best cold air induction
Drifting
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,912
Likes: 33
From: S.D. CA
Not installed yet. I sent it back to get the updated version. There are no 1/4 mile strips around here so I'll probably never know. I may do this... http://www.openroadracing.com/ . If I do, I'll be sure to post.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,131
Likes: 0
From: Dallas Texas
Originally Posted by jimman
Last I checked 2 inches is less than 3, hard for you to grasp. If someone hydrolocs and I didn't warn them what would you say to that. There were more other than me that had this problem.
While hydrolock resulting from driving through puddles deep enough to cover the cavity and create a seal is a concern. Splashes, heavy rain, or traffic waves from small puddles are not.
I have driven my car in heavy rains here in Dallas and on the road over the winter without problems.
I think the new designs are much safer than your 'old' C5 Halltech but that is just my opinion.
Intermediate
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by DSOM Z51
Woa
You are saying that ALL of his gain came from the tune and nothing from the Vararam?
I believe that he got "something" from the Vararam, but certainly not half of a second.
"...The first time 4/1/2005 2.048 60 ft.13.147 et 107.49 mph.4/1/2005 cartek fan switch 160 therm. 8/24/2005 cartek ECU Reprogram 2005 LS-2 minor tune A4. 8/26/2005 2.052 60 ft. 13.014 et 109.25 mph 60 ft. time...because tune might have been lost. when cartek checked they seen one new update so redid it for FREE. went back to track 10/27/2005 60 ft. 2.018 12.919 et 109.48 mph. temp 47 relative humidity 100 absolute baro 29.46 that's the best so far i think because of cold and miles. now vararam and spacer. 60 ft. 1.972 et 12.387 mph 113.36"
He had the Cartek tune before the Vararam and it got him from 13.014 to 12.91. Then, with the same tune, but this time with a Vararam, the car runs 12.38.
My contention was that the non stock tune by itself didn't offer much, everything else stock. The non stock Vararam airbox, plus the non stock tune gave the 12.38.
But that the results of the Vararam in the bone stock car were unknown.
Please explain in further detail why you believe that ALL of the gain came from the tune?
You are saying that ALL of his gain came from the tune and nothing from the Vararam?
I believe that he got "something" from the Vararam, but certainly not half of a second.
"...The first time 4/1/2005 2.048 60 ft.13.147 et 107.49 mph.4/1/2005 cartek fan switch 160 therm. 8/24/2005 cartek ECU Reprogram 2005 LS-2 minor tune A4. 8/26/2005 2.052 60 ft. 13.014 et 109.25 mph 60 ft. time...because tune might have been lost. when cartek checked they seen one new update so redid it for FREE. went back to track 10/27/2005 60 ft. 2.018 12.919 et 109.48 mph. temp 47 relative humidity 100 absolute baro 29.46 that's the best so far i think because of cold and miles. now vararam and spacer. 60 ft. 1.972 et 12.387 mph 113.36"
He had the Cartek tune before the Vararam and it got him from 13.014 to 12.91. Then, with the same tune, but this time with a Vararam, the car runs 12.38.
My contention was that the non stock tune by itself didn't offer much, everything else stock. The non stock Vararam airbox, plus the non stock tune gave the 12.38.
But that the results of the Vararam in the bone stock car were unknown.
Please explain in further detail why you believe that ALL of the gain came from the tune?
A tune is not an instant change for the fuel trims. It can take a long time for them to stabilize. That also affects timing, showing up as knock retard. After they stabilize, you have to scan again and normally adjust some more. It's rare to get them set perfect on the first adjustment.
If he was running 13's there was something very wrong with that car. Also if his best run is a 12.48 that is not his average. This summer he'll see 12.8 consistent.
My stock C5 runs 12.65 for a best. Usually 12.8/12.9 Whoops, I said stock. It does have a Blackwing over a cutout in the shroud, 3:42 and my tune.
Last edited by C5 Express; May 16, 2006 at 07:11 AM.
