87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Had my car dyno tuned today. I'll post the graph later, as their printer didn't work, so they have to send it to me.
I don't recall the rpms but
hp: 220
tq: 296

Unfortunatley the graph did start until 2500rpm and by that point the torque was already falling. But its nice to know.

L98 0.030" bored
stock heads
zz4 cam
AS&M runners
portmatched plenum and base
K&N's
SLP 1 3/4" headers
catco cat
edelbrock catback
700-r4
9-bolt

The tuning was done by Alvin of PCMforless. I feel he did a very nice job. He picked up about 20hp

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

with that said i will address some of the questions in the other thread before it got out of hand.

Why wasn't the torque higher? Like I said, the dyno didn't start reading until about 2500rpm or so. By this time the torque was already dropping. I have no doubt the real max torque is about 315-320ish. Horsepower does seem a little low, especially compared to Kats numbers in the other thread. But i'm not to worried about it. It is what it is. Before the tune it ran 14.0 @ 97mph. It feels much stronger now. Also it seemed like everyone was dynoing a little lower than usual. So I can't say. But nice numbers for Kat.

Kat

iTrader: (4)

Thanks man. I thought that yours was going to be a bit higher. Then again more compression might have something to do with it.

So far the best that I've gotten my car to run is 13.7@103 with a 2.1 60' and me not shifting really well.

Kat

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

What is your compression? Mine is 10:1

Kat

iTrader: (4)

Same here with the Felpro 1094's

Kat

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Here you go, forget the first run, timing was way way down from when i was playing with it, and the fuel pressure was too high. The second run was actually not the best, not sure why then sent this one to me. But it was close enough.

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

Thanks for the post. Your graph is typical of the TPI system. Maximum torque around the 3500rpm area and horsepower about 4500rpm then starts dropping. Your airfuel ratio looks pretty good in the upper ranges. Looks like you could use a little more leaning in the lower ranges but it's not to bad. If you are running at the track it looks like you should be shifting no later than the 5000rpm mark. So at the motor you are around 272HP and 367Torque. Thats probably a good 40-50 horsepower over the stock rating. Allen

fireturd350

iTrader: (8)

If I had to guess it was just a bad day. My L98 with headers, catback, kn, tb bypass etc all OEM motor did 211 hp and 313 tq. At least you got an A/F chart I didn't even get that I had to pay 50 buck a pull. Keep tuning you'll get all the kinks worked out eventually.

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Yup they are nice numbers indeed. I wouldn't be suprised at higher numbers but i'm not disappointed at these either. I can't wait until the tracks open this spring. I don't have any doubt i'll break my previous best of 14.0. I think i'm looking at about 13.8ish. Thanks for the comments.

91Z28-350

Your HP and torque seem really low, particularly with a ZZ4 cam and runners. Peak torque below 2500 rpm, what? That's nuts. Peak torque on a stocker should be at 3200 rpm. You've got something wrong.

Edit: just looked at your chart, it looks like your torque is peaking about 3200, but it's still low.

My stock L98 with everything stock, not even ported plenum and stock cam put down 220HP and 320 torque with manifolds and a cat back. With headers, 245 HP and 345 torque through a T-56. That's also without a tune, and running pig rich at 11:1 AFR.

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

You do realize dynos vary. And things like weather play a role. Also, your t-56 sucks less power than my 700r-4. The important thing to note is Kats results on the same dyno the same day. The real test is 1/4 mile times. What are yours? Like i said before my best before the tune was 14.0. Which isn't too shabby. There is nothing wrong with peaking that low. Its not abnormal for TPI cars to peak around 2500ish rpm. Its a torquey cam. Also remember you have a 91 which uses the better computer. And had 20 more hp stock. The torque pecks looks like its at 3200 becasue that is where i engaged full throtttle. The dyno operator started recording just before i got in it all the way.

With that said, I do understand what you are saying, it does seems a bit low, but if there was something wrong i think i would see some real bad numbers out of it. Engines vary, and i'm sure with more miles the engine will completely break in and produce a few more horses.

91Z28-350

Yes, I realize dynos vary, but it was on a dynojet also and done at 11AM in the middle of summer and right after a drive, no cool down before getting on the dyno, and I'm running really rich at 11:1 AFR. Yes, a T-56 uses less power, but not by that much. It would be the same comparing to a T-5. My torque peaked at 3200, as spec'd from the factory.

