Halltech

In December 2005, we had Donaldson Company provide us with a flow analysis of the Stock C6 AIS (C6 Basecar) vs. the Halltech Stinger SSM for the C6 (with the stock laminar flow honeycomb screen in the MAF), vs the Stock LS7 AIS with the Donaldson/AC Delco PowerCore filter) Here are the results:
http://www.corvettels7.com/Halltech_test_report.pdf

The C6 Stinger actually flows better than the stock LS7 AIS when the flow screen is removed, but the turbulence from the air tumble causes lean codes, so we always recommended leaving the screens in tact.

This next test was done with the Halltech/Donaldson LS900 PowerCore Filter vs. the stock filter.




You can see the restriction at 700 cfm is about 15% less than the stock LS7 filter (max power for the stock LS7 is 720 cfm). You would think this would represent a substantial HP/TQ increase, but the actual increase on the Katech Dyno cell was only 2 HP/2 ft. lbs. TQ!

http://www.corvettels7.com/Halltech ...Comparison.pdf

I thought this information would be of interest, since our upcoming Killer Bee AAIS will be competing with the stock LS7 intake flow numbers.

Jim

XC6VETTE

OK Jim, I'll bite and here's a bump! Let's see those Killer Bee AAIS numbers for the Z06!

I never took the foam filters out of the box between Winter and hearing this was coming! Do we know price and performance yet?

Halltech

Still in testing. Two new filters in testing with one filter design that has extreme high velocity.

In the meantime. Stage 1 is not a bad choice:

Halltech Stage 1 - another report
Just dynoed the car after installing Jim's F1 race filter and tune. Here are the comparison data. Both the stock and modified runs were done on LG Motorsports' Dynojet.

BONE STOCK ( 63 deg F ) ( 34% humidity )

Run ----- Oil T ----- H2O T ----- RWHP ----- RWTQ

1 -------- 149 ------ 198 -------- 456 ------- 424

2 -------- 158 ------ 210 -------- 463 ------- 431

3 -------- 153 ------ 205 -------- 458 ------- 431


F1 AIR FILTER AND HALLTECH TUNE ( 70 deg F ) ( 30% humidity )

Run ----- Oil T ----- H2O T ----- RWHP ----- RWTQ

4 *** invalid data (wheels spun on dyno) ***

5 -------- 167 ------ 214 -------- 484 ------- 446

6 -------- 156 ------ 203 -------- 481 ------- 453

Assuming the car has 505 FWHP, per Katech, then the stock data reflect a 90.69% flywheel-to-dyno rollers efficiency under these conditions, on this dyno. (throw out high and low, use 458 rwhp, so 458/505 = .9069)

Using the same efficiency factor for the modded runs, and using run 5 (the first run, which isn't posted, showed 486 hp / 344 tq - so I threw it out as the "high" and threw out run 6 as the "low") gives 534 FWHP / 492 FWTQ.

So, it looks like Jim's estimates on hp/tq gains are right on, as the car gained about 26 RWHP / 15 RWTQ (29 FWHP/17 FWTQ). The dyno sheets show roughly constant percentage hp and torque gains across the rpm range. (My 10 yr old says he can photograph and load them on the computer for me if he can find the cable for his camera. Boy does that make me feel old and stupid. )

My SOTP impression is more low end torque (better partial throttle response). I can't tell much difference on the high end. But I think that's because in the days / weeks before the mods it was in the low 40s, so the ECM wasn't pulling timing or adding fuel, and the streets and tires were cold = whoa! I'm sure the real SOTP difference will be when it's 90+ deg this summer, when the stock ECM program usually pulls like 30 hp "just to be safe."

And the CAGS defeat is a real plus.

30 ponies / 17 ft-lbs. Way to go, Jim!

And a very special thanks to LG Motorsports - Bobby (very nice Cobra!), Anthony, Sean, and Lou (wherever he is). You guys run a first rate shop.

- Dave

Jim