[Z06] History repeats itself +31 to +36 RWHP with one mod and tuning
09-19-2012, 10:02 PM
#1
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Bristol, Tennessee
Posts: 12,986
Received 582 Likes
on
312 Posts
St. Jude Donor '09
History repeats itself +31 to +36 RWHP with one mod and tuning
In 2009 the Halltech Super Bee CF112 crushed all records with +31 RWHP/+17;bs-ft torque on a completely bone stock 2010 Z06. Done at a Chevy dealer's tuner in SD. Jerry's Chevrolet.
Now a definitive A-B dyno done by another shop, completely independent of Halltech until the dyno revealed huge numbers. Again, a bone stock 2010 Z06, but this time it was the Halltech Super Bee MF103. The World Champ dyno king and track 1/4 mile record holder for e.t. and speed with a 9.97@137.72.
What is more amazing is the torque this time with more lead and better air fuel ratio than the 91 Octane tune done by Jerry's Chevrolet.
SBCF112 in 2009:
SBMF103 in 2012:
These two dynos look like traces of each other, done 3 years later, by two shops 2,000 miles apart, and at the time both were not dealers of ours. Both sold and install Vararam intakes prior to these dynos.
We have a library of dynos that look just like this.
Now the interesting part. We are putting the CF112 and MF107R to the test. This tuner (Chuck's Tuning Service in Houston) is testing the MF107R that was returned by a dissatisfied customer. The customer was disgusted with the performance, in fact, he claims to be a professional tuner, but yet the bridge had never been installed on a car, and the MAF sensor screw holes never used. Maybe Speed Density.
Chuck is going to dyno both on the same car for comparison, which has not been done before.
I do not expect any difference in power, since all three are clones of each other, just made with different MAF read areas, which control estimated airflow at the PCM.
MF103 vs. bone stock:
Now a definitive A-B dyno done by another shop, completely independent of Halltech until the dyno revealed huge numbers. Again, a bone stock 2010 Z06, but this time it was the Halltech Super Bee MF103. The World Champ dyno king and track 1/4 mile record holder for e.t. and speed with a 9.97@137.72.
What is more amazing is the torque this time with more lead and better air fuel ratio than the 91 Octane tune done by Jerry's Chevrolet.
SBCF112 in 2009:
SBMF103 in 2012:
These two dynos look like traces of each other, done 3 years later, by two shops 2,000 miles apart, and at the time both were not dealers of ours. Both sold and install Vararam intakes prior to these dynos.
We have a library of dynos that look just like this.
Now the interesting part. We are putting the CF112 and MF107R to the test. This tuner (Chuck's Tuning Service in Houston) is testing the MF107R that was returned by a dissatisfied customer. The customer was disgusted with the performance, in fact, he claims to be a professional tuner, but yet the bridge had never been installed on a car, and the MAF sensor screw holes never used. Maybe Speed Density.
Chuck is going to dyno both on the same car for comparison, which has not been done before.
I do not expect any difference in power, since all three are clones of each other, just made with different MAF read areas, which control estimated airflow at the PCM.
MF103 vs. bone stock:
__________________
"World Class Performance for your Corvette"
Intake Design and Engineering since 1999
Halltech Systems, LLC
262-510-7600
For service email:
orders@halltechsystems.com
www.halltechsystems.com
"World Class Performance for your Corvette"
Intake Design and Engineering since 1999
Halltech Systems, LLC
262-510-7600
For service email:
orders@halltechsystems.com
www.halltechsystems.com
Last edited by Halltech; 09-24-2012 at 07:42 PM.
09-20-2012, 02:37 PM
#3
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Bristol, Tennessee
Posts: 12,986
Received 582 Likes
on
312 Posts
St. Jude Donor '09
That is the way they all look. The top one has smoothing 5, the bottom smoothing 3.
Smoothing 1 would look even worse. As long as the lines do not drop sharply downward it normal.
I could ask the dyno shop to provide a smoothing 5 graph if you like. The numbers will be the same.
Smoothing 1 would look even worse. As long as the lines do not drop sharply downward it normal.
I could ask the dyno shop to provide a smoothing 5 graph if you like. The numbers will be the same.
09-20-2012, 07:11 PM
#5
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Bristol, Tennessee
Posts: 12,986
Received 582 Likes
on
312 Posts
St. Jude Donor '09
The MF103 has fed Katech's 685 HP 501 c.i.d. motor and was limited by the cam profile, not the intake. In fact our intake is not the point of restriction even with the Williams TB and FAST intake. The FAST intake is actually 99.7mm, not 102.
Jim
09-20-2012, 08:04 PM
#6
Team Owner
I am unaware of anyone who has tuned their car without mods. I would estimate that the tuning represents 20 RWHP of the graph since our intake adds 15 HP to the LS7 motor by itself. The extra airflow, is still corrected to 11.25:1 with the stock tune, which means that the benefits come from reduced restriction to flow and higher plenum capacity which helps at high rpm. Most tuners that install just the MF103 see 14 to 18 just from the intake without power tuning.