I think it is abnormal for TPI cars to peak at 2500 rpm for torque. I was thinking that if your car peaked at 2500 rpm, perhaps your cam wasn't degreed properly. It's possible you've got a mismatch with your heads, but I don't know anything about the flow numbers expected from your heads. The graph indicates 3550, but I'm not sure about starting the dyno before you get into it. Mashing the pedal is pretty instantaneous.

True, the 91 puts down 245 hp from the factory (at the crank), but you've got a ZZ4 cam with an intake upgrade, and higher compression. The differences, other than the computer, were the cam and dual cats. The ZZ4 cam compared to my stock cam is way more aggressive than my cam compared to a stock 87 cam.

I know an 89 that put down about 215 on the same dyno with the stock exhaust in all it's restrictive glory and a stock 700R4. Stock engine too. He pulled a low 14@97 IIRC with a slipping TC and bad rear end, pinging, and fully loaded too (options and didn't remove the spare tire for the run). By all accounts I've got 30hp+ on him with about 40+ torque. Assuming all else is well, I should run better than him easily...but I don't, for mechanical reasons.

1/4 mile times depend on weight, so they vary too. There's also driver skill. My times aren't great, basically because my posi is shot (too much play and lots of clunking) and my clutch is slipping. My car is also fully loaded. If I dump the clutch at 3000 rpm, my car sits there and the engine revs freely and smokes to hell. If I dump at 2000 rpm, it sputters. I have to slip off the line, no fast launches. A civic can take me off the line by 2 car lengths before I can move without sputtering. It's been that way for over a year, and I probably won't fix it before a new engine.

Kat

iTrader: (4)

Here is the graph from my best run.. Yeah I have a bit of work to do on the tuning. I'm getting it there lil by lil.

Kat

White91GTA

Here is my graph from Saturday.

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

I want to thank you guys for taking the time to post your dyno graphs.

White 91GTA is your throttle opening all the way? The reason I ask is that I have never seen a torque curve like that on a TPI engine. Yours should be similiar to the others in shape. There is something amiss.

I want to repost my dyno results in this post to show how the SLP "fully siamesed" runners can move the power up the rpm range. Notice peak torque is about 1000rpms higher. The torque graph is now flatter and the peak is less than Kats. Horsepower is a solid 500rpms higher up. The runner length has been shortend a good 6+ inches with the mods I did. Allen

White91GTA

1989GTATransAm...myself and several of the guys that were at the shop on Saturday think that I may have only been running on 7 cylinders. I am really leaning towards this because for a while, I was running 10:1 A/F and haven't changed the plugs since I got the new tune and straightened out that problem.

As for the throttle opening...I am pretty sure that it was opening all the way.

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

If you were running on seven cylinders that would explain alot. Your torque curve should not be dying off like that. Allen

White91GTA

I am going to replace the plugs here really soon. Don't know if I will dyno again after that or not though. If I do, I will post the graph then too.

C20T/A

I have seen several graphs like that.

My truck with a 260 horse crate engine has that exact graph with the exception of the fact that I am running a TH-400 and it absorbs about 20 more horsepower and torque than yours.

I have also seen many other stock gm gen 1 engines do this exact same thing. including (tbi tahoe, tbi 4.3 s-10(lower graph obvously but same shape) , and a friend of mines 305 TPI elky)

I don't think you are running on 7, I think you have a GM stump puller.



also look at the graph on this page.
http://stealthram.com/dynoresults.html

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

Hi C20TA

That is another STRANGE graph. What ever happened to the torque and horsepower meeting at about 5250RPM. On that one it looks like they meet at 3650rpm. At least on White91GTA they meet at the proper rpm. Allen

Twilightoptics

FINALLY SOME REALISTIC NUMBERS!

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Are you reffering to mine?

White91GTA

Just pulled the valve covers and discovered where part of my problem lies.....its in the junk 193 heads .

norcalz28

iTrader: (13)

87350IROC, what were the conditions when you dyno'd. What type of dyno was it. I also dyno'd my car the same day as 91- 350-z28, and I can vouch for the fact that both our cars dyno'd a bit higher in bone stock form. Not trying to knock or anything, but I would have thought that with headers, exhaust, intake mods to boot, you would have dyno'd a tad higher. Mine was 214/312 with paper filters. Only mod was a cutout after the cat. Car was bone stock other than that. Let us know whats going on. I am sure your car has more power hiding there somewhere

Will

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

No. I was refering to the one mentioned by C20T/A through his link. Allen

eric305TPI

Here is c20 t/a's graph.

