Chris Edwards

Solid gains under the curve. How is the overall driveability? Did RPM spend much time tuning driveability on the dyno or just WOT? I'll be getting mine tuned at RPM for sure

robz

Ok, thanks. That is with ported heads and it made significant improvements if that is the only thing changed. Nice.

I'm wondering if a 102mm will show gains with stock 243 unported heads and a healthy cam which I have now by replacing it for the 92 mm fast.

robz

8-10 hp would be worth it to me after tuning if it was possible cam-only.

I'll search around.
Thanks

dagon138

Slightly better, I was having it die in me pulling it out of the garage, that's all better now.
In general it's really good driving around town, but there are some lingering low speed "parking lot" kind of stuff that still needs work, more noticeable after it's been ran for awhile.
Austin was warning me about the 102tb being hard for the c5 computers, but evidently they did ok with it, the above low speed stuff was there even before.
Dyno and street as far as I know, not sure if Charlie tuned it this last time or Austin.

I might have Andy at a&a take a stab at the low speed stuff since he's much closer to me.

dagon138

Not the only thing(see my update post), but the rest probably had no affect in hp.

itsonlyairandfuel

So going from a stock TB and ls6 manifold, to a NW 102 TB and Fast 102 intake, your gain was 16.6 Hp and 10.6 Tq? If so the stock items are better than most people think. Thanks for the info. Ron B.

NemesisC5

You've spent time and money on your intake manifold/TB, have you considered a Lingenfelter 100mm MAF? Although not going to make a big difference on a 347 CID motor it will slightly reduce intake path restriction and likely add mid range - top end power. To me if upgrading to FAST 102/NW 102 it only makes sense to include the Lingenfelter 100mm MAF in the combination.

dagon138

The Halltech KB2 intake has a LS7 style MAF.

NemesisC5

10-4

Chris Edwards

This is the first time I've heard of using a non-stock MAF. I'll be running a Fast 92/ LS2 90 tb combo, what MAF should I use?

NemesisC5

Jim Hall is a CAI guru and his product is used by the OP and detailed below in a post. Lingenfelter is also a top shelf company that manufactures a 100mm MAF sensor and supplies the tables necessary to benefit from it. The more an engine breathes the more you will benefit from decreasing resistance in the intake path. A million people will tell you they made x horsepower with stock MAF and they are correct,,, but if extracting every bit of power from your combination is your goal you can make small gains with a 100mm MAF on a 347 CID LS6.

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c5-z...ll-killer.html

dagon138

I personally think you'd be fine with the stock MAF.
If I would do it all over again I would have gone 90mm LS2 TB, stock MAF and kept my CF airbridge/Blackwing setup or with a true cold-air intake.

CactusCat

Robz, I think this is the exact information you were looking for. Hope it helps.
http://ls1tech.com/forums/generation...ts-inside.html

robz

Very cool, thanks. I didn't even know they made a cathedral 102 back then. I was happy with 8-10 and they got 9. Sounds good.
I made ~470whp cam only with the 92/92 on a Mustang dyno.
I borrowed my friends 102/102 and just threw it on and raced with it.
The car well 9.6@141 but I won't know the gains unless I swap back and run at the track or dyno with the 102/102 to compare.
But I will say that I think the 102 is not only larger but a slightly better design. I also would have to tune it some to get the most out of it.

CactusCat

While I don't doubt your claims of 500rwhp, I'd sure like to know what you did (the small things) to get to that point. I've done just about everything you can, ported and milled 243s, nice cam (231/236), ported Fast102, ported 90mm TB, 1-3/4 LTubes, 25% underdrive pulley, etc and I'm pushing 420-425. How hard to get that extra 75rwhp??? All ears...

robz

If it's just for the number then I say just enjoy the car.
Every dyno reads different and tires/rims/clutch can make big difference in power numbers. And you want good power under the curve anyway.
EWP, lightweight clutch, ARH 1 7/8, 102TB, more tuning, decreasing rolling resistance, decrease windage, decrease gearing, etc... Things add up but so does the price per hp gain at this point.

robz

And just to drive home the point, cars make 10-15% less whp on my buddy's dyno at Tune Time Performance than the local dunno jets but typically run very strong on the street and strip.

540i 6spd

Interesting results. I would have thought more. As you said, definitely not a great return on investment for peak gains.

CactusCat

Good advice Robz... I've had my car on two different dynos here in OKC and there was a 20rwhp difference between the two. The lower numbers comes from where I have all my work done. His Dynojet is stingy!!

CTD

Some of the small things are big money things Less camshaft 228/228, 1 3/4 LG with cats so a longer tube than the AR, 3" over axle Big 3 LG mufflers, EWP. The very exspensive little thing is the cylinder heads, they started as of the shelf AFR 205's. Then Tony Mamo open chambers, hand finished the ports without affecting the size of the port so the heads still would do what they do very well.......air speed. Horsepower is how well it flows past peak torque, this motor made very good peak torque......nothing silly that isn't believable. It carried that torque into higher rpm, many combinations begin to sign off after peak torque.

The talk of under curve power, this motor had, no big donkey dick camshaft & almost perfect street manners. Hands down the most fun combination I've ever owned

My current deal is a LS3 416 stroker, it's been a friggen nightmare. My goals & objective have not changed, exceptional power with manners. I'm nearly there, last dyno reports were 513 rw torque & 604 rwhp.