The MF103 has fed Katech's 685 HP 501 c.i.d. motor and was limited by the cam profile, not the intake. In fact our intake is not the point of restriction even with the Williams TB and FAST intake. The FAST intake is actually 99.7mm, not 102.
Jim
The MF103 has fed Katech's 685 HP 501 c.i.d. motor and was limited by the cam profile, not the intake. In fact our intake is not the point of restriction even with the Williams TB and FAST intake. The FAST intake is actually 99.7mm, not 102.
Jim
Appears to have gone from ~440 to ~467 Hp, an ~26 HP jump.
another Z06..from Z06Vette.com Corvette Z06 Forum
from ~444 to ~ 467 for an ~26 HP jump
Last edited by JoesC5; 09-20-2012 at 08:14 PM.
09-20-2012, 09:25 PM
#7
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Oct 2007
Location: Chicago area Illinois
Posts: 772
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I am unaware of anyone who has tuned their car without mods. I would estimate that the tuning represents 20 RWHP of the graph since our intake adds 15 HP to the LS7 motor by itself. The extra airflow, is still corrected to 11.25:1 with the stock tune, which means that the benefits come from reduced restriction to flow and higher plenum capacity which helps at high rpm. Most tuners that install just the MF103 see 14 to 18 just from the intake without power tuning.
The MF103 has fed Katech's 685 HP 501 c.i.d. motor and was limited by the cam profile, not the intake. In fact our intake is not the point of restriction even with the Williams TB and FAST intake. The FAST intake is actually 99.7mm, not 102.
Jim
The MF103 has fed Katech's 685 HP 501 c.i.d. motor and was limited by the cam profile, not the intake. In fact our intake is not the point of restriction even with the Williams TB and FAST intake. The FAST intake is actually 99.7mm, not 102.
Jim
09-20-2012, 09:47 PM
#10
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Bristol, Tennessee
Posts: 12,986
Received 582 Likes
on
312 Posts
St. Jude Donor '09
The above 26 RWHP looks about right, but the STD correction factor bumps results about 2.6% more than SAE correction or 456 RWHP if the tooner had clicked on SAE instead of STD. I bring this up since some might think 481 is a pretty easy jump from 469. A little more difficult from 456.
The assumptions for correction are different between the two correction factors. Obviously the delta between stock and tooned would not change, just the totals.
SAE J1349 correction:
29.23 in/hg.
77 degree temp
0 percent humidity
Standard correction:
29.92 in/hg.
68 degree temp
0 percent humidity
One more point probably not applicable to the above dyno. The SuperFlow guys have a tendency of SuperCorrecting RWHP results by a "DynoJet Factor" ; this factor supposedly shows what you would dyno on a DynoJet. Facts: Our ULZ700 dynoed 594 RWHP with this unnecessary correction factor, and made only 561 RWHP on a DynoJet with pretty much the same mods, even with the Underdrive ATI damper as well. So much for the SuperFlow "DynoJet" correction. Everyone knows that different dynos make different assumptions. The Mustang, for instance is supossed to by very conservative vs. the DynoJet. Less than 5 RWHP is what Katech found between the two, and that small margin can happen on the same dyno, same day, same car let alone two different dyno platforms.
Overall, I like the SuperFlow Dyno more than all the others, but I wish operators would just let the numbers fall where they may. The dyno above may not have had this goofey correction like my dyno had, and by the looks of the numbers, in SAE, look just about right.
Last edited by Halltech; 09-20-2012 at 09:56 PM.
09-20-2012, 09:55 PM
#11
A bridge has not been installed on the car??? Care to explain what you're talking about?
In 2009 the Halltech Super Bee CF112 crushed all records with +31 RWHP/+17;bs-ft torque on a completely bone stock 2010 Z06. Done at a Chevy dealer's tuner in SD. Jerry's Chevrolet.
Now a definitive A-B dyno done by another shop, completely independent of Halltech until the dyno revealed huge numbers. Again, a bone stock 2010 Z06, but this time it was the Halltech Super Bee MF103. The World Champ dyno king and track 1/4 mile record holder for e.t. and speed with a 9.97@137.72.
What is more amazing is the torque this time with more lead and better air fuel ratio than the 91 Octane tune done by Jerry's Chevrolet.
SBCF112 in 2009:
SBMF103 in 2012:
These two dynos look like traces of each other, done 3 years later, by two shops 2,000 miles apart, and at the time both were not dealers of ours. Both sold and install Vararam intakes prior to these dynos.
We have a library of dynos that look just like this.
Now the interesting part. We are putting the CF112 and MF107R to the test. This tuner (Chuck's Tuning Service in Houston) is testing the MF107R that was returned by a dissatisfied customer. The customer was disgusted with the performance, in fact, he claims to be a professional tuner, but yet the bridge had never been installed on a car, and the MAF sensor screw holes never used. Maybe Speed Density.