Look up, Now it is on his post.

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

It was a dynojet. It was around 45 degrees at the time. The graph is SAE corrected. The car made about 10 more hp/tq on the uncorrected curve. Personally i don't mind the numbers, while they seem a little low I am running high 13s with it. And ultimately 1/4 times are what i'm interested in, not hp numbers. With that said others were showing low numbers on that day on that dyno, so I can't say what exactly was going on with the dyno. One of the guys there had a formula which he dynoed there at a previous date at 360whp. This time he had an aftermarket tb and lost 20hp.

Kennerz

Remember

PCM for less sucks- Alvin is not an expert you're probably losing HP with his tune- you're low TQ rpm shows something is not 100% I tried PCM for less and my car didn't run- with no refund- bad vendor- went to a local tuner with a strong reputation- now my car will pull evo III's hang with M3's - basically most stuff on the street- my car with the old combo -(ported stock heads, ported stock runners, comp XE264 cam, stock TB, and SLP headers) would beat stock, and lightly modified supra turbo's (93~97') consistently so with your mod's probably something in either the tune, or the mech adjustments( Timing, valves, FP) is off a little. I would think you would be closer to 240~250 rwhp

don't use PCM for less unless you have a LT1 or LS1- don't let Alvin topuch your stuff, he has the touch of $h**

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

You had your car dyno tuned by alvin in San Diego? Wow, i didn't know he traveled that far to dyno days. I thought he only did mail order chips for long distance. I don't don't know what to say dude, car ran 14.0s with 205 whp. Now with his tune i have 220 whp. Dropped me solidly into the 13s.

So what times are you running in the 1/4? And what mods?

1MeanZ

iTrader: (9)

Dont wanna make waves here but the 305 in my sig just put 230 hp 282tq to the wheels last friday. it made over 200hp from 3200 to 5300 and over 250tq from 2800 to 4800 so yah the curve was real flat too. just some #s for reference. I went 13.9 with a single 2.5" flowmaster, in a few weeks I am gonna run it with my new tires, suspension mods, and new exhaust. Hopin for 13.70s

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Well there you go. I'm running just as fast as you. And i have "less" hp. I'm pretty confident i'm not any lighter than you. Plus you have a bigger cam, bigger convertor, suspension mods, better rockers, much better lighter heads. Those are nice times though, nice work. Once again guys we all know dynos vary and i'm okay with the numbers, if something was "wrong" i'm sure it wouldn't run nearly as well/smooth as it does. I think my stock base is really killing me at this point.
Thanks for the input
John

Anti-Venom

For comparison:

SLP 1 3/4" headers, cat and air delete. Flowmaster catback. K&N, descreened MAF. Airfoil. Nothing else touched. also a point rich on A/F's

Mustang #'s recently factory tech calibrated dyno.

239hp 298lbft.

Not trying to hate but your numbers seem low for everything you have done. especially for a dynojet run.

Kennerz

in reply to 87' no Alvin didn't dyno tune my car in SD from NC. Just compared to the professionals I deal with he was a bozo and his stuff did not work with no refund- there was a guy on these boards a few years back named bort62 - he burned me a chip for the price of a chip + postage, and my car ran bitchin with my old combo, his turn arround was quick , and any problems with re-burns he corrected asap - PCM for less on the other hand - service sucked - product did not work - that is a crappy vendor in my book - hate to say it but sounds as if you really don't know a whole lot about what your doing either- 220 hp and high 13's arent really a whole lot to write home about. a stock wrx would probably give you trouble. Not putting you down - it's a good start- but please don't compare - I have found out what works over a long period of going over and through everything , and know how and what works- tuning these cars takes time to get sorted out - and I still think you are over looking some thing in the tune - I bet you have another 20 hp or more hiding somewhere- and both my cars run very well thank you - better than a 14 or 13.9 and 220rwhp type of run well

