Dyno Numbers One Mod at a Time
#1
12-11-2001, 02:02 PM
Dyno Numbers One Mod at a Time
Well fellas (and gals) the numbers are finally in...way back in October my truck pulled 348.8 hp and 419.9 ft.-lbs. bone stock in 85-degree weather. Last week I went back to my buddy's shop and dynoed one mod at a time including the Bassani cat-back, BaBolt's billet T/B, JDM filter kit and JDM flip-chip. The Bassani cat-back to stock comparison probably isn't a direct apples-to-apples comparison as the weather was 27-degrees cooler when I did the cat-back runs (although all of the runs have been and will continue to be on the same dyno at approximately the same operating temperature for the truck, no ice on the intake, hood up with two fans on it and with a minimum of three runs per mod).
Stock: 348.8 hp and 419.9 ft.-lbs.
Bassani (stock airbox, filter, etc.): 362.3 hp and 429.3 ft.-lbs. (with maximum gains of 18.4 hp and 21.9 ft.-lbs. and average gains of 13.6 hp and 15.6 ft.-lbs. across the rev range)
If we assume the 27-degree difference added something to the run (an assumption backed up by SVT Girl's recent run of 354.6 also done in AZ and probably with similar temps to my Bassani run) then the Bassani was still good for a peak gain of about 6-8 hp. We could get significantly more involved with correction factors (the stock run had a 1.04 CF and the Bassani run had a .99 CF) but taking away and adding horsepower is probably best left to the Dynojet software. I would love to give you guys a definitive answer on the cat-back but I can't. It doesn't appear that the system does nothing as some people have claimed. With the Bassani set-up and nothing else done to it my truck ran a 13.599 at 101.8 with limited traction off the line (2.07 60'). If you're considering the Bassani system and aren't expecting a night and day difference I would say it's got that nasty sound and will certainly add something to the truck (somewhere in the neighborhood of 6-8 hp and maybe 10 ft.-lbs.).
Now things get even more interesting as we have direct apples-to-apples comparisons for the next mods...
Next up was the BaBolt billet T/B and this was on the same day as the Bassani with almost identical conditions (temperature was 65.5-degrees and the CF was 1.00 or no software correction at all).
Bassani 362.3 hp and 429.3 ft.-lbs.
Billet T/B 365.5 hp and 437.8 ft.-lbs. (with maximum gains of 6.6 hp and 7.8 ft.-lbs. and average gains of 3.6 hp and 4.3 ft.-lbs. across the rev range)
The Billet T/B appears to almost match JDM's claim of 8-10 hp and 8-10 ft.-lbs. The truck was stronger throughout the rev range and especially up top as would be expected.
Now the kicker and something that is going to require some more testing on my part (but has been backed up with claims from other people on the board) - the next mod to go on the truck was the JDM cool air induction kit (which is no different than any other tuner's filter kit since they all use the same S&B 12" cone filter).
Billet T/B 365.5 hp and 437.8 ft.-lbs.
Air filter 360.9 hp and 436.3 ft.-lbs. (with maximum losses of 10.2 hp and 9.8 ft.-lbs. and average losses of 2.0 hp and 2.0 ft.-lbs. across the rev range)
The interesting thing about this run (of which there were three pulls with nearly identical graphs since we didn't originally believe the results) is that most of the losses occurred in the top portion of the rev range (from about 4600 rpm on up to 5500 rpm). Since the S&B has significantly more surface area than the stock filter and the stock airbox was partially designed to quiet blower noise, we figured there would be some type of gain. Not to be - the stock airbox and filter, on the dyno at least, flows better than the current Lightning filter kits. I actually called two tuners about this one and was told that there is a learning curve in the truck's PCM that cannot take advantage of the additional flow immediately after adding the filter and also that the S&B will ultimately flow more air when the truck is moving and air is passing over it. The jury's still out on this one...I will test the filter and stock airbox again after the 4 lb. pulley goes on. With the blower pulling more air because of the added boost than that should be the time for the S&B to shine. I will also do back-to-back 1/4 mile runs to further test this little quandry. Unless some tuners want to chime in here and explain this one I would tell anyone considering the purchase of a filter kit to spend their $175-200 on another mod. If you have your heart set on a filter let me know as I may have a brand new one for sale shortly(gently used on the dyno).
Lastly, the chip went in it was set on side I which is a cold weather program (an oxymoron here in Arizona). Three pulls with the chip were made and the results are as follows:
Air filter: 360.9 hp and 436.3 ft.-lbs.
