Nice result!, gained a lot more area under the curve on the boosted runs. 6HP increase doesn't do it justice at all haha, it looks like 100HP at 5.5K but the feel in the seat should tell you all about that i'm guessing. Very keen to see how much of a difference it makes on the strip.
The Sledgehammer - Shooting for 1,000hp
- Thread starter AlexLTDLX
- Start date
It made 17 more peak hp, but as you mention, the area under the curve is huge. Another thing to consider is the weather was horrible last thursday - it was around 90*; the time before, the ambient was around 65 degrees. Even with dyno corrections, it would've made even more - probably another 20hp. But I can't prove that (yet - until I get my own dyno); it's just experience that tells me that. There is a lot of data to parse, particularly related to the torque converter as well. One thing I'm quite sure of - this is definitely 9 second capable now. In fact, it's now made more on a terrible weather day than the Whipple ever made. Hopefully I can get it to the track before summer, but it might have to wait until fall, depending on what's happening with the place in Texas.
Sorry for the delay - I've been having major issues with the place in Texas - the contractors poured the foundation incorrectly (and it passed 3 inspections before it was poured, somehow). It's been all I can do to work, try to fix that, keep tabs on my mom (she's 81 now) and kid, pack up the house into the trailer and still make any sort of progress on the car/youtube channel, etc.
Anyway, yeah - it would be interesting to see what DynoSim5 spits out. I used to use a program way back when called desktop dyno. I'll just post the specs here:
SBF V8 4.135" bore, 3.4" stroke (365 ci or 6.0 liters)
228/242 at .050" cam on a 116 with .600 lift intake and exhaust
Compression is 8.8:1
1 3/4" longtube Kooks Headers
EFI Intake manifold with ~ 10.5" long runners (add a few inches for the runner length in the heads - some people forget that)
100mm TB
I'll attach the head flow sheet here (port job #2 is what's currently being run):
Let me know if you need anything else. Feel free to post here in this thread, so everyone can see.
Anyway, yeah - it would be interesting to see what DynoSim5 spits out. I used to use a program way back when called desktop dyno. I'll just post the specs here:
SBF V8 4.135" bore, 3.4" stroke (365 ci or 6.0 liters)
228/242 at .050" cam on a 116 with .600 lift intake and exhaust
Compression is 8.8:1
1 3/4" longtube Kooks Headers
EFI Intake manifold with ~ 10.5" long runners (add a few inches for the runner length in the heads - some people forget that)
100mm TB
I'll attach the head flow sheet here (port job #2 is what's currently being run):
Let me know if you need anything else. Feel free to post here in this thread, so everyone can see.
I had to guess at the valve size and assumed 2.05" and 1.6". Also had to guess at cam timing and assumed the intake vale centerline at 106 degrees ATDC. DynoSim5 likes seat to seat cam duration and I assumed 260 and 276. With these assumptions, I got the following for naturally aspirated.
RPM FWHP RWHP
4500 384 326
5000 404 344
5500 403 343
6000 378 321
6500 328 279
RPM FWTQ RWTQ
4500 448 381
5000 425 361
5500 385 327
6000 331 281
6500 265 225
So seems like a reasonable match to dyno data
RPM FWHP RWHP
4500 384 326
5000 404 344
5500 403 343
6000 378 321
6500 328 279
RPM FWTQ RWTQ
4500 448 381
5000 425 361
5500 385 327
6000 331 281
6500 265 225
So seems like a reasonable match to dyno data
The valve sizes are close - 2.02 and 1.60. The seat to seat duration (0.006") is more like 280 and 292. The engine makes about 520 flywheel hp - with the other converter I saw a 26% loss through the trans and converter; and it has a BSFC of about .47, which is actually not great because of the relatively low compression. I don't have enough meaningful data with the new torque converter to calculate it's loss on the dyno - the weather was so bad that it throws everything out of whack - I'll have to dyno on a closer to SAE air day to be able to get meaningful numbers.
If this engine only makes 404 hp at 5,000 rpm, I'd throw it off a cliff - I've had a stock block 306 with the same heads that made that power with a smaller cam. There are no factory parts in the entire engine (including the block) except for the lifters and lifter guides. If you put a T5 behind it, it would be dynoing in the low to mid 400's. Peak HP is actually at just over 6,000 rpm, BTW.
That program assumes a 15% drivetrain loss - that's stick shift territory.
This guy has had almost an identical experience:
However - the glide will be faster at the track because of torque multiplication and only having to make 1 shift. In fact, it'll likely be close to half a second quicker (but not necessarily faster - MPH would stay the same or likely go down a little).
Curious to see if making the cam and valve changes makes any difference.