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

I'm not sure how my hp numbers determine how much i know about cars/engines. There are some great engineers at honda stuck building 120hp engines. I agree alvins mail order chips suck, i had one, first it didn't work, he replaced it and the second didn't do anything for performance. I think he is a good guy once you actually talk to him. He agreed to dyno tune my chip for no additional charge. So the $150 I spent isn't bad for a dyno tune. No offense but it doesn't sound like you know much about tuning these cars either, why else would you pay someone to make a prom for you. I never said i was excited about the numbers, i'd like to know where you got that impression. I don't have to post my numbers, i don't do it to get my jollies over 220 hp either, i'm doing it for the purpose of contributing to the site so others can take my information into consideration. I'm a poor college student who can't afford a lot of parts right now, otherwise i would have them. I've been through my engine, had it in and out, i've done heads, cam, intake many times, exhaust. blah blah blah, point being i've spent alot of time with my car, i know whats going on under the hood. About the WRXs and EVO VIIIs, their awd systems hinder top end performance, not to much trouble at high speeds.

Anyway I am still curious to know what your 88' runs. You never did say.

Oh yeah, about what you said, the fp is set at 48psi, initial timing at 8 degrees. I agree it is very possible something else may be off a little. However i'm not going to tear the engine down again on a hunch. If i noticed symptoms of a problem, certainly I would fix it, but i'm happy with it. I'm looking forward to going home next week taking the car out of storage, removing the cover, and just going on a nice long cruise. Maybe do a little racing this summer, some shows, but mostly a lot of back road cruising, and thats what its all about gentlemen.

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

A few pictures for your enjoyment as well.

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Kennerz the forth gens are nice, and fast, stock. Yours sounds similar.

1MeanZ

iTrader: (9)

87350IROC, beautiful car by the way, below is mine. My "suspension mods" consist of me welding up my stock pieces lol. and i ran the 13.9 with a single 2.5" flowmaster and poor traction. I think the car has a better ET with my exhaust, better tires, and now i have no wheelhop. not sure if you noticed but my torque numbers seem way way below most of you 350 guys, is that cuz i am over cammed or because i have a 305?

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Beautiful ride as well, i love that color in the sun. I think the lower torque numbers are due to the 305. The cam would just move the torque to higher rpms. If you look at mine, they are even low for a 350, but I really do think the dyno was reading a bit low, as others seemed to get low numbers as well. But like said, if you can't get it to the ground the extra tq doesn't help much.

Enjoy!

Kat

iTrader: (4)

I do agree that the dyno reading a bit low that day. I know that I a making a bit more power that what the graph said, just that I can't drive stick LOL

Kat

Kennerz

87' Just cause I don't have the time to burn proms doesn't mean I can't tune a car. Also I know enough to leave certain things to experts. Does it mean I can't tune a car because I let Dana at pro built built my trans vs. doing it myself? with the age of these TPI car you need to go through EVERYTHING to get them to run right, any air leaks, CTS, un adjusted-or unproperly adjusted valves. How did you install the cam? you could be a tooth off even if it looks strait up, injectors clean? fuel filter? You even admit Alvins product sucks - he has to have a dyno to burn you a chip that works -Oh yeah and my SS is close to stock but not bone stock - a strong running bolt on SS is nothing to sneeze at- especially on the top end - infact my car is a special order GM hardtop car- All slp options except the auburn posi - and it has all the suspension stuff- do all the work myself - and the only car that has pulled me arround here is either a Viper, (no chance-) ( ZO6 -(fast on top end) or a 911 turbo 01'+( only by about 3 lengths) kills are numerous

not alot of point to it but I'm not a rookie with this stuff- and I have a life outside of cars.

Just think you need to look alittle deeper into your car- not to tear appart the engine - but pull the valve covers - make sure your vaccum hose are good, check it all..

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

The car pulled good vacuum, i don't remember the number off hand as it has been a while. You are in a similar situation at myself i think. The point i was making was that with school i don't have time to burn my own chips, and i'm not with my car but 4 months of the year, and i like driving the car then. While i think alvins mail order chips aren't that great, i also can't argue with 15 hp from the tune. Fortunatley for me virtually every soft component under the hood was replaced when i pulled the engine. So all vacum hoses should be in good shape, and the TPI seems to be sealed up. No doubt i'll give it a look through when i get home. I have to get it ready for super chevy anyway.

Thanks