Chip: 372.8 hp and 439.6 ft.-lbs. (with maximum gains of 22.2 hp and 21.2 ft.-lbs. and average gains of 7.7 hp and 8.4 ft.-lbs. across the rev range)
I was originally disappointed with the chip's results as JDM touted a 35-40 hp and 30 ft.-lbs. gain. I had originally only looked at the peak gain which was about 12-13 hp but once the numbers were entered in to an Excel spreadsheet I could see the gains of 22 hp and 21 ft.-lbs. with the chip shifting the curves up significantly from about 4500 rpm on up. I was still a little disappointed with these numbers as I had hoped to be at about 385-390 hp when I realized that the chip was also burned for a 4 lb. pulley. After speaking to Jim at JDM it was confirmed that the chip was indeed dumping in extra fuel and pulling timing to compensate for the pulley that wasn't on yet (this was confirmed when I changed my plugs last Saturday and they had the smell of raw fuel). Jim has all but guaranteed that with the current burn on the chip and the 4 lb. pulley I will be pulling over 400 hp. Unfortunately for him I am going to hold him to it.
Hopefully some of you guys will find this information useful when considering mods. If any of you want more details (like the actual Excel spreadsheet I am using for comparison purposes) leave your e-mail address and I will send it to you.
Dan
P.S. And there's still more a comin'
Stock: 348.8 hp and 419.9 ft.-lbs.
Bassani (stock airbox, filter, etc.): 362.3 hp and 429.3 ft.-lbs. (with maximum gains of 18.4 hp and 21.9 ft.-lbs. and average gains of 13.6 hp and 15.6 ft.-lbs. across the rev range)
If we assume the 27-degree difference added something to the run (an assumption backed up by SVT Girl's recent run of 354.6 also done in AZ and probably with similar temps to my Bassani run) then the Bassani was still good for a peak gain of about 6-8 hp. We could get significantly more involved with correction factors (the stock run had a 1.04 CF and the Bassani run had a .99 CF) but taking away and adding horsepower is probably best left to the Dynojet software. I would love to give you guys a definitive answer on the cat-back but I can't. It doesn't appear that the system does nothing as some people have claimed. With the Bassani set-up and nothing else done to it my truck ran a 13.599 at 101.8 with limited traction off the line (2.07 60'). If you're considering the Bassani system and aren't expecting a night and day difference I would say it's got that nasty sound and will certainly add something to the truck (somewhere in the neighborhood of 6-8 hp and maybe 10 ft.-lbs.).
Now things get even more interesting as we have direct apples-to-apples comparisons for the next mods...
Next up was the BaBolt billet T/B and this was on the same day as the Bassani with almost identical conditions (temperature was 65.5-degrees and the CF was 1.00 or no software correction at all).
Bassani 362.3 hp and 429.3 ft.-lbs.
Billet T/B 365.5 hp and 437.8 ft.-lbs. (with maximum gains of 6.6 hp and 7.8 ft.-lbs. and average gains of 3.6 hp and 4.3 ft.-lbs. across the rev range)
The Billet T/B appears to almost match JDM's claim of 8-10 hp and 8-10 ft.-lbs. The truck was stronger throughout the rev range and especially up top as would be expected.
Now the kicker and something that is going to require some more testing on my part (but has been backed up with claims from other people on the board) - the next mod to go on the truck was the JDM cool air induction kit (which is no different than any other tuner's filter kit since they all use the same S&B 12" cone filter).
Billet T/B 365.5 hp and 437.8 ft.-lbs.
Air filter 360.9 hp and 436.3 ft.-lbs. (with maximum losses of 10.2 hp and 9.8 ft.-lbs. and average losses of 2.0 hp and 2.0 ft.-lbs. across the rev range)
The interesting thing about this run (of which there were three pulls with nearly identical graphs since we didn't originally believe the results) is that most of the losses occurred in the top portion of the rev range (from about 4600 rpm on up to 5500 rpm). Since the S&B has significantly more surface area than the stock filter and the stock airbox was partially designed to quiet blower noise, we figured there would be some type of gain. Not to be - the stock airbox and filter, on the dyno at least, flows better than the current Lightning filter kits. I actually called two tuners about this one and was told that there is a learning curve in the truck's PCM that cannot take advantage of the additional flow immediately after adding the filter and also that the S&B will ultimately flow more air when the truck is moving and air is passing over it. The jury's still out on this one...I will test the filter and stock airbox again after the 4 lb. pulley goes on. With the blower pulling more air because of the added boost than that should be the time for the S&B to shine. I will also do back-to-back 1/4 mile runs to further test this little quandry. Unless some tuners want to chime in here and explain this one I would tell anyone considering the purchase of a filter kit to spend their $175-200 on another mod. If you have your heart set on a filter let me know as I may have a brand new one for sale shortly(gently used on the dyno).
