new cam results i6

22-12-2005, 06:41 PM

put the new g&d cam in sat arvo ,finaly got it retuned today .it made 158.3 rwk @ 5400rpm and 340 nm @ 3400rpm .somethings definately got to be restricting my set up .its strange how it made 159 rwk with just streetfighter cam then 157 rwk with ported head/streetfighter cam and now 158 rwk with the new cam .it was tuned and dynoed by cnj motorsports all 3 times ,they are great blokes and if your in brissy area ,i'd recomend them.
on the bright side the thing pulls hard all the way to the limiter again . i'm going to advance the cam on the weekend a bit to try bring the power curve back down a bit .when we put the cam in we just set the vernier gear to 0 degrese .
all in all it feels a lot stronger ,i'll have to go out to willowbank for a run and see how she goes.
jake

xr8ute · 22-12-2005, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nik

i'll have to go out to willowbank for a run and see how she goes
jake

Good luck at the track, hope it works out well. One thing is for sure, big peak hp numbers don't always equal the quickest car. Hamos 14.3 was with around 140 at the wheels wasnt it?

Does seem weird that peak hp has hardly changed at all given the recent changes you've made. Stick with it, G&D certainly have some impressive track results to back up their work

stiddy · 22-12-2005, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xr8ute

Good luck at the track, hope it works out well. One thing is for sure, big peak hp numbers don't always equal the quickest car. Hamos 14.3 was with around 140 at the wheels wasnt it?

Does seem weird that peak hp has hardly changed at all given the recent changes you've made. Stick with it, G&D certainly have some impressive track results to back up their work

hamo's car had 157rwkw and yeah ran a 14.3

Nik im watching this thread, im curious to see how you go.. im gonna be down in GnD workshop soon enough for a fair lump of work so im curious..

xr8ute · 22-12-2005, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stiddy

hamo's car had 157rwkw and yeah ran a 14.3

OK, thats a bit more than 140 then...not sure where I got that from..LOL

:

Whats your PB Jake? Was it a 15.0(?) and a couple of mph slower after the ported head went back on...?

What sort of intake and exhaust are you running? Kee to hear how you get on at the track. Fingers crosed you get some cool dry air ;)

stiddy · 22-12-2005, 09:12 PM

I know whats wrong.. you havent got a 3inch exhaust lol..

:

is the GnD cam suited to the head that you have now or whats the story?

**Stav** · 23-12-2005, 06:51 AM

I know where your power is restrictive because we have similar components...pm sent.

Also the feelng of the car can be deceiving.I drove xr8ute's ute and didnt think it was quick..the power felt a bit different.It ran a 14.2 and I ran the 15.1 . Feeling is not a good indicator.

23-12-2005, 07:28 AM

is the GnD cam suited to the head that you have now or whats the story?[/QUOTE]

no it's the biggest cam they'd recomend to run with a unichip .i was going to get a custom grind done up ,but didn't have the money to get another chip to get it to idle.

i'm thinking maybe the lukey headers aren't up to the job.
if hammo was getting 157 rwk ,then the cams doin what it's sposed to.i reckon theres a bit left in the cam ,it needs advancing to bring the power curve back down a bit.

23-12-2005, 07:34 AM

[
Whats your PB Jake? Was it a 15.0(?) and a couple of mph slower after the ported head went back on...?

What sort of intake and exhaust are you running? Kee to hear how you get on at the track. Fingers crosed you get some cool dry air ;)[/QUOTE]

14.596 @ 95 that was with just the streetfighter cam only
i got a 15.001 @ 93 after i fitted the ported head ,but i have since found out that my clutch was shagged and slipping witch would explain 60 ft's were slower and et's

i run a jmm cai and lukey headers hiflow cat (could be stuffed )2 1/2 sports with single lukey ultra flow

**Stav** · 27-12-2005, 12:27 AM

At what kays is power peaking at?

SpoolMan · 27-12-2005, 12:42 AM

Hamo's AU made 151rwkw with the Cam he used to run 14.30 97.6 mph...
when you got 159rwkw with just a street fighter cam was this done on the same dyno as your current setup and tune?

we seen a JMM full dev4 kit E-series falcon complete re-built motor at our AFF dyno event and he manged 159 rwkw he has gone 14.17 @ 97.8 mph...its a manual so it has less loss on the dyno through the drive line compared to the auto...