Race Director
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,549
Likes: 27
From: Southampton NJ
Originally Posted by C5 Express
I'm just throwing that out for discussion.
A tune is not an instant change for the fuel trims. It can take a long time for them to stabilize. That also affects timing, showing up as knock retard. After they stabilize, you have to scan again and normally adjust some more. It's rare to get them set perfect on the first adjustment.
If he was running 13's there was something very wrong with that car. Also if his best run is a 12.48 that is not his average. This summer he'll see 12.8 consistent.
My stock C5 runs 12.65 for a best. Usually 12.8/12.9 Whoops, I said stock. It does have a Blackwing over a cutout in the shroud, 3:42 and my tune.
A tune is not an instant change for the fuel trims. It can take a long time for them to stabilize. That also affects timing, showing up as knock retard. After they stabilize, you have to scan again and normally adjust some more. It's rare to get them set perfect on the first adjustment.
If he was running 13's there was something very wrong with that car. Also if his best run is a 12.48 that is not his average. This summer he'll see 12.8 consistent.
My stock C5 runs 12.65 for a best. Usually 12.8/12.9 Whoops, I said stock. It does have a Blackwing over a cutout in the shroud, 3:42 and my tune.
Intermediate
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by dennis50nj
the .03 difference in consistency will win many races you can change your dial each round an dial in 1/10 slower but it don't mean any thing if you cant pull a good light. most 05 c6 a4new of my weight ran 13.s and the car does run 12.06 now and probably 11s next time down and you are right it takes 200 miles to see final gains that's why you cant do on of same day testing
My average lights for the last year is .028. I've had several .000 this past year. That helps me win a few but my car HAS to run a .01 or less variable or I won't last long.
I also have never seen a C6 run 13's. I need to start paying closer attention. Stock C5's run 13.1/13.2 right out of the factory. How can a C6 be that slow with more ponies?
Le Mans Master
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 7,695
Likes: 51
From: Imperial Beach CA
Originally Posted by midnite902
Please correct me if I am wrong. Your hydrolock occurred with the Halltach Tric?. That filter was of a completely different design than today's C6 bottom feeders, The filter in that unit sat so low the filter often had to be modified when the car was lowered. My LPE is over 12 inches off the ground enclosed in a cavity a couple of feet back from the nose. I have seen no reports of hydrolock with any of the filters that use this desgn (LPE, Callaway, etc.).
While hydrolock resulting from driving through puddles deep enough to cover the cavity and create a seal is a concern. Splashes, heavy rain, or traffic waves from small puddles are not.
I have driven my car in heavy rains here in Dallas and on the road over the winter without problems.
I think the new designs are much safer than your 'old' C5 Halltech but that is just my opinion.
While hydrolock resulting from driving through puddles deep enough to cover the cavity and create a seal is a concern. Splashes, heavy rain, or traffic waves from small puddles are not.
I have driven my car in heavy rains here in Dallas and on the road over the winter without problems.
I think the new designs are much safer than your 'old' C5 Halltech but that is just my opinion.
Team Owner
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 27,253
Likes: 134
From: Short Hills, NJ
Originally Posted by C5 Express
I also have never seen a C6 run 13's. I need to start paying closer attention. Stock C5's run 13.1/13.2 right out of the factory. How can a C6 be that slow with more ponies?
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvette Engines RANKED by Peak Torque (70+ Years of Muscle!)
Joe Kucinski
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Intermediate
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by LS1LT1
I've seen it, especially if they were brand new and running in less than stellar air quality, torque management plays a role as well.
Race Director
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,549
Likes: 27
From: Southampton NJ
Originally Posted by C5 Express
You can do it same day as testing. I am not going to post how but you can PM me if interested.
My average lights for the last year is .028. I've had several .000 this past year. That helps me win a few but my car HAS to run a .01 or less variable or I won't last long.
