In all cases you want to increase the area under the curve. Choosing where you want the power band to be on the graph is based on the application and, to some extent, personal preference. Using a stock Lightning converter I would prefer to have my peak torque lower in the band which would probably resemble your 500rwhp 650rwtq figure. If traction became an issue I would change the gearing to 3.55:1.

Maybe it's easier to say that in the end what you want to do is produce as flat of a torque curve as possible and adjust your stall and final drive to take the best advantage of where the engine produces peak torque.

Or, maybe I'm full of it.

.02

 

I'm still a little confused Bro. Porting a S/C DOES NOT take away TQ, and to say a Twin Screw can not come close to your numbers is def a little hard to take in. Dont get me wrong if your saying all you have is a 6lb pulley then 545tq is great and Big Congrats to You (Thumbs Up) And if your comparing your tq numbers to a particular L I'd have to guess he has one of the MANY MANY bad ports out there, cause your right in saying many lost tq BUT NOT BECAUSE IT WAS PORTED, because it was a bad port, (and there are hundreds and hundreds of them out there)

Any way you cut it none of this post matters until we see the Dyno Sheet.
We need to see if it was a tq spike, where the tq was made, how fast was it dropping off, etc... As everyone is saying there are soooooooooooo many things that play a part in the numbers .....

Here is a Dyno Sheet of a proper ported Eaton using a 8lb lower pully VS the same 8 lb lower pulley with a Magnum Powers Supercharger. Same Tune, Same Dyno, Same Tuner, Stock Cams, Stock Heads, Stock Springs, Stock Valves...
There was no prob with my tq numbers as you can see, amof they are crazy high for a ported Eaton, cant even tell which ones which Mag can you ; o )

NOBODY ported them better than Wes. The SC was known as (named by me of course) --> "The Wasp" <-- (stood for Wes Apten Style Port)
(where ever you are pal, I ****** Luv U Man) I've had 2 Wasp in my times....



Here is another old L of mine (the 99) with a differant and what I consider a Bad Apten Port Job. This one had a Ported Apten, Patriot Ported Stage 2 Heads, and stage 2 cams, using a 6lb lower pulley


As you can see the tq is not proper to the HP curve, imo just another bad port...


NOW here is the same Lightning when I switched to a KB 2.6L Supercharger,
NO OTHER CHANGES MADE (same dyno, same tuner)



I think the Tq #'s are proper to the HP

 

ok.. here we go....

Big Man has 444RWHP and 519RWTQ off of a whipple at 15 psi...

the whipple is supposed to be SO MUCH BETTER..

I know he is completly stock fuel system wise

but with a 6lber i am running 420/545..

I have more torque but he has more hp...

why is that... if we are running pratically the same setup, just different s/c's

i do not understand my torque?? I will post my dyno here later tonight... I would expect for the torque and HP to be ALOT higher than me.. and I am only running 12 psi...

 

Wow. It seems this story will never end. Why are you so infatuated with dyno numbers? Comparing a graph to someone else's setup is fairly retarded bro. Plus, I see that you had your pulls done at FIS. They have been well rumored to buffer their numbers there. Go over to Murillo's and do a couple of pulls and see what you get.

And at this point if you are going to try and argue that a twin screw blower isn't more efficient than a roots I'm going to flip the **** out.

 

Murrillo is a jackass and only knows how to tune old 5.0 mustangs... and only for wot...

don't get me started on that tard... Personal experience...

I would rather drive to PSP in Dallas... Then go see Marano.. I mean murillo..

as for the torque... I am going to buy a whipple... just gotta find a place and a good price...

i am just trying to figure out what i "NEED" to buy to go along with it, or if I can go back to my 4lb lower and run it on stock maf and stock fuel with a good tune...

 

Those are some choice words for the winningest Outlaw 10.5 driver and tuner. I personally feel blessed to have someone with that talent living in San Antonio. Not to mention he is probably the funniest character I have ever met. To each his own.

--Steele

 

There are a number of factors you need to look at...were these trucks dynoed on the same dyno and the same day with the exact same conditions (tire pressures, cooldown, etc). There are so many factors that can wildly influence a dyno pull it's amazing...unless you're using the same dyno with the same conditions every time, even pulls on two different days with the same truck can have varying results.

Another thing that can affect pulls is the RPM that the pull was started at...whoever dynoed your truck may have started the pull a few hundred RPM earlier than the pull on the other truck and this can skew torque readings. The only true measure would be to dyno both trucks back-to-back with a tune that locked them into third gear so a full pull could be made without fear of a kickdown, etc.

My $.02...

 

I agree with the above statement, not to mention the fact that there are a bunch of unscrupulous "dyno techs" that alter the sea level elevations to pad the end results. Nothing like putting a big smile on the cutomers face as he hands over a nice "inflated" dyno graph to a paying customer. I've seen it a number of times with the superbike guys down here. I had a guy who had a "175 h.p." Busa lose to my 160 h.p. busa in a 1/4 mile race (I outweighed him by 35 lbs). For the life of him, he couldn't understand it....until I asked him where he had his bike dyno tuned. Bingo! It happens more than you think. Dynos are a good catalyst for base numbers and added mods. They should be used primarily for that. Performance results are proven at the strip and the old assometer.