Lastly, the chip went in it was set on side I which is a cold weather program (an oxymoron here in Arizona). Three pulls with the chip were made and the results are as follows:
Air filter: 360.9 hp and 436.3 ft.-lbs.
Chip: 372.8 hp and 439.6 ft.-lbs. (with maximum gains of 22.2 hp and 21.2 ft.-lbs. and average gains of 7.7 hp and 8.4 ft.-lbs. across the rev range)
I was originally disappointed with the chip's results as JDM touted a 35-40 hp and 30 ft.-lbs. gain. I had originally only looked at the peak gain which was about 12-13 hp but once the numbers were entered in to an Excel spreadsheet I could see the gains of 22 hp and 21 ft.-lbs. with the chip shifting the curves up significantly from about 4500 rpm on up. I was still a little disappointed with these numbers as I had hoped to be at about 385-390 hp when I realized that the chip was also burned for a 4 lb. pulley. After speaking to Jim at JDM it was confirmed that the chip was indeed dumping in extra fuel and pulling timing to compensate for the pulley that wasn't on yet (this was confirmed when I changed my plugs last Saturday and they had the smell of raw fuel). Jim has all but guaranteed that with the current burn on the chip and the 4 lb. pulley I will be pulling over 400 hp. Unfortunately for him I am going to hold him to it.
Hopefully some of you guys will find this information useful when considering mods. If any of you want more details (like the actual Excel spreadsheet I am using for comparison purposes) leave your e-mail address and I will send it to you.
Dan
P.S. And there's still more a comin'
Last edited by Struck in AZ; 12-11-2001 at 02:39 PM.
#2
12-11-2001, 02:17 PM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting... thanks for posting these results. It's a shame you didn't have the chip tuned for the current pulley but then I guess that's what tuning the chips are all about and an overall gain to 400hp+ with chip and pulley would make ME happy.
Looking forward to reading more when you get it done!
Looking forward to reading more when you get it done!
Last edited by PitDog; 12-11-2001 at 02:43 PM.
#3
12-11-2001, 02:21 PM
Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: West Palm Beach
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#4
12-11-2001, 02:36 PM
#5
12-11-2001, 02:48 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Struck in AZ- Thanks for posting that great info.!!! We all can benefit from it in some way. Now, get that 4# pulley on there and your pretty little Lightning will turn into an asphalt ripping beast!!! It will make a huge improvement for you. I still giggle everytime I stick my foot in it!
#6
12-11-2001, 03:52 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In a House, USA
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Struck- I feel what you did provides some of the best info for users of this board. I have done the same thing but not as organized as you. A couple of points:
1. I don't know what your mileages were during the various tests but, a few thousand miles on a motor early on will help the break-in and horsepower #'s.
2. For comparison, I dynoed stock w/800 miles at 355+ rwhp.
added an early 01 program and filter (all JDM) and increased peak rwhp by 21. Added long tube headers and exhaust and got 7 rwhp with a maximum gain of 12 @ around 3300rpm. Put on a 2# pulley, chip reburn and BABolt TB and added 18rwhp. So I am sitting at 400.0 rwhp. I'll put on the electric fan/water pump kit and switch to a 4# pulley next.
#4 pulley will get you over I'm sure. I know about the disappointment thing...I've felt it too until I thought through things and realized 400 rwhp isn't bad! 2+2 does not always equal 4 when dealing with claims, combos and vehicle variances, correction factors etc.
I don't know about you but the only thing I would have done differently is go with the #4 pulley instead of the #2. JDM, Lightning Performance and Mike Phillips have all been great to me.
1. I don't know what your mileages were during the various tests but, a few thousand miles on a motor early on will help the break-in and horsepower #'s.
2. For comparison, I dynoed stock w/800 miles at 355+ rwhp.
added an early 01 program and filter (all JDM) and increased peak rwhp by 21. Added long tube headers and exhaust and got 7 rwhp with a maximum gain of 12 @ around 3300rpm. Put on a 2# pulley, chip reburn and BABolt TB and added 18rwhp. So I am sitting at 400.0 rwhp. I'll put on the electric fan/water pump kit and switch to a 4# pulley next.
