Why always Fridays? Some of us have to work on Fridays you know :willy:

Some of us have a wife and kids :willy: :willy:

I'll look into Saturday, but its tougher for me.

That's just wrong, Robert. :) I'm flying back from Switzerland this Friday and won't get in until about 7pm. :( :( I would totally skip work and do anything to thrash my beater and maybe ride a session or two with both of you guys!

I would love to see the Run File. Thanks Andy.

Jim

Emailed.....

No crap...I didn't even spin the wheels on the dyno when I made the run posted below....it was almost a perfect run except for one little misfire.

Andi,

Great numbers my friend! :cheers:

Steve T.

Back those dyno #'s up with some runs @ the dragstrip.. :cheers:

OK.

If you check out Playadam's thread, he just dynoed at LGM with LG Long-Tube Headers and tune and hit SAE 473.4 and 457.5.

there quite a few zs dynoing at 430-450 rwhp. i find it a little odd this car makes up to 50 rwhp mpre than those. maybe its the builder? probably threw in a cam shaved the heads and who knows what else... :bs

It doesn’t make 50 more.
Most dyno around ~450rwHP

I think the variations are just that – dyno variations.
I think all cars are much closer together in reality.

In this example sounds like the car may not have been strapped down correctly, possibly causing skewed readings.

These 2 cars were done on the same dyno.

I don't think is BS Mr. Diel. When I saw Andi's dyno post, I knew that some naysayers were going to jump in and shine away. Look, I dyno my car at that same very dyno back when my car was only 130 miles old, and it pulled 459.9 STOCK with filter in place and in the heat of Texas. A few hundred miles later, it dyno 468, if you don't believe it, then so be it. I am not loosing any sleep over it and I am willing to bet that neither is Andi. I truly believe that his 467 are very real. Heck, my brother’s Z in Chicago pulled 463 and 461 with only 500 miles or so on his ride...STOCK.
I will tell you that we, (my brother and I) did not follow that goofy break-in procedure the manual says. I freaking jumped on my car after 40 miles or so. I am not sure how Andi did his.

I have dyno at three different shops here in North Dallas and all readings have been in the middle to upper 460's with the filter in place. Heck, if you want to flip your top even more, I can PM you or have someone here post some of my dyno runs with a CAI currently in testing. In those runs, we made 481 and 477 back to back WITH the filter in place...booyah! :thumbs:

It seems that are dyno runs are varying..could this be that when the car warms up GM set int to retard the ingtion to 25rwp less to ensure long jevity or does the weather temp or dyno affect it?I have seen from 430rwh to 480.Thanx for figures anyway! :yesnod:

YES!

Same C6Z, same dyno (same in this case), same day, same temperature, same mods,etc. = +/- 5-10rwhp/rwtrq.

I guess that settles that argument!
:cheers:

I, too, believe there must be something going on with the dyno that explains this difference in HP. Identically built engines don't vary by that much from the norm. I also believe that there is no difference in the particular engine builder. Although the engines may be, in part, hand built, I find this to be largely a GM publicity stunt. Do you really think one builder sifts through a bin of parts with a micrometer looking for the perfect set of pistons?

Give the car to Ranger for a few days at the drags and see if the times are any different. That would be the acid test.

What rarely seems to happen is the testing of several, identically equipped cars at the same place and time. Then your data would be a lot more reliable.

As far as break-in goes, with all due respect to Andy, I still will go with what a bunch of mechanical and automotive engineers, with the tools to do the analysis, particularly if you plan on hanging on to your car for a bunch of years.

Look at the shape of the red curve on that plot above. The peak value seems to come from the "bump" which looks completely abnormal. Also, the overall shape of the curve does not fit well with the others. I say it was a bad dyno reading. The green curve looks to have a better shape. Knowing that LG runs a great shop, I say it's a one time anomaly. I bet if you go back and run it again on a calibrated dyno, you'll get something approximating the green curve. Just my two cents...

Still, nice numbers.

Go back to the very top of the thread and read my 1st post.

:toetap: I'm waiting......

Ok.... the 1st graph looks weird because the tires were spinning. Remember from physics class that the coefficient of dynamic friction is lower than the coefficient of static friction -- i.e. you when you spin your tires, you're not going as fast as the guy who's hooking. So in run 1, when the car is spinning the tires, it's not putting down as much torque. Then when the car finally does hook, it hooks hard, which translates into a spike in horsepower/torque (which is why I never said "hey look y'all I made 488rwhp" when anybody else in my position would have). The 488 was a spike. But if you closely examine the graph, you can see that after the spike, the car was actually producing ~480rwhp on that run steadily.

Sigh, where's glass slipper when you need him? :cheers:

Andi