Chuck is going to dyno both on the same car for comparison, which has not been done before.
I do not expect any difference in power, since all three are clones of each other, just made with different MAF read areas, which control estimated airflow at the PCM.
Now a definitive A-B dyno done by another shop, completely independent of Halltech until the dyno revealed huge numbers. Again, a bone stock 2010 Z06, but this time it was the Halltech Super Bee MF103. The World Champ dyno king and track 1/4 mile record holder for e.t. and speed with a 9.97@137.72.
What is more amazing is the torque this time with more lead and better air fuel ratio than the 91 Octane tune done by Jerry's Chevrolet.
SBCF112 in 2009:
SBMF103 in 2012:
These two dynos look like traces of each other, done 3 years later, by two shops 2,000 miles apart, and at the time both were not dealers of ours. Both sold and install Vararam intakes prior to these dynos.
We have a library of dynos that look just like this.
Now the interesting part. We are putting the CF112 and MF107R to the test. This tuner (Chuck's Tuning Service in Houston) is testing the MF107R that was returned by a dissatisfied customer. The customer was disgusted with the performance, in fact, he claims to be a professional tuner, but yet the bridge had never been installed on a car, and the MAF sensor screw holes never used. Maybe Speed Density.
Chuck is going to dyno both on the same car for comparison, which has not been done before.
I do not expect any difference in power, since all three are clones of each other, just made with different MAF read areas, which control estimated airflow at the PCM.
09-20-2012, 10:08 PM
#12
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Bristol, Tennessee
Posts: 12,986
Received 582 Likes
on
312 Posts
St. Jude Donor '09
I found this LS3 dyno, bone stock vs. Super Bee MF103; no tuning.
Airflow demand on the LS3 is a little less than the Z06.
Hood up on stock and Super Bee biases the stock system since on road, the stock intake is an HAI vs. CAI.
I'll look for one on the Z06.
Airflow demand on the LS3 is a little less than the Z06.
Hood up on stock and Super Bee biases the stock system since on road, the stock intake is an HAI vs. CAI.
I'll look for one on the Z06.
09-20-2012, 10:12 PM
#14
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Bristol, Tennessee
Posts: 12,986
Received 582 Likes
on
312 Posts
St. Jude Donor '09
Katech Engine Dyno Validation and Testing in 2009
The motor was not stock (obviously) but the only change was taking the stock OEM LS7 intake off, and installing the Super Bee.
09-20-2012, 10:35 PM
#16
Now the interesting part. We are putting the CF112 and MF107R to the test. This tuner (Chuck's Tuning Service in Houston) is testing the MF107R that was returned by a dissatisfied customer. The customer was disgusted with the performance, in fact, he claims to be a professional tuner, but yet the bridge had never been installed on a car, and the MAF sensor screw holes never used. Maybe Speed Density.
Chuck is going to dyno both on the same car for comparison, which has not been done before.
I do not expect any difference in power, since all three are clones of each other, just made with different MAF read areas, which control estimated airflow at the PCM.
Chuck is going to dyno both on the same car for comparison, which has not been done before.
I do not expect any difference in power, since all three are clones of each other, just made with different MAF read areas, which control estimated airflow at the PCM.
09-21-2012, 12:02 PM
#17
Burning Brakes
How does this system compare to all of the other CAI systems out there? From what I've seen, they all claim to put out the most power lol. I will be in the market for a CIA soon so I'm looking for the best CIA out there. I've been looking at the Vara Ram because I've ran them on my past C5's. They don't put out a lot of power on the dyno, but they really wake up when the car is actually moving. How does your system compare to the Vara Ram? If I'm not mistaken, they also claim to be the "most powerful CIA on the market."
09-21-2012, 12:21 PM
#18
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Bristol, Tennessee
Posts: 12,986
Received 582 Likes
on
312 Posts
St. Jude Donor '09
How does this system compare to all of the other CAI systems out there? From what I've seen, they all claim to put out the most power lol. I will be in the market for a CIA soon so I'm looking for the best CIA out there. I've been looking at the Vara Ram because I've ran them on my past C5's. They don't put out a lot of power on the dyno, but they really wake up when the car is actually moving. How does your system compare to the Vara Ram? If I'm not mistaken, they also claim to be the "most powerful CIA on the market."
09-21-2012, 12:25 PM
#19
Melting Slicks
hey Jim, I have a tune from you for the killer bee II from a couple years back. Do your tunes change at all over time? Should I be updating the programmer and or the tune?
09-21-2012, 12:42 PM
#20
Le Mans Master
email me at jim@halltechsystems.com for a comparison dyno. I don't want to post it here, since comparing to the competition is not our goal. Getting the stock intake off and replacing it with our system is where we live.
Thanks.
