[Z06] Widow cam/WCCH-X results
#41
Burning Brakes
Further more here is a quick screen cap of the last dyno scanner log file showing the timing and airflows. I assure you, it's got as much timing in it as it will take at WOT at all RPM ranges as the previous dyno showed quite a bit more KR when I commanded more timing not to mention it was actually audible and visible in the exhaust stream at that point.
#42
Burning Brakes
#43
Yep, it was you. Nice car by the way...I've been using it as a sort of outline. I'm going to install some headers in the next few weeks and have Carlos remote tune it. If I make what these other guys are making around the country we'll know the issue. If not, then I'll take back my doubts about the tune.
stop building your car backwards and you may enjoy a better running car..
oh, and my gt500 setup should be in the 560-570 range and it put down 529 in this **** weather with **** fuel..
#44
I agree and that's why I chose the combo. Dozens of Widow/WCCH setups out there making great numbers. I don't remember the member but there's a guy in Texas making I think 600rwhp on 90 octane with this cam. I don't doubt that the combo is capable of producing the results I'm looking for.
Headers will be going on very soon. I think you're right about being happy after the headers/retune!
Headers will be going on very soon. I think you're right about being happy after the headers/retune!
#45
Melting Slicks
That "unicorn" dyno is the same one I have been on for the past 3 years. The best way to back up dyno numbers is with performance at the track. I back up those dyno numbers with 140+mph trap speeds in the 1/4. Those trap speeds are right inline with the power advertised. The numbers for the car he is referring to are accurate and not inflated.
#47
Racer
Thread Starter
dude, not to be a complete dick, but you should maybe optimally build your car before throwing out accusations of a bad tune. You threw on heads and a fairly large cam without even doing headers? talk about choking an engine.. you're in AZ, its hot and the fuel is terrible.
stop building your car backwards and you may enjoy a better running car..
oh, and my gt500 setup should be in the 560-570 range and it put down 529 in this **** weather with **** fuel..
stop building your car backwards and you may enjoy a better running car..
oh, and my gt500 setup should be in the 560-570 range and it put down 529 in this **** weather with **** fuel..
#48
Burning Brakes
In my first post I stated that I wanted to take care of the valve issue, and in an attempt to save money in the long run I had them install a cam as well. Since this was a budget build and I didn't want to fork out another $2k for headers and install I was willing to take a hit on power for the time being. All I'm saying is I think it should be making a little more than it does even being restricted. The 580+rwhp H/C numbers aren't what I would call "unicorn numbers". Those numbers are duplicated all over the country even on 91. It's hot in Texas and California too. As EX1 stated, he made 597 on 90 octane and backs it up with track times. The Widow/WCCH combo is fairly common.
#49
Burning Brakes
#50
Team Owner
I made an offer that no one could refuse to Matt@FSP to come play with my car. For some reason he said no.
Last edited by Unreal; 07-25-2013 at 04:18 PM.
#51
Melting Slicks
The exhaust is backing up so bad it took only like 13 degrees of timing, commanding anymore resulted in knock
#52
Supporting Vendor
#53
Melting Slicks
yes we installed it properly
Further more here is a quick screen cap of the last dyno scanner log file showing the timing and airflows. I assure you, it's got as much timing in it as it will take at WOT at all RPM ranges as the previous dyno showed quite a bit more KR when I commanded more timing not to mention it was actually audible and visible in the exhaust stream at that point.
My two cents would be to get some super high octane gas (additive if necessary) to eliminate the gas issue so that you can run timing in the 25-26 range at a minimum and start the runs with the engine temps in the 160 range (with a cooler thermostat) before crying foul. Your set-up cannot be compared to others when you're only running 17 degrees timing at WOT!
#55
Racer
Thread Starter
#57
Racer
Thread Starter
#58
Safety Car
Guys, don't knock Az. Where else can you run LT headers and a cam with HUGE overlap and smog it at a State Station? I would put a wide spot in the collector that looks like a cat at least but given that they don't sniff the car and only pull ALDL data it is a pretty nice state to get big power in.
I made a change from a Texas Speed Torquer on a 112 to one on a 114 in Az. I thought I lost 40 hp and 45 ftlbs of torque. But the basic difference was a DynoJet pull in Nevada on the 112 and a DynoJet in Phoenix on the 114.
I concur with others here. The best comparison is trap speed before and trap speed after. How it "feels" is way too subjective as are comparing runs across different dynos particularly different kinds of dynos. I have found the Dyno Pak to be slightly more conservative than DynoJet with the Mustang dyno easily 10-15% behind the Dyno Jet and 10% behind the Dyno Pak.
I made a change from a Texas Speed Torquer on a 112 to one on a 114 in Az. I thought I lost 40 hp and 45 ftlbs of torque. But the basic difference was a DynoJet pull in Nevada on the 112 and a DynoJet in Phoenix on the 114.
I concur with others here. The best comparison is trap speed before and trap speed after. How it "feels" is way too subjective as are comparing runs across different dynos particularly different kinds of dynos. I have found the Dyno Pak to be slightly more conservative than DynoJet with the Mustang dyno easily 10-15% behind the Dyno Jet and 10% behind the Dyno Pak.
Last edited by pkincy; 07-26-2013 at 09:54 PM.
#59
Melting Slicks
#60
Team Owner
Guys, don't knock Az. Where else can you run LT headers and a cam with HUGE overlap and smog it at a State Station? I would put a wide spot in the collector that looks like a cat at least but given that they don't sniff the car and only pull ALDL data it is a pretty nice state to get big power in.
I made a change from a Texas Speed Torquer on a 112 to one on a 114 in Az. I thought I lost 40 hp and 45 ftlbs of torque. But the basic difference was a DynoJet pull in Nevada on the 112 and a DynoJet in Phoenix on the 114.
I concur with others here. The best comparison is trap speed before and trap speed after. How it "feels" is way too subjective as are comparing runs across different dynos particularly different kinds of dynos. I have found the Dyno Pak to be slightly more conservative than DynoJet with the Mustang dyno easily 10-15% behind the Dyno Jet and 10% behind the Dyno Pak.
I made a change from a Texas Speed Torquer on a 112 to one on a 114 in Az. I thought I lost 40 hp and 45 ftlbs of torque. But the basic difference was a DynoJet pull in Nevada on the 112 and a DynoJet in Phoenix on the 114.
I concur with others here. The best comparison is trap speed before and trap speed after. How it "feels" is way too subjective as are comparing runs across different dynos particularly different kinds of dynos. I have found the Dyno Pak to be slightly more conservative than DynoJet with the Mustang dyno easily 10-15% behind the Dyno Jet and 10% behind the Dyno Pak.