No I have one and was debating putting it on my car. I thought I was being helpful

 

Only real way to REAL hp on lt1's in my opinion from experience is heads and cam. AFTER those is when the addons start showing real improvements

 

Bingo.


Shouldn't have posted that though...this thread was fianlly starting to get...FUN!

 

Sorry

 

I'd be interested in knowing what difference those mods actually made on a dyno, OP. When you get to that point, can you please share your results?

Thanks.

 

 

great job guys, maybe you can **** off all the other forum members and you can have the forum to yourselves ....if you get tired of the same questions being asked over and over why don't you just skip to the next topic? can't imagine where that word "*****" ever came to be associated with some corvette owners.. i've had 6 vettes in my life i hope i never get some of your know-it-all attitudes....

 

w/ you, and others of the same experience/opinion. Spot-ON!

IMO, the "FUN" is in the reading some of the unsubstantiated (HP) claims (usually hidden in the fine print...if at all!).





What I find irritating is the proponents of junk power adders use all sorts of gimmicks or outright lies to "produce" the gains they claim - NOT that I buy their hype, but the fact guys like the OP, who are honestly trying to learn more (about their cars) are sucked in by these hp claims. Wouldn't it be nice if the purveyors claims had to base hp claims on actual results where the variables are controlled? FAT CHANCE, I recon!!!

 

When you get a free hand I would like to hear what HP gains you got.

 

I can't imagine why the guy would even consider coming back to this thread.

 

Well one thing that makes it even more complicated some of the go fast goodies actually work. Just not usually how they are trying to market them.

Case in point the throttle body spacer. On a tpi motor it doesn't do squat. But on a throttle body motor like the 84 vette they actually do work to some extent. The most effective results are on the old late 80's and early 90's tbi motors used in Camaros and pickup trucks.

But even that isn't why they list it. It has to do with spray effect on hitting the manifold and really only at wot for the most part.

The tornado do-dad effect they machined into them later didn't do squat but I remember when people were raving about them.

Now we look back and think how could anyone believe in that stuff. You should of been here when the products first came out. You would be amazed how many people bought into that stuff then.

 

It is his thread the least he could do is post his results from his mods for others to learn. Before he takes his ball.

 

Some "others" have no interest in learning squat - it is their way or the hiway.

 

Like I said earlier...people don't like facts. What should we do? Stroke people's egos? Or post facts -correct information?

I know when *I* have posted questions in the past, I wanted the facts, or honest, correct information.

 

If he posted up his results showing a 37 hp gain, I guess he'd have proved all the "hiway" guys wrong. Right? Objective data is always good, and welcome, as far as I'm concerned.

 

I would agree with you - "people don't like facts" and one fact is that some people on this forum seem to enjoy being dicks in their approach.

 

I hate facts. I wish everything would go how I wanted. Lol

 

Your signature says your a meteorologist, you want to see an improvement in performance, take it and run it on a 90 degree day with high humidity, then run it again on a 65 degree day with low humidity. You'll see a bigger increase in performance than all that work together.

Nothing wrong with a catback and a tune and there's some things you might feel but a chassis dyno just isn't a quality measuring device. Your margin of error is going to be higher than your improvement in power.

 

Maybe. i find it more common that people perceive or interpret the delivery of facts as an offensive act. I used to work at a place where it was impossible to deliver a fact, w/o offending someone who had an opinion. It was crazy. Here is one example. Our "environmental manager wanted "idle free". This was a ski area. She wanted my department to cease idling of snow cats. I stated that we needed to idle them just enough to warm them up before shift start -about 5 minutes. She was offended. She argued to me (and my boss) about something she'd seen on TV where they put a 50 gallon trash bag over the tail pipe of a pick up, and the exhaust filled the trash bag in abotu 1 minute. She proudly claimed, "That's 50 gallons of pollution!". My boss agreed. I pointed out, the facts; that the contents of that trash bag were 99% oxygen, water and Carbon Dioxide, and that we still need to warm up snow cats before we drive them under load....and just like that, I was an azzhole. That is just one example.

I though it was all me and I tried all manners of tip-toeing around the fact delivery to not offend. People don't seem to be able to absorb factual information w/o becoming offended. Like the facts were a tool to offend, when that isn't the case that all...they're just the facts.

I believe that is what has happened in this thread.

 

I agree with you that facts are important It is the delivery I am questioning. For example, using your above scenario, I agree totally with your facts. But is that exactly how it happened, or did you find it necessary to throw in a little tidbit such as "If you went to school, you would know that"? Just saying.