#4 pulley will get you over I'm sure. I know about the disappointment thing...I've felt it too until I thought through things and realized 400 rwhp isn't bad! 2+2 does not always equal 4 when dealing with claims, combos and vehicle variances, correction factors etc.
I don't know about you but the only thing I would have done differently is go with the #4 pulley instead of the #2. JDM, Lightning Performance and Mike Phillips have all been great to me.
#7
12-11-2001, 04:26 PM
NeedFour Speed,
A few comments to your points:
The first dyno run on the stock truck took place when I had about 1,175 miles on the truck. The most recent runs done have taken place with about 1,400 miles on the truck. I figure the truck may still "loosen" up with an additional 1,500 miles on it.
I assume that if the chip would have been burned for a stock pulley and not the 4 lb. pulley I may have seen another 10-12 peak horsepower (which is pretty well in line with your gains). I can lug the truck to no end and it doesn't even hint at knocking or pinging so it's definitely on the rich side. I'm hoping to be right there with you at the 400 rwhp mark when the new pulley goes on. If not, it's time for a little more aggressive program on the chip. After the 4 lb. I also plan on doing the fan/water pump combo, the 1 lb. upper and then Jim's new long tubes with dynos of each mod as before. If all of the numbers work out that should put me at about 450 rwhp (give or take a few).
As far as the disappointment goes, I wasn't disappointed in the end result just that some of these mods fell short of the tuner's claims or did nothing - and even that was tempered to a degree. I'm certainly not knocking Jim (or even Sal or Johhny who I haven't dealth with much) and his claims as he was just about spot-on on the billet T/B. My numbers on the chip didn't meet his numbers but you also have to factor in that his numbers were pulled on a different truck, a different dyno under different weather conditions, different altitude, possibly using different programs and maybe even with some custom tuning done. All of these I have no problem with and I even thought the 35-40 hp may have been on a 99-00 with a 90mm MAF and program. I am by no stretch of the imagination an L tuner and I will never claim to be, so I'm certainly not going to call BS on any single tuner's claims. My guess is Jim may well have seen a 35-40 hp improvement from his chip on a truck or two and, like any good businessman with some marketing savvy, made a justifiable claim for his products - I would do the same thing. What I can say is that Jim and his "crew" have never been anything but professional and patient with me and my endless questions (as I'm sure others would claim of their favorite tuners) and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend him or his products to a fellow L owner. I have also heard good things about Sal, Johnny and Mark. Mike Phillips (BaBolt) has also been nothing but courteous and professional with me as well. I have to commend all of the previously mentioned folks on the things they have done for us L owners in our neverending search for more power.
Now I'll get off my soapbox...the main reason I did all of this was to see what each mod did and whether it was worth doing. My results for each mod may not have matched the tuner's claims for each individual mod but I certainly can't bitch about the end result - which will hopefully be a 400-450 rwhp truck.
Dan
A few comments to your points:
The first dyno run on the stock truck took place when I had about 1,175 miles on the truck. The most recent runs done have taken place with about 1,400 miles on the truck. I figure the truck may still "loosen" up with an additional 1,500 miles on it.
I assume that if the chip would have been burned for a stock pulley and not the 4 lb. pulley I may have seen another 10-12 peak horsepower (which is pretty well in line with your gains). I can lug the truck to no end and it doesn't even hint at knocking or pinging so it's definitely on the rich side. I'm hoping to be right there with you at the 400 rwhp mark when the new pulley goes on. If not, it's time for a little more aggressive program on the chip. After the 4 lb. I also plan on doing the fan/water pump combo, the 1 lb. upper and then Jim's new long tubes with dynos of each mod as before. If all of the numbers work out that should put me at about 450 rwhp (give or take a few).
