2015 C7 ZO6 dyno run
03-10-2015, 08:01 AM
#1
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
Member Since: Nov 2003
Location: Tampa Fl
Posts: 7,972
Received 234 Likes
on
168 Posts
St. Jude Donor '12-'13-'14
2015 C7 ZO6 dyno run
We had a chance to get a C7 ZO6, manual with 600 miles on the rollers last week. ZERO modifications. The Corvette is just beautiful. Here's a clip of it on the dyno and what it put down.
BETA HP Tuners
BETA HP Tuners
03-10-2015, 08:49 AM
#2
Turn 12!
Nice numbers!
03-10-2015, 09:40 AM
#3
Stout numbers for sure.
03-10-2015, 11:49 AM
#4
Team Owner
I don't understand your numbers.
Are both pulls on a pure stock car? If so which pull was first, the 559rwhp or the 575rwhp? Why the difference in HP between the pulls if nothing was touched on the car.
Or, is the 559rwhp on the stock car and the 575rwhp on the tuned car?
Are both pulls on a pure stock car? If so which pull was first, the 559rwhp or the 575rwhp? Why the difference in HP between the pulls if nothing was touched on the car.
Or, is the 559rwhp on the stock car and the 575rwhp on the tuned car?
03-10-2015, 12:00 PM
#5
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
Member Since: Nov 2003
Location: Tampa Fl
Posts: 7,972
Received 234 Likes
on
168 Posts
St. Jude Donor '12-'13-'14
Bone stock. First numbers was right after driving up to the dyno and the second ( higher) letting it cool down for about 10 minutes while everyone drooled at it. No change in anything between runs.
03-10-2015, 03:35 PM
#6
Race Director
03-11-2015, 11:03 AM
#7
Team Owner
That's why I don't have any confidence in chassis dyno results. I'll stick with GM's horsepower results done on an engine dyno performed under very strict SAE protocol.
03-11-2015, 10:38 PM
#8
Melting Slicks
That's why I don't have any confidence in chassis dyno results. I'll stick with GM's horsepower results done on an engine dyno performed under very strict SAE protocol.
And another revelation that you need is that the new J1349 SAE rating that GM uses is not the previous SAE Std HP that used a lower baro and temp for correction so the correct factor to use when converting J1349 ENGINE dyno to Chassis dyno is 12% (.88) not 15%. And guess what.... 650 SAE J1349 Flywheel HP x 0.88 = ~572 RWHP....I'd say the numbers are spot on when you consider a variance error of +/-1% which is acceptable! You're welcome by the way for the free education
03-11-2015, 11:01 PM
#9
Drifting
It's obvious that you don't have personal experience with dyno pulls. There isn't an LS or LT motor that I have seen that doesn't make more power typically on the 2nd or 3rd run on the dyno....that's just the way it is! My C7Z first run on the dyno was 559 RWHP and after a cool down my best run was 571 RWHP....I'd say that this is pretty consistent with what the OP observed
And another revelation that you need is that the new J1349 SAE rating that GM uses is not the previous SAE Std HP that used a lower baro and temp for correction so the correct factor to use when converting J1349 ENGINE dyno to Chassis dyno is 12% (.88) not 15%. And guess what.... 650 SAE J1349 Flywheel HP x 0.88 = ~572 RWHP....I'd say the numbers are spot on when you consider a variance error of +/-1% which is acceptable! You're welcome by the way for the free education
And another revelation that you need is that the new J1349 SAE rating that GM uses is not the previous SAE Std HP that used a lower baro and temp for correction so the correct factor to use when converting J1349 ENGINE dyno to Chassis dyno is 12% (.88) not 15%. And guess what.... 650 SAE J1349 Flywheel HP x 0.88 = ~572 RWHP....I'd say the numbers are spot on when you consider a variance error of +/-1% which is acceptable! You're welcome by the way for the free education
Agree 100%... what will be the % of loss in a Mustang Dyno? 15%?
03-11-2015, 11:05 PM
#10
Drifting
IMHO the difference in whp & wtq between the time (10 min) is to much compare it to other cars that I seen, maybe 10whp between 25 to 30 min to cool down runs will be more "normal"
03-11-2015, 11:57 PM
#11
Melting Slicks
what will be the % of loss in a Mustang Dyno? 15%?
IMHO the difference in whp & wtq between the time (10 min) is to much compare it to other cars that I seen, maybe 10whp between 25 to 30 min to cool down runs will be more "normal"
03-12-2015, 12:05 AM
#12
Drifting
Sorry if I don't express myself right... what I'm trying to say is that this engine's are to sensitive to temperatures, for example if I compare it with my 997.2 Turbo the highest difference after 12 runs on the dyno (5 to 10 min. between runs) was 10whp.
03-12-2015, 09:56 PM
#14
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Oct 1999
Location: Charlotte, NC (formerly Endicott, NY)
Posts: 40,088
Received 8,927 Likes
on
5,332 Posts