If this engine only makes 404 hp at 5,000 rpm, I'd throw it off a cliff - I've had a stock block 306 with the same heads that made that power with a smaller cam. There are no factory parts in the entire engine (including the block) except for the lifters and lifter guides. If you put a T5 behind it, it would be dynoing in the low to mid 400's. Peak HP is actually at just over 6,000 rpm, BTW.
That program assumes a 15% drivetrain loss - that's stick shift territory.
This guy has had almost an identical experience:
Powerglide vs. Manual - 100 rwhp loss on DynoJet... - CorvetteForum - Chevrolet Corvette Forum Discussion
C3 Tech/Performance - Powerglide vs. Manual - 100 rwhp loss on DynoJet... - I have a 632 BBC w/Big Chief heads in a '67 Corvette street car. The motor made 1060 hp on an engine dyno and makes 900+ rwhp and 760+ rwtq on my DynoJet. This is with full exhaust connected. The car is not NHRA legal...
www.corvetteforum.com
However - the glide will be faster at the track because of torque multiplication and only having to make 1 shift. In fact, it'll likely be close to half a second quicker (but not necessarily faster - MPH would stay the same or likely go down a little).
Curious to see if making the cam and valve changes makes any difference.
Changed the cam duration to 280/292 with 116 LSA. Played with the cam timing. It liked opening the intake later and got most HP at 117 intake centerline. Valve overlap was 54 degrees. This resulted in 516 HP at 6500 rpm and 481 ft-lbs at 5000 rpm. This was at sea level with 90 'F and 50% humidity.
That sounds closer. Those programs always seem to get you in the ballpark, but they're only as good as the input data. I know when I'm in the building phase of a project I can't help but do whatever simulations I can because I'm excited to see the result. I appreciate you running that through the program. There's a program called pipemax that some in the racing community seem to like.
DynoSim5 is one level of enhancement up from Desktop Dyno. There are two more levels of enhancement; DynoSim6 and Dynomation6. Pricing is:
DynoSim5 - $70
DynoSim6 - $150
Dynomation6 - $500
I checked out Pipemax and it looks like its strength is in header design although it also does engine simulation - $150.
I bought DynoSim because I was considering boring and stroking a GM 2.3L Quad 4. This is a DOHC engine that makes 190 HP stock. I thought with 2.6L displacement I might get 225 HP. DynoSim predicts 210 HP which didn't seem worth the money.
I think with the engine simulators you have to calibrate to a known starting point and then you can evaluate the relative effects of changes. I'll add a supercharger on to you engine now and see what that says. I'll have to calculate the supercharger power consumption so that can be added back in.
DynoSim5 - $70
DynoSim6 - $150
Dynomation6 - $500
I checked out Pipemax and it looks like its strength is in header design although it also does engine simulation - $150.
I bought DynoSim because I was considering boring and stroking a GM 2.3L Quad 4. This is a DOHC engine that makes 190 HP stock. I thought with 2.6L displacement I might get 225 HP. DynoSim predicts 210 HP which didn't seem worth the money.
I think with the engine simulators you have to calibrate to a known starting point and then you can evaluate the relative effects of changes. I'll add a supercharger on to you engine now and see what that says. I'll have to calculate the supercharger power consumption so that can be added back in.
I ran a boosted case in DynoSim with a Vortech Si trim supercharger. I adjusted the pulley ratio to get 6.8 psi of boost at 6500 rpm. I specified an intercooler efficiency to get 140 'F MAT. This resulted in 679 hp which includes the parasitic load of the supercharger. I checked the power consumption for 75% supercharger efficiency in a compressor model and got 31 hp (23 kW). So with electric boost the power is 710 hp or a gain of 195 hp over the N/A case. The compressor map says the required rpm to get 6.8 psi of boost is about 32,000. 6500 rpm is on a sweet spot on the compressor map. The motor + ESC performance is impressive.
Here's the video - it's worth noting that to run these times, the car made over 800 crank horsepower:
On a mineshaft air day, it might get to 850 hp. But I think that's all the compressor's got. Without another power adder (i.e. second electric supercharger or nitrous) it won't hit 1,000 hp. When I (finally) get down to the new place with the dyno, I'll be able to do twin/compound setup testing... I can't wait.
On a mineshaft air day, it might get to 850 hp. But I think that's all the compressor's got. Without another power adder (i.e. second electric supercharger or nitrous) it won't hit 1,000 hp. When I (finally) get down to the new place with the dyno, I'll be able to do twin/compound setup testing... I can't wait.
When are we going to start developing a daily driver setup, instead of a race only drag set up! I want so badly to put a daily driver set up in my 07 ridgeline. I could put the battery in the back, build up the alternator, and the install of the compressor would be very very easy. I just need to know what turbo to get, controller, battery I can do the rest. Motor is a 3.5!