I also have never seen a C6 run 13's. I need to start paying closer attention. Stock C5's run 13.1/13.2 right out of the factory. How can a C6 be that slow with more ponies?
My average lights for the last year is .028. I've had several .000 this past year. That helps me win a few but my car HAS to run a .01 or less variable or I won't last long.
I also have never seen a C6 run 13's. I need to start paying closer attention. Stock C5's run 13.1/13.2 right out of the factory. How can a C6 be that slow with more ponies?
Team Owner
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 27,253
Likes: 134
From: Short Hills, NJ
Originally Posted by C5 Express
I'm just surprised. I think you run at E-Town and know a lot of the same guys I do and they run mid 12's. I thought they were stock, maybe not.
Race Director
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,549
Likes: 27
From: Southampton NJ
DSOMZ51 sorry for being such an ***. now that i thought about it i believe you are right the tune probably helped a lot. because so much time had passed between runs the shift points higher rpms timing and fuel had to play a big role i never listen to the wisdom of experience i always have to hear a lot think then make my own decision
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: Sumner WA
Well I have read CAI posts until I was dizzy, trying to figure out which one was right. Seems that most people like the performance of the Vararam but not the build quality (fit, finish, install, etc)...but now it looks like a new version with all that corrected is coming out. I am going to order that unit and give it a shot.
I will report my findings on this board when I get it installed. I will also post info on the build quality, and how it compares to the older version we have read about.... wish me luck!
I will report my findings on this board when I get it installed. I will also post info on the build quality, and how it compares to the older version we have read about.... wish me luck!
Tech Contributor
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 14,950
Likes: 264
From: St. Louis, MO
St. Jude Donor '08
Originally Posted by robotpedlr
Well I have read CAI posts until I was dizzy, trying to figure out which one was right. Seems that most people like the performance of the Vararam but not the build quality (fit, finish, install, etc)...but now it looks like a new version with all that corrected is coming out. I am going to order that unit and give it a shot.
I will report my findings on this board when I get it installed. I will also post info on the build quality, and how it compares to the older version we have read about.... wish me luck!
I will report my findings on this board when I get it installed. I will also post info on the build quality, and how it compares to the older version we have read about.... wish me luck!
Team Owner
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 38,314
Likes: 35
Originally Posted by dennis50nj
DSOMZ51 sorry for being such an ***. now that i thought about it i believe you are right the tune probably helped a lot. because so much time had passed between runs the shift points higher rpms timing and fuel had to play a big role i never listen to the wisdom of experience i always have to hear a lot think then make my own decision
Intermediate
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by dennis50nj
i have taken the stock air bridge off and seen a 1/10 slower took filters out 1/10 slower even with rr slower till computer relearns at first extra air more fuel retards timing even if you tune right their it will change that's why dyno numbers are different each run. and if you have a lot of rounds to run clean ups on track sun weather changes from day to night as you said da can change quickly .01 seems impossible i have raced since 68 a lot of bracket racing won a lot of rounds won a Winston cup championship in heavy eliminator in 81.always changed dial some times every round 400 plus cars in the class that day. good light good brakes good win. checkout c6 times most in 13s most don't post until better and torque management is what kills them 2.10 and slower 60 ft no tire spin and believe me their is no way to remove on a4 or a6 if you no away can guarantee way better 60 ft you will be rich
I've been told that the Fast computer will automatically compensate for the weather and the car will run the same number regardless of the weather. I have no idea how much it varies. And they are very expensive.
Race Director
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,549
Likes: 27
From: Southampton NJ
Originally Posted by C5 Express
No, I didn't mean it that way. I mean I have to have the car run under.01 from what I dial. I have matched my weather station to the car and depend on it for my predictions.
I've been told that the Fast computer will automatically compensate for the weather and the car will run the same number regardless of the weather. I have no idea how much it varies. And they are very expensive.
I've been told that the Fast computer will automatically compensate for the weather and the car will run the same number regardless of the weather. I have no idea how much it varies. And they are very expensive.