Nice stable of cars, and explantion!!

JB

 

I'll admit I'm having a hard time getting my brain to comprehend the numbers.

The first one makes sense - 20 hp with a tune, and taking advantage of the higher octane gas, I fully comprehend that one.

The second one seems a bit high - effectively you are saying you picked up 20 rwhp with just a filter (not sure what the bridge brings to the party). I would not think the octane would be giving you much in addition to phase I here.

Phase III is getting you 30hp with exhaust. I've seen 30hp for headers AND a tune, but in your case you have already had the tune, so the 30 seems high for just headers.

Typically, gains are not cumulative. I frequently see people trying to add up the gains that can be had based upon claims from manufacturers of CAI, headers etc. As I'm sure you know, it never works that way. 20+20 almost never equals 40 (just as an example).

Thanks for sharing the information. While I admit to being skeptical that 80 rwhp can be gained with these mods, I can honestly say I'm reading and listening with an open mind. I also am curious about the 376 stock reading. I will try to go back and look after I post this, but isn't that a 6 speed manual LS3? If so, that is by far the lowest reading I've seen for one.

My car - LS3 manual with NPP dynod at 390.5 on MTIs dyno. I have a lot of experience with MTI and I find their dyno runs to be very consistent and realistic. Any thoughts on why the 376 number seems so low?

Thanks again.

 

I don't have the Lucas to look at the label but it's probably advertized as increasing the octane by 3 "points". They don't mention that a point is one tenth of an octane. 3 "points " would raise you from 93.0 Octane to 93.3 Octane. If you stated Torco in 'points' the Torco raises Octane by 101 "points", 93 to 104 when mixed one 32 oz. can to 10 gallons of 93 Octane gas.

I have no idea of current cost of Torco, it used to add $1.40 to the cost of a gallon of 93 Oct. It's not cheap but it was cheaper (and more available) than race gas and much easier to use.

 

Go to go to work, but 2 things real quick:

The intitial run at 376 was on 91 octane only, and we made a few pulls to back that one up.
People seeing 390s are most likely using 93 or 94 to start...

Once we put the headers and exhaust on, and increased the octane with a stronger Torco mix, we then did extensive tuning to redial the car in!!

Charlie was on a "load" dyno for a few hours to get the fueling right before we got the big #s!!

JB

 

No it isn't. You are using the old way of calculating HP at 15 percent.
So is Charlie at RPM.

You need to calculate with 10 percent loss under the 08's new SAE rating.

LEX

 

So once again, you're saying, more octane means more rwhp. Is that correct?

 

As the octane goes higher the amount of energy in the fuel usually goes down (not counting oxygenated racing fuels). The rule of thumb by people in the know at the drag strip is to use the lowest octane your car will handle without detonation. That may be easy to detect with old school engines, but with newer engines and computer controlled systems you can change the timing curves to take advantage of the higher octane. Anti-knock sensors can also make it hard to tell that there is a problem with the octane level. Unless you have the need for 100 octane racing gas, it will slow your car down. Octane is a number that represents the anti-knock factor of the fuel, which basically is how slow it will burn. Octane boosters slow down the burn of the fuel, and may have the side affect of reducing the energy in the fuel even more than a normal premium fuel of the equivelent octane. One example is ethanol blends, which increase octane but decrease the energy in the fuel. If you have a 93 octane tune in your car and it does not detonate on 93 octane pump gas, you will loose power by going to anything higher.

 

I will be doing some dyno testing next week, will post the results.

 

Torco eh? Here are some Subaru engine/ cylinder head pictures compliments of the stuff:









I have seen flood damage look nicer than this...........

 

Thanks for your input and sarcastic attitude Mike.

Yes Torco will discolor your plugs, and leave a slight residue. I've said this many times before. This particular motor appears to have a few other issues going on.

You come on here showing some pretty ugly stuff, and try to make it all appear to be from Torco.

I've run Torco in my 98 for over 5 years in every tank, and never saw anything like this. While I only sell Torco on the side, and it is by no means a real source of revenue to me, I have probably sold well over 500 cases in the last few years. I have never had one customer come back to me with a single complaint!!

Torco has been selling this product for over 10 years now. If it really did this to motors, do you think this product would still be around?

 

It's from my Subaru!



Aside from AZ 91 Octane, this is the only culprit for a sub 30k mile engine. I would never use the stuff...

 

Going to do my tests today. OCTANE BOOST + 2 DEG
TIMING, I will post my results here. LS2 w cai.

 

Here is an engine that has run torco for 4+ years. Absolutely no issues.

 

Explain how I should apply your calculation factor when both cars put down similar RWHP numbers on the same chassis dyno.

I think you are talking about Flywheel HP ratings and confusing that with Wheel Hp ratings.

