bjankuski

A few months ago I posted my results of my dyno runs with my Superram and ZZ-9 cam. I then mentioned that I would change to the 219 cam and rerun the dyno tests to see what the diferences were. From dyno test to dyno test I made two changes to the car that may be effecting the HP changes from the cam, I changed to a dana 44 rear end with 3.45 gears from my dyna 36 with 3.07 gears and I changed the cam from the ZZ-9 cam to the 219 cam. Other then that the car is exactly the same.

The ZZ-9 cam made 311 RWHP at 4700 RPM and 376 RWTQ at 3700 RPM and had run a best ET of 12.36 at 111 MPH with the 3.07 gears. With the 3.45 gears and dana 44 this combination has run a best ET of 12.30 at 112.5 MPH. The power curve with this combination was very broad and the car pulled hard to 5800 RPM.

The 219 Superram combination made 316 RWHP at 5400 RPM and 405 RWTQ at 2700 RPM?? I have not ran this combination at the dragstrip yet but will this Saturday.

Some interesting comparisons, the 219 cam made more low end HP and TQ until 3500 RPM where the ZZ-9 cam passed it and pulled away with a max difference of 15 RWTQ at 3700 RPM. The ZZ-9 cam continued to make more power then the 219 cam until 5000 RPM where the 219 again overtook the ZZ-9 and pulled away to a new higher HP peak of 316 RWHP at 5400 RPM. Another interesting item was that the 219 combination had two HP peaks on my car. It peaked at 316 RWHP at 5400 RPM and then dropped backed slightly to 312 RWHP and then repeaked at 316 HP at 6000 RPM before falling gradually to 295 RWHP by 6600 RPM.

Overall I was disapointed by the cam change results, I was expecting to see a greater gain then 5 RWHP at the peaks. I am not sure if this 219 combination will be any faster then my ZZ-9 combination. The 219 combination has more low end torque but less mid range power and then more top end power. The mid range drop in power is rite where the engine RPM drop to when it shifts gears, I do not know if this drop in power will be made up by the higher peak power and increased RPM range of the 219 combination.

When I dynoed the car I had a vacuum gauge on the intake and a pressure gauge in the exhaust system to check for any possible restriction in the intake and exhaust system. The intake vacuum never went over 0 inches of water at full throttle, and the exhaust would reach a max reading of 3 PSI at 6000 RPM. Maybe the exhaust is costing me some power but I have been told that exhaust readings of less then 5 PSI are not really costing much power.

I will post new times when I get them.

vader86

Are those results after tuning for both, or with a stock program?

bjankuski

Stock programing and fuel pressure adjustments. The stock programming does not appear to be too far off target. The air fuel ratio floated from 12.3 to 1 at 2500 RPM to 13.2 to 1 at 6600 RPM. The spark advance was staying around 35 degrees throught the test. There may be some more power in the tuning but I am not expecting to see large increases.

Beach Bum

Great Test... Thanks for sharing !! You're the first I recall that has run both of these profiles.

Not sure what to say about the results... I would have guessed only a 5-10 hp increase with the 219 vs ZZ9... as a note, I think the 3.45 gears would have helped your et's very little with an aftermarket torque converter as you have. Thus your et and mph improvement have probably come from the cam change. As another note, I think more gear actually eats up a few more ponies.... nothing dramatic, especially with just your 3.07 to 3.45 change, but something to keep in mind.

One last note, noticed in your signature you have 2400 rpm converter.... I think with another 500 rpm or so you can drop those 12.30's to teens and possibly even 12.0x. I race at an altitude track every now and then that knocks me back to the 111-112 mph area...I'll get 12.0 to 12.1 out of those traps.

Good Stuff !!

Cheers,
Beach Bum

Mr. Magoo

Thanks!! Great stuff! :cool: :cheers:

ralph

Great test and great job documenting the results. A couple of thoughts/questions. Did you use the same dyno for both? Results can vary widely from dyno to dyno. I'm not sure how the gears effected the results, but you did get 30ftlb increase in torque.....that's not insigificant. Also my engine analyzer simulator predicted about a 10 hp & 20ftlb difference with the curves crossing at about 4000 rpms....these cams aren't all that different. See what ya get at the track.....you might be pleasantly surprised. Good luck

Dave C. '04 Z06

If the cams perform similarly but one is significantly different than the other, it could mean you cylinder heads are restricting flow and that heads with larger volume runners might increase your power. Especially if the intake isn't showing a vacuum.

Just a thought...

-Dave C.

ELEVENS

That 219/SR is a hard combo to beat...

Aaron's 87

A good tune will find more power and a lot more drivability IMO.

Mark L. Warner

I am very surprised to read that the ZZ9 peaked out at 4700 rpm. I always thought that the ZZ9 with a Mini-Ram would peak around 6000 or so. I am not familiar with the SuperRam - could you please explain a little and/or give your impressions as to why the peak was so low. Thanks

Hole-Shot

Great test. Interesting results. Thanks for sharing the info :thumbs:

dgoodhue

The result don't surprise me too much, years ago I saw another car dyno both an dthey were within 5hp of each other also.

mn_vette

manufacturers do tend to design for their own stuff, SR/219 and MR/ZZ-9 are going to be the best combinations for each setup.

bjankuski

Thanks, for the coments guys. I have been on a road trip for the last few days and have not been able to post. I want to run 11's with this car and I believe I need 20 more RWHP to accomplish my goal. A less restrictive exhaust sytem and tuning may get me the goal? Maybe all I need to do is change to a higher 2800 to 3000 RPM stall? I will keep the forum posted on what it takes to accomplish the goal.

I read a paper today that suggested that every 1 LB of exhaust backpressure caused a 2% loss in engine power. I have 3 LBS of backpressure and with 400 flywheel HP that would mean a 24 HP increase if the paper is correct. I will soon find out if that information is correct.

reallycoolcorvette

i think the swap was worth it. can you post the hp/tq difference from 4700 rpms to 6000 rpms?

I am sure that the 74219 cam is doing alot more good from 4700 to 6000 rpms than the ZZ9. If so, then the cam swap was definetly worth it.

Just my $.02