As far as the disappointment goes, I wasn't disappointed in the end result just that some of these mods fell short of the tuner's claims or did nothing - and even that was tempered to a degree. I'm certainly not knocking Jim (or even Sal or Johhny who I haven't dealth with much) and his claims as he was just about spot-on on the billet T/B. My numbers on the chip didn't meet his numbers but you also have to factor in that his numbers were pulled on a different truck, a different dyno under different weather conditions, different altitude, possibly using different programs and maybe even with some custom tuning done. All of these I have no problem with and I even thought the 35-40 hp may have been on a 99-00 with a 90mm MAF and program. I am by no stretch of the imagination an L tuner and I will never claim to be, so I'm certainly not going to call BS on any single tuner's claims. My guess is Jim may well have seen a 35-40 hp improvement from his chip on a truck or two and, like any good businessman with some marketing savvy, made a justifiable claim for his products - I would do the same thing. What I can say is that Jim and his "crew" have never been anything but professional and patient with me and my endless questions (as I'm sure others would claim of their favorite tuners) and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend him or his products to a fellow L owner. I have also heard good things about Sal, Johnny and Mark. Mike Phillips (BaBolt) has also been nothing but courteous and professional with me as well. I have to commend all of the previously mentioned folks on the things they have done for us L owners in our neverending search for more power.
Now I'll get off my soapbox...the main reason I did all of this was to see what each mod did and whether it was worth doing. My results for each mod may not have matched the tuner's claims for each individual mod but I certainly can't bitch about the end result - which will hopefully be a 400-450 rwhp truck.
Dan
Last edited by Struck in AZ; 12-11-2001 at 04:55 PM.
Trending Topics
#8
12-11-2001, 07:07 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 6,798
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan
Nice Work....
No question that any tuners HP claims for a chip were with the chip and the mods in line with each other. Running pig rich is NOT the best way to make HP...
We will all be interested to see the future results added to this thread....
If the XLS file is small enough to view easily on one page I will post it on my website if you like... Let me know...
Doug
dougboss@svtlightnings.com
Nice Work....
No question that any tuners HP claims for a chip were with the chip and the mods in line with each other. Running pig rich is NOT the best way to make HP...
We will all be interested to see the future results added to this thread....
If the XLS file is small enough to view easily on one page I will post it on my website if you like... Let me know...
Doug
dougboss@svtlightnings.com
Last edited by Silver_2000; 12-11-2001 at 10:33 PM.
#9
12-11-2001, 08:19 PM
Doug,
That's why I (and most others it would seem) am sticking to one tuner for all of my mods. I figure no one knows their stuff better or can make more power with their stuff they can. PeterB and myself were both amazed at the how rich the truck was running when we yanked the plugs - pig rich is pretty close. I'm hoping the pulley cures that little ailment and I almost hope for a little detonation when the pulley goes on - figure at that point I'm hanging on the ragged edge of tuning (if not I'll do some pulls with an A/F reading and get them to Jim). If you send me your e-mail address (can't add an attachment within the BB e-mail feature) I'll e-mail you the Excel file and let you decide if you want to post it or not - it's got eight individual worksheets with graphs embedded into each worksheet so it's a fair size file. My e-mail address is dandkmcguire@home.com (just as a note - the last three worksheets contain junk data as I haven't done those dyno runs yet).
Thanks,
Dan
That's why I (and most others it would seem) am sticking to one tuner for all of my mods. I figure no one knows their stuff better or can make more power with their stuff they can. PeterB and myself were both amazed at the how rich the truck was running when we yanked the plugs - pig rich is pretty close. I'm hoping the pulley cures that little ailment and I almost hope for a little detonation when the pulley goes on - figure at that point I'm hanging on the ragged edge of tuning (if not I'll do some pulls with an A/F reading and get them to Jim). If you send me your e-mail address (can't add an attachment within the BB e-mail feature) I'll e-mail you the Excel file and let you decide if you want to post it or not - it's got eight individual worksheets with graphs embedded into each worksheet so it's a fair size file. My e-mail address is dandkmcguire@home.com (just as a note - the last three worksheets contain junk data as I haven't done those dyno runs yet).
Thanks,
Dan
Last edited by Struck in AZ; 12-11-2001 at 08:21 PM.
#10
12-12-2001, 12:11 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Posts: 997
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now this is EXACTLY the kind of information that is very welcomed thae we all should be sharing on this board. I can't stand peoples "assometer" claims or "it pulls so much better", blah, blah, blah. Of course now I've just opened myself up to the "assometer" testers to say "yeah, a dyno run isn't a run at the track". It is so funny to me that when you bolt something on that makes either a louder noise on the intake side or exhaust side, we would swear that it then runs faster.
This post is some very, very detailed methodical testing and informative data to provide us all with so that we can make our decisions on what to buy or not. Now that the dyno runs are in, we now need to see how your truck will do at the track. I'm thinking that Yoda will still probably rein supreme. We'll just have to see actual results. And it has been said before "results not typical, your results may vary".
