Jump to content
Forums Gone... but not forgotten!
Pontiac of the Month

JayByrd's 1986 Grand Prix

2024 December
of the Month

  • Rev up your passion for Pontiacs and join our vibrant community of enthusiasts!

    Whether you're a die-hard fan of classic muscle cars or you've got a soft spot for sleek modern models, you've found your home here at Forever Pontiac. Our community is dedicated to celebrating everything Pontiac, from the iconic GTO to the legendary Firebird and everything in between.

    Unlock access to expert advice, stunning photo galleries, engaging discussions, exclusive events, and more!

    Start your Pontiac journey with us today!

    Sign up now! 🏁

Recommended Posts

Posted

have a powerful car? prove your numbers and post up the sheet.

Tired of these Ads? Register Today!

  • Replies 28
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

what if i dont have a scanner?

take a pic and upload it?

Posted

take a pic and upload it?

:lol2:

Posted

lol ok, its nothing special. all i had at the time was a cai, tb, exhaust and tune. ill have to find it.

Posted

369.2 -- Full dyno tune, Mid 1 7/8th headers, Roto-fab CAI, catback exhaust with magnaflow mufflers.

(added a port matched intake manifold the next day)

27873_1462443642388_1272369186_31295000_4554483_n.jpg

28823_1462443762391_1272369186_31295001_6360110_n.jpg

Posted

Not the best quality

web.jpg?ver=12758781050005

277HP 350TQ

Was blowing out black smoke and AFR was in the 10s, I kept cranking up the boost to try to lean it out but never was able to. Needs a tune bad but not bad starting numbers.

Posted

Here are mine on the stock setup. Completely stock down to the AC Delco air filter.

3363250073_large.jpg

3363250074_large.jpg

333 HP

351 TQ

Posted

mustang dynos usually exagerate things, but id day ur pretty close to that. not bad stock. what are they rated like 340 right. if thats the case then id say based on 20% drivetrain loss(which is conservative for rwd) but since u were practically brand new, prolly closer to 290 at the wheels. like i said, still not bad

Posted

mustang dynos usually exagerate things, but id day ur pretty close to that. not bad stock. what are they rated like 340 right. if thats the case then id say based on 20% drivetrain loss(which is conservative for rwd) but since u were practically brand new, prolly closer to 290 at the wheels. like i said, still not bad

My car was rated 325hp factory. From what I know its usually the dynojets that have the "not so realworld" rating and the Mustang dyno is "realworld" There were quite a few other LS1 fbodies there that day and some were running in the 290's to low 300's. The rating given is corrected, as well. A stock LS1 will avg 380fhp on an engine dyno.

I was making the same hp with my stock setup as a few others that day with aftermarket exhaust and hiflow airlids...so,I'm sticking with 333hp. :cheers:

Posted

My car was rated 325hp factory. From what I know its usually the dynojets that have the "not so realworld" rating and the Mustang dyno is "realworld" There were quite a few other LS1 fbodies there that day and some were running in the 290's to low 300's. The rating given is corrected, as well. A stock LS1 will avg 380fhp on an engine dyno.

I was making the same hp with my stock setup as a few others that day with aftermarket exhaust and hiflow airlids...so,I'm sticking with 333hp. ;)

i didnt say u were wrong, just giving what ive heard about mustang dynos. So its safe to say then that the ls1 in the ceta is underrated?? as are most gm v8's

Posted

3363250073_large.jpg

What the shit is up with the torque numbers?!!?

Posted

i didnt say u were wrong, just giving what ive heard about mustang dynos. So its safe to say then that the ls1 in the ceta is underrated?? as are most gm v8's

Salgood, ya know. Yeah, GM underated the LS1 in anything that wasn't a Corvette. They didn't want to advertise a lower priced vehicle as having the same power as their flagship vehicle. ahah.

What the shit is up with the torque numbers?!!?

Ya know...I never got an answer from the tech as why the Torque number showed that on the one printout. Just that it was correct on the other sheet.

Posted

There are ways that dynos figure torque... I know that the 'uncorrected' number showed that my car had something like 1200 lbs of torque... Mike Haddad tried explaining it to me, but I really didnt care.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

I'll join in on the fun.... 371 rwhp 382 rwtq

KrisFinal.jpg

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

well i finally got the old sunfire on the Dyno, it didnt do to bad for only having a short ram intake and a 56mmTB

1st pull

89.17 HP

109.88 FT lbs of torque

2nd Pull

87.50HP

106.93 Ft lbs of torque

3rd Pull

89.84HP

108.30 Ft lbs of torque

Posted

merged you into the official dyno sheets thread.

Posted

yeah, sorry bout makin ya move everything for me, still getting used to this forum lol

Posted

no worries. :D any pics or video while on the dyno?

Posted

yeah, my buddy who took the video is doing something with it right now, ill post the link when its up

Posted

here the link to my dyno run video -

Posted

well i finally got the old sunfire on the Dyno, it didnt do to bad for only having a short ram intake and a 56mmTB

1st pull

89.17 HP

109.88 FT lbs of torque

2nd Pull

87.50HP

106.93 Ft lbs of torque

3rd Pull

89.84HP

108.30 Ft lbs of torque

That's respectable for little more than 1/3 of my motor, less a decade of technology...

Posted

gotta love GM lol, push rod power!!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Tired of these Ads? Purchase Enhanced Membership today to remove them!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.