because. ONCE AGAIN.
He should be caplitalized.


Do you ever wonder why they spend so much time on spelling and grammar in school? In case you didn't, I'll explain the 2 reason as simply as possible:
1. It creates a common template for conveying thoughts across. IT HELPS PEOPLE UNDERSTAND YOU.
2. When you don't use proper spelling and grammar, not only are your messages not always clearly interpreted and understood by others, but you come off like a complete retard. No one likes helping a retard because it takes too much time.

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

No I am not saying that .... I am just saying TBI isnt the problem why a TBI car is a dog is all!
----------
And still have something equally depressing. TPI cars are the same dog's as a LO-3 just not as bad.

85irocz355tpi

I had an 89 rs with the tbi 305. It was a pooch but it had a v8 and I was 15 when I bought it. They mad 170 Hp at 4400 RPM and 255 LB FT at 2400 RPM. And are governed at 115 MPH. If you take a chip from a tbi 305 or 350 truck you can lose the governor though. I agree that the LO3 was a dog from the factory and the gearing didn't help at all but mine had 282,000 miles on it when I sold it and it still ran like a champ. We Put a set of 3.73's in it after i sold it to my friend and It smoked my 305 TPI Iroc-z.

mike_c

iTrader: (13)

racer J

Yea the same 3/4 that are wrong almost EVERY engine from that time period regardless of make or model. The only thing TPI honestly has over TBI is torque and the ability to fuel beyond 520 HP. All he was doing was comparing a LO3 to a LB9/L98 if they had the same cam, heads, exhaust from the factory to showcase that not ALL the power difference is because of the fuel injection system.

Another example would be doing the same cam, head, and exhaust modifications to a factory LO3 and a factory LB9/L98. That's pretty much the 3/4 of an engine modification EVERYONE does to EVERY car once they start modding it even the ALMIGHTY LSx.

Kevin91Z

iTrader: (1)

I'm not depressed with my TPI car. I quite enjoy it. Not to mention the TPI cars also usually have a better base to start with in the name of rear end gears, disc brakes, better suspension, etc.
But I hear a lot of TBI owners complaining and wanting to change.
But its your car and every car is special in its own way.

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

he must have forgot about the peanut cam days ... So ok lets go there it's an equal cam to the LO-3 beast ... what did they make in those days 190hp just 20 more then TBI. So a de-tuned TPI motor making a lousy 20hp more then a TBI car ... I think that credits TPI offers no significant power over TBI only torque. So lets take away 3.42 gears and drop in some 3.08's ... then what will a peanut cammed TPI be a high 15 second car just like a LO-3

Jason89RS

iTrader: (2)

The TPI cars definitely got the better suspension, brakes and gearing, there's no argument there. Yes us TBI guys are trying to upgrading all that stuff.
I think the same ole argument is if you were to take the same motor and dyno it with a TPI system and then dyno it with a TBI system I doubt there would be much of a HP difference.

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

true but the better suspension and 4wdb didn't come automatically with TPI just available is all ... and that stuff has no bearing on performance. Back in the day you could order a V-6 camaro coupe with F-41 suspension now with less nose weight I would surely think it could out handle the Z-28. Even with 3.08 rear gears once moving my TBI engine pulls pretty dam good. Not like the 3.73 but it can still easily walk a LO-3 and TPI 305.

Maybe middle of next month I will put 350 electronics in and have a chip burned and dyno the car ... I'm fairly certain it will be within a respectfully close margin to a tpi 350.

89RsPower!

the 350's with crossfire were pretty much just that, except for gas mileage. The L69 t-5 maro of the day was faster in the 1/4th too..

89RsPower!

I thought you were selling it and buying a v6 vert? If it is dynoed will it be with the roto-charger or without?

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

Lets not forget the 1981 L81 with its computer carb and a lousy 190 hp. Around 1976-1977 they hit an all time low hp 350 with less than 180 hp. Oh, then they had the little LG4 as the ONLY California engine in the 1980 Corvette.

brodyscamaro

1982 Corvettes aren't. What were they factory rated at? About 200hp. Yeah a league of its own alright.

89RsPower!