27-12-2005, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XRFPV8

Hamo's AU made 151rwkw with the Cam he used to run 14.30 97.6 mph...
when you got 159rwkw with just a street fighter cam was this done on the same dyno as your current setup and tune?

we seen a JMM full dev4 kit E-series falcon complete re-built motor at our AFF dyno event and he manged 159 rwkw he has gone 14.17 @ 97.8 mph...its a manual so it has less loss on the dyno through the drive line compared to the auto...

the tunes were all done by cnj on the same dyno by the same guys.
crikey you guy's are getting some good mph out of it

**Stav** · 27-12-2005, 08:21 AM

My last tuner (no names) was focusing only on top end power .I have been talking to you the longest of any member Jake and hope to help get you there mate.
I dont believe that you have power problems at all.158-159 proper rwkws should be getting you down the 1/4 in 14.7-14.1 by comparison to other cars.

Get yourself on another dyno dynamics dyno to get a more realistic picture for yourself of what is going on. With the times you are running I think that either 2 things are happenning.

firstly ..you dont have the power or power curve required to do the job.
secondly the power delivery systems arent doing their job.

if your peak power is above 160 kmph then I think that advancing the cam a tad may help or a set of 3.9 diff gears to bring down the powerband.Advancing a cam by 2 degrees is said to lower the band by 500 rpm

SpoolMan · 27-12-2005, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nik

crikey you guy's are getting some good mph out of it

Regardless of your ET most tuners look for a improvement in MPH.
The MPH is the true indicator if your engine is making more power.
97.6 mph is good enough for a better ET (14.30), 1 more crack for Hamo going to edit just the Auto...see if he can get it off the line harder...
Then its retired, he has BA XR8 he wants to play with....The AU is being driven by his GF.. if she was not driving it, we were going to try a 3500rpm hi-stall...
Good luck Nik, let us know when you hit the track...

**Stav** · 28-12-2005, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XRFPV8

Regardless of your ET most tuners look for a improvement in MPH.
The MPH is the true indicator if your engine is making more power.
97.6 mph is good enough for a better ET (14.30), 1 more crack for Hamo going to edit just the Auto...see if he can get it off the line harder...
Then its retired, he has BA XR8 he wants to play with....The AU is being driven by his GF.. if she was not driving it, we were going to try a 3500rpm hi-stall...
Good luck Nik, let us know when you hit the track...

Trust me ..a 3500 stall wont make it faster.You will be reducing the powerband too much.

Walkinshaw · 28-12-2005, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by useless

Trust me ..a 3500 stall wont make it faster.You will be reducing the powerband too much.

Not all of us have a baby cam that kicks in below 3500

Casper · 28-12-2005, 04:27 PM

Hell, for the track I'd love to be able to run a 3500rpm stall in my stock engine, it would most certainly make a difference. As soon as you are past 3500rpm you never see that low a rev again till you're off the accelorator. 3500rpm would be ideal to launch at on the track in an I6.. most manuals do it around those rpms or more. Its just simply not practical on the road day to day though.

stiddy · 28-12-2005, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

Hell, for the track I'd love to be able to run a 3500rpm stall in my stock engine, it would most certainly make a difference. As soon as you are past 3500rpm you never see that low a rev again till you're off the accelorator. 3500rpm would be ideal to launch at on the track in an I6.. most manuals do it around those rpms or more. Its just simply not practical on the road day to day though.

i think 3500 would be perfect launch at the track..
i have a manual and the minimum i launch it from is 3500rpm....
i think it would make a fairly big difference if you can get traction..
the auto would probably be faster over a manual, if you can launch both at 3500rpm with traction...

xr8ute · 28-12-2005, 05:01 PM

I'd love a 3500rpm converter!!! Would be a bit doughy on the street though...

Converter choice should really match where your cam starts making power. My best power seems to be between 3500rpm to 5500rpm so it would be almost perfect.

When it was running the stock cam, it was out of puff by 4500rpm. A 3000rpm converter would have been a wasted most of my powerband.

Theres no hard and fast rules with this sort of thing, it's all about the combo ;)

**Stav** · 28-12-2005, 10:35 PM

I have a 3300 stall converter. A 2.177 60 foot time isnt too bad for a lard *** au wagon auto...without traction..

Walkinshaw ...maybe my cam is a baby cam but its still quicker than yours with an extra 100 kgs of weight. :hihi:

Casper I do assure you that I am the closest to 3500 stall speed in an AU auto and regularly achieve up to 3400 rpm stall speed on a few dynos.It is streetable and does work pretty fine.Its just a matter of ...are there tyres which can give traction with the higher stall speed? If not then there is no point.