Here's the program outline directly from SAE's website...

About SAE J1349 Certified Power

Power and torque certification provide a means for a manufacturer to assure a customer that the engine they purchase delivers the advertised performance. This SAE Standard has been written to provide manufacturers with a method of certifying the power of engines to SAE J1349 or SAE J1995. Document SAE J2723 specifies the procedure to be used for a manufacturer to certify the net power and torque rating of a production engine according to SAE J1349 or the gross engine power of a production engine according to SAE J1995. Manufacturers who advertise their engine power and torque ratings as Certified to SAE J1349 or SAE J1995 shall follow this procedure. Certification of engine power and torque to SAE J1349 or SAE J1995 is voluntary, however, this power certification process is mandatory for those advertising power ratings as "Certified to SAE J1349".

SAE Engine Rating Standard Prevents Numbers Fudging (an article on how GM will use SAE J1349 Certified Power, AEI May 2005, Vol 113 No.5, p 59 )

General Motors has become the first manufacturer to certify an engine's power and torque ratings using a newly adopted SAE standard (J2723), James Queen, GM Vice President, Global Engineering, announced during his keynote address at the SAE World Congress and Exhibition in April 2005. The world's largest automaker plans to certify all of its engines to the voluntary standard, and is encouraging its competitors to do the same. The LS7 engine for the 2006 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 was certified under the new standard this month. The 7.0-L V8 unit produces 505 hp (377 kW) at 6300 rpm and 470 lboft (637 Nom) at 4800 rpm. "The new voluntary SAE power and torque certification procedure ensures fair, accurate ratings for horsepower and torque as it uses third-party certification," said Queen. "SAE technical standards level the playing field, and this certification procedure is just the latest example of the value SAE has offered over the past century." To tout power and torque ratings as "SAE-certified," engine manufacturers must have an SAE qualified witness watch over the entire testing procedure to ensure that it is conducted in conformity to SAE standard J1349. Third-party witnessing is the main provision of J2723. An existing SAE standard, J1349, spells out how the actual testing is to be done. J1349 was updated last year to eliminate some ambiguities that allowed engine makers to cite power and torque ratings higher than the engine's actual capabilities. Engine makers are free to cite power and torque figures drived from testing conducted outside the scope of the SAE standards, but they may not claim the figures are SAE-certifed. "We feel that both the consumer and industry are well served by having accurate, consistent ratings from all manufacturers," said David Lancaster, a Technical Fellow in GM Powertrain and Chairman of the SAE Engine Power Test Code Committee that updated J1349 and wrote J2723. Data from a wide array of parameters (e.g., air:fuel ratio) will be collected during testing conducted to the SAE standards. SAE will create a database and offer it to industry in different packages and at different price points.

 

If it leaves residue, AND discolors plugs, it's not going in my engine. Thanks for the headsup you just saved me the purchase.

 

Wow

 

For a little more headsup...
MMT is an additive in TORCO used to increase octane and it's the MMT that causes the discoloration/deposits/problems. Read your owners manual (pages 5-5 and 5-6) for GM's take on MMT...they recommend against the use of it as it reduces the life of the spark plugs and may cause problems to the emission control system leading to a "check engine" light. Repairs may or may not be covered under warranty.
Link to an online copy of the owners manual, just scroll to the pages listed above:
https://www.mygmlink.com/pdf/go2cont...06corvette.pdf

The "2006" in the link can be changed to reflect the year of other 'Vettes.

 

DO NOT PUT THAT SHEET IN YOUR TANK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I put 3 bottles of it and went to the track, the car ran slower, I may not be the best driver at 1/4 mile racing, but the best I got out of the LS3 (bone stock 392 dyno'd)was a 12.7 @ 114mph ..... Everyone told me after the fact, higher octane will burn slower and not ignite fully, the only way it will work is if the car is tuned for the higher octane!!! I am so pissed at myself

 

FWIW, spark plugs are cheap... O2 sensors for 97-04 Corvettes are now sold at pep boys for cheap and have a lifetime warranty.

If you truly have a need for Torco to make big horsepower. These little things like spark plugs or replacing O2 sensors are not a big concern. FWIW, I have been using Torco for years and the only time I needed to replace the O2 sensors was after my last motor blew up and "flushed" coolant down my exhaust system. I've had the same spark plugs in my car for over a year without any problems. The set I had in before stayed in for almost 2 years as well.

 

YEP, i put one bottle of that stuff in my tank. Its a cool 58 degrees in PA today and the car did not perform any better. It may have slowed it down even. I installed a 160 stat today. No better. Thats the last time my car will see that stuff. For $9.00 a bottle its a real rip.

Your the first to share info on that stuff ( lucas as pictured in the post ). Those guys are promoting torco, maybe it works but no
additives for this guy.