I love when people make uneducated statements like that..

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

89rspower!

I just want to let you know since you are blind to the fact. I ignored you long ago and quite frankly am concerned by the fact you are persitant enough to follow me from thread to thread and directly try and start a problem.

I have to change my yahoo and AIM name since you bother me on them as well since you got them from my profile! Quite honestly 89rspower, I really don't care if I get banned for saying this but to be obsessive to the extent you are is a little on the freaky side.

85irocz355tpi

I hate to tell Jproz that no cross fire motor carried the rpo code lo3.

Codename 47

iTrader: (4)

Where did he say that?

Kevin91Z

iTrader: (1)

I've seen LB9 automatic cars anwhere from 15.2 to 15.7 and L03 automatic and stick shift cars anywhere from 15.7 to 16.2. 20 horsepower and torque is worth about half a second, it seems.

Its been done, by myself in fact. 1992 Camaro RS 5-speed with a stock IROC 2.75" exhaust dynoed at 158 HP and 220 TQ. That same car with a TPI intake and computer with no other changes dynoed at 176 HP and 290 TQ. Swapping in an LT1 cam made 187 HP and 290 TQ.

And FAST355 will discredit my numbers.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

I never have discredited your torque numbers, period. I stated that a TBI engine will often gain 30-40 ft/lbs by re-working the factory tuning. The main reason the TBI cars are such slugs all around is the lousy factory tuning GM ran in them and the horribly restrictive exhaust system. The short cam timing didn't help either. Add all that togather with an open differential and tall gears with skinny tires and you aren't getting anywhere fast.

GM decided to De-Tune to the TBI setup to make it a limp noodle, raise the price of the sexier TPI setup, and you have the makings to more money with the optional TPI setup, pretty simple from a marketing stand point.

The SAME L03 that is in the TBI cars is factory rated at 285 ft/lbs in the 1993-1995 fullsize vans and trucks, along with 185 HP.

I also EASILY see 290 ft/lbs from a L03 with a TPI setup on it and a LT1/LT4 cam. Especially with headers, good exhaust, and a good tune.

This is a LT4 cammed L03 with TPI, headers, 2,000 rpm converter, pulling a 5,500lbs van with 3.08 gears. The L03 TPI 305 combination definately is not short on torque.

89RsPower!

Honestly I'm just messing with you.. I've never messaged you on yahoo or aim so you have me confused with someone else there..

89RsPower!

Fast355 I just watched that video and I'm kinda confused.. what was being demonstrated there?

racer J

He was showing how a tiny lil 305 can yank a big *** van around without a lot of effort. I'm betting imagine that in car was being implied.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

Exactly, my reply was to Kevin91 saying that I don't doubt his RWTQ numbers. The Video is my 5,500# fullsize van turning the power on in its little 305. In a 3,200 lbs car, imagine how it would run. The van has TERRIBLE gearing as well, 3.08s with 29" tall tires.

S105.7

nice ******* wagon

flaming-ford

iTrader: (7)

damn that afr was downright scary. I thought it was just my tbi car that had that problem. Seems they were all tuned horribly fat.......

whats with that? I mean i understand running fat up top for a safety margin but, 10 to 1 is just plane dumb, **** another couple points and it would be too rich to burn at all.........

i remember mine dyno'd at high 10 to 1 ratio to mid 11 to 1 ratios. I also had a few bolt ons so i figured mine if anything should have read lean???? It did seem to dyno right on with what other people are showing though, to bad it reached its demise or i would have made my regulator adjustable and tried again.

are tpi cars the same in this aspect? because, i have a 89 maf 305 5 spd car now and it seems to run with the same overall rich condition (dark plugs black tailpipe) Even a little smoke from the pipes sometimes. It also should if anything run lean as it has all bolt ons, other than msd box and roller rockers....

sometimes you just gotta scratch your head as to y an engineer would detune something for no apparent reason........