EFFalcon · 28-12-2005, 11:25 PM

you recommend a car thats quicker then yours, to not increase from 3000rpm stall to 3500rpm stall, yet you're practically using one?
that to me sounds stupid....

Casper · 28-12-2005, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by useless

Casper I do assure you that I am the closest to 3500 stall speed in an AU auto and regularly achieve up to 3400 rpm stall speed on a few dynos.It is streetable and does work pretty fine.Its just a matter of ...are there tyres which can give traction with the higher stall speed? If not then there is no point.

This is the same stall that started at 2500, then 2800, then 3100, then 3300, now 3400??
Stav, got to make up your mind. Mine started at 3000 and has remained a 3000 for the whole time.

Walkinshaw · 28-12-2005, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by useless

I have a 3300 stall converter. A 2.177 60 foot time isnt too bad for a lard *** au wagon auto...without traction..

Walkinshaw ...maybe my cam is a baby cam but its still quicker than yours with an extra 100 kgs of weight. :hihi:

Casper I do assure you that I am the closest to 3500 stall speed in an AU auto and regularly achieve up to 3400 rpm stall speed on a few dynos.It is streetable and does work pretty fine.Its just a matter of ...are there tyres which can give traction with the higher stall speed? If not then there is no point.

Sooooo let me get this straight.

DONT USE A 3500converter. But you are the closest to 3500rpm and its great.

Just like saying, "don't do heroin, but mate god i feel great when i shoot up"

Oh as for you being quicker, how's about you give me $3000 (cost of your diff, edit, stall) to spend on mine and we'll see who's quicker...PS, it won't be you. My $1000 of mods goes quiet well thanks. Whats also wierd is your 2.2 60' Your a whole 0.09sec quicker to 60' with 3.9, stall and slicks than i was with 3.23, 1800stall and 205 cheeze cutters............wierd

Casper · 28-12-2005, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by useless

Walkinshaw ...maybe my cam is a baby cam but its still quicker than yours with an extra 100 kgs of weight. :hihi:

And I'm using a factory stock cam, factory stock diff and (at the time) factory stock auto AND factory stock ECU... and I'm quicker than you (and dont pull the "I'm heavier".. it dont work with me, you have maybe 20-30kgs on my car, I have 0.15 on your wagon.. thats more than 30kg.) so whats the point?

Walkinshaw · 28-12-2005, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

And I'm using a factory stock cam, factory stock diff and (at the time) factory stock auto AND factory stock ECU... and I'm quicker than you (and dont pull the "I'm heavier".. it dont work with me, you have maybe 20-30kgs on my car, I have 0.15 on your wagon.. thats more than 30kg.) so whats the point?

Casper 0.15sec is more like 100kg

EFFalcon · 28-12-2005, 11:46 PM

and i'm running LPG and i'm slower then you all

but atleast its cheap and looks good

Casper · 28-12-2005, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walkinshaw

Casper 0.15sec is more like 100kg

Something like that.. I still dont get the point. Give me the $3000 and lets see how fast I can go (like I already dont know exactly how fast that $3000 would make me

: )

Walkinshaw · 28-12-2005, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

Something like that.. I still dont get the point. Give me the $3000 and lets see how fast I can go (like I already dont know exactly how fast that $3000 would make me

: )

3/10ths slower, 'cause you'd blow it on pies and booze like me?

Casper · 29-12-2005, 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walkinshaw

3/10ths slower, 'cause you'd blow it on pies and booze like me?

dont forget lap dancers.. got to love them.

stiddy · 29-12-2005, 12:30 AM

lol walkinshaw.. love the avatar, its really cracking me up..

instead of it flashing a question mark it should be WTF! or both..hahaha

oh and just for sh#ts and giggles, i have a faster car than all of you with lesser mods then all of you hahahaha... (the longer capser delays goin to the track, the longer i hold that title )

jonbays · 29-12-2005, 11:32 AM

Weight is a big baddie down the qtr so don't get too excited about your times.

It's all power to weight modified by gearing.

Foe example on a qtr mile calc here is the difference between a modded falcons all with the same power. Not quite real world as it assumes perfect gearing and traction.

manual sedan ET 14.57 sec TS 92.9mph

Auto sedan ET 14.80 sec TS 91.4mph

Auto wagon or IRS Auto sedan ET 14.95 sec TS 90.5mph