I hope you guys get your JDM 4#r's in soon, so that Yoda can once and for all part with his 2# pulley, so that I can atleast be somewhat in your guys league.
This post is some very, very detailed methodical testing and informative data to provide us all with so that we can make our decisions on what to buy or not. Now that the dyno runs are in, we now need to see how your truck will do at the track. I'm thinking that Yoda will still probably rein supreme. We'll just have to see actual results. And it has been said before "results not typical, your results may vary".
I hope you guys get your JDM 4#r's in soon, so that Yoda can once and for all part with his 2# pulley, so that I can atleast be somewhat in your guys league.
#11
12-12-2001, 12:14 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 6,798
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Posted Dans Dyno runs Here
http://www.svtlightnings.com/xls/For...yno%20Runs.htm
Nice job Dan
Doug
PS Let me know if you have trouble seeing the spreadsheet. Shouldnt need Office 2000 but who knows with Microsoft
http://www.svtlightnings.com/xls/For...yno%20Runs.htm
Nice job Dan
Doug
PS Let me know if you have trouble seeing the spreadsheet. Shouldnt need Office 2000 but who knows with Microsoft
Last edited by Silver_2000; 12-12-2001 at 12:16 AM.
#12
12-12-2001, 12:46 AM
Doug,
Thanks for posting the Excel spreadsheet.
Peter B,
Ye of little faith...being that you've actually been behind the wheel you should know better than to tap Yoda as the reigning King (in fact, he's been unseated as the fastest L in AZ by a fellow 2001 owner). I figure right now there are maybe four of five L's capable of 12's in Phoenix that I know of (with Yoda's maybe even being one of them) but unless we can collectively figure out the traction issues (most of us are pulling 1.9-2.1 in the 60') it may be a rare event. Some of the guys running slicks aren't seeing much, if any, gain over the F1's and Speedworld isn't exactly like bubble gum off the line. But the question remains...does anyone here have what it takes to run in the 11's? I'm thinking I may have a few more tricks up my sleeve to get me a little closer to that magic number...might have to dust off the Hayabusa if all else fails!
Stay tuned,
Dan
Thanks for posting the Excel spreadsheet.
Peter B,
Ye of little faith...being that you've actually been behind the wheel you should know better than to tap Yoda as the reigning King (in fact, he's been unseated as the fastest L in AZ by a fellow 2001 owner). I figure right now there are maybe four of five L's capable of 12's in Phoenix that I know of (with Yoda's maybe even being one of them) but unless we can collectively figure out the traction issues (most of us are pulling 1.9-2.1 in the 60') it may be a rare event. Some of the guys running slicks aren't seeing much, if any, gain over the F1's and Speedworld isn't exactly like bubble gum off the line. But the question remains...does anyone here have what it takes to run in the 11's? I'm thinking I may have a few more tricks up my sleeve to get me a little closer to that magic number...might have to dust off the Hayabusa if all else fails!
Stay tuned,
Dan
#13
12-12-2001, 09:54 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In a House, USA
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Struck -
We're on the same page and I didn't mean to imply that or make it sound like you were or should be dissappointed.
Someday I'll figure out how to do it and post my dyno chronicles....time to call and order my #4 pulley. Might as well do that when I do my fan kit.
If you are curious I can send you my dyno sheets for my long tubes. Mine are from Lightning Performance and are probably pretty comparable to Jim's. Totaled runs the same headers that I do.
Once again, I have nothing but good things to say about the vendors that are busting the a$$es to give us good products.
We're on the same page and I didn't mean to imply that or make it sound like you were or should be dissappointed.
Someday I'll figure out how to do it and post my dyno chronicles....time to call and order my #4 pulley. Might as well do that when I do my fan kit.
If you are curious I can send you my dyno sheets for my long tubes. Mine are from Lightning Performance and are probably pretty comparable to Jim's. Totaled runs the same headers that I do.
Once again, I have nothing but good things to say about the vendors that are busting the a$$es to give us good products.
#15
12-12-2001, 12:26 PM
Need,
No hard feelings...nothing taken personally. If you could send me your dyno sheets for the longs tubes I would like to see them. My e-mail address is dandkmcguire@home.com.
Thanks in advance,
Dan
No hard feelings...nothing taken personally. If you could send me your dyno sheets for the longs tubes I would like to see them. My e-mail address is dandkmcguire@home.com.
Thanks in advance,
Dan