***LMR C7 Supercharged Corvette makes over 700rwhp***
12-21-2013, 05:39 PM
#41
Team Owner
10-7, the only reason the HP/Torque don't cross at 5250 is the scales are different on the graphs for those two variables.
Looking at that graph I would bet they both cross at 5250, just different gears. One may have dynoed in 3rd or 5th and the other pull in 4th. That would account for the MPH difference where they cross.
Looking at that graph I would bet they both cross at 5250, just different gears. One may have dynoed in 3rd or 5th and the other pull in 4th. That would account for the MPH difference where they cross.
12-21-2013, 07:25 PM
#43
Instructor
12-22-2013, 12:45 AM
#45
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
We have our packages on our website but there is still a lot of R&D left to do so pricing is subject to change.
http://www.latemodelracecraft.com/
http://www.latemodelracecraft.com/
__________________
Worlds Quickest C8 Corvette 8.83@160MPH
FIRST C7 Corvette in the 7's & 9's
FIRST C7 Corvette in the 7's & 9's
2019 ZR1 LT5 8.874 @ 155
Current C7 World Record Holder 7.55 @ 184 MPH
Quickest and Fastest GEN5 LT Powered Vehicle
LMR1200HP Supercharged C7 8.84 @ 160
LMR1200HP Twin Turbo C7 9.35@155mph-2014
2 TIME OUTLAW DRAG RADIAL LSX CHAMPION 2008/2010
9.47 ZR1 Corvette-2009
LATE MODEL RACECRAFT
713-466-9900
LateModelRacecraft.com
Too many PMs, please call or email instead, thanks!
Current C7 World Record Holder 7.55 @ 184 MPH
Quickest and Fastest GEN5 LT Powered Vehicle
LMR1200HP Supercharged C7 8.84 @ 160
LMR1200HP Twin Turbo C7 9.35@155mph-2014
2 TIME OUTLAW DRAG RADIAL LSX CHAMPION 2008/2010
9.47 ZR1 Corvette-2009
LATE MODEL RACECRAFT
713-466-9900
LateModelRacecraft.com
Too many PMs, please call or email instead, thanks!
12-22-2013, 07:41 PM
#46
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Pretty obvious to me that whatever LMR figured out in the software, it enabled the engine to pull cleanly through the rpm band. Was only a matter of time. Usually airflow table limits get exceeded in NA cars that have FI systems installed. I used to run into that issue in German cars with Bosch ECUs. Had to raise the upper limits in the MAF/load tables since the limits were exceeded, resulting in a sharp cut in power. No idea what the epiphany was on this E92 code, but I think everybody is glad to see LMR figured out a technique to make the ECU happy while making great power. Clearly that info was shared with a select few, since another car suddenly made huge gains at approximately the same time. 
LMR:
I'm a little curious as to why the hp/tq crossover point on each displayed dyno curve does not match. Both should cross over at 5250 rpm, or at the same approximate wheel speed. We're the two pulls done in different gears from each other? I don't know a lot about Dynojets (used to own a Mustang AWD-500), so please forgive me if it's not apparent to me.
LMR:
I'm a little curious as to why the hp/tq crossover point on each displayed dyno curve does not match. Both should cross over at 5250 rpm, or at the same approximate wheel speed. We're the two pulls done in different gears from each other? I don't know a lot about Dynojets (used to own a Mustang AWD-500), so please forgive me if it's not apparent to me.
HP and TQ cross at different MPHs because the first dyno run was with the factory wheels and tires. Now the car has HREs on it and a big 305 tire that is 28.9in tall. Both cross at the same RPM. The aftermarket tire is just much taller causing the MPH to change.
12-22-2013, 07:51 PM
#47
Instructor
HP and TQ cross at different MPHs because the first dyno run was with the factory wheels and tires. Now the car has HREs on it and a big 305 tire that is 28.9in tall. Both cross at the same RPM. The aftermarket tire is just much taller causing the MPH to change.
12-23-2013, 03:35 AM
#48
Instructor
Member Since: Mar 2011
Location: Los Angeles CA
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something I have not mentioned is that injecting very far from the optimum SOI and EOI will lead to fuel impingement which can, amongst many other things, wash down the fuel film on the cylinder wall and cause premature piston ring wear. Probably not a huge issue with gasoline on these engines (liquid length for a gasoline spray from a GDI injector is only about 50mm; Ethanol is about 2.2 times that) but it would keep me from doing an E85 build unless I knew I had the injector headroom to spray only similar durations to the factory calibration.
Is this an issue others are noticing on long term E85 usage?
12-23-2013, 04:36 AM
#49
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Oct 2007
Location: Greater Detroit Metro MI, when I'm not travelling.
Posts: 6,149
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
10 Posts
engine cylinder, the time available for mixture preparation is
reduced significantly. As a result, the atomization of the fuel
spray must be fine enough to permit fuel evaporation in the
limited time available between injection and ignition. Fuel
droplets that are not evaporated are very likely to participate
in diffusion burning, or to exit the engine asUBHC emissions.
Also, directly injecting fuel into the engine cylinder can result
in unintended fuel impingement on the piston or the cylinder
wall. These factors, if present in the design, can contribute to
levels of UBHC and/or particulate emissions, and to cylinder
bore wear that can easily exceed that of an optimized PFI Engine"
E85 does two things: First it demands a higher injection duration because its stoichiometric ratio is a lot lower than Gasoline's. Second if you're running a boosted engine you need more fuel, again increasing duration. Eventually you run into a regimen where there is a ton of impingement, which is a very bad thing.
http://web.iitd.ac.in/~pmvs/ICengines/paper12.pdf
12-23-2013, 05:40 AM
#50
Administrator
Member Since: Mar 2001
Location: In a parallel universe. Currently own 2014 Stingray Coupe.
Posts: 343,480
Received 19,447 Likes
on
14,053 Posts
C7 of the Year - Modified Finalist 2021
MO Events Coordinator
St. Jude Co-Organizer
St. Jude Donor '03-'04-'05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19-
'20-'21-'22-'23-'24
NCM Sinkhole Donor
CI 5, 8 & 11 Veteran
Nicely done - very impressive hp number from the car.
12-23-2013, 09:40 AM
#51
Not trying to call anyone else out but here is a TRUE dyno graph our pull ALL they way to 6700rpms with no issues(and I can post several more to show it was not a one hit wonder. If you watch the video of the RPMS climbing in the other(so called supercharger package) thread on hear you can clearly see the car misfires/spits and sputters at 5700rpms and they lift and stop filming. Then they show a dyno graph that anyone could make using a computer. I can say with certain that this is the ONLY boosted car performing 100 percent successfully through the entire pull. Another company shows a dyno graph with it falling on its face up top, again, the car is not pulling clean. Now I am not hear to call anyone out just stating facts. The public should know a marketing scheme.
I would be glad to take these cars to the track and show the world how they really perform and line up next to one another
. There is still a lot more R&D work that needs to be done to sell the end user(you) a system that works and is reliable.
12-23-2013, 09:55 AM
#52
Team Owner
12-23-2013, 09:59 AM
#53
12-23-2013, 10:04 AM
#54
Safety Car
Either way, there is a lot of smoke and mirrors going on here from various vendors. ECS is really the only one im taking seriously at the moment. Many were very interested in what the blower is capable of on a 100% stock car. LMR's car is bad ***, but its not stock. A&A's car seems to be making power to, but there are to many variables in play now and from the get go (torco fuel additive, different cam with larger injection pump lobe). Doug and his crew are the only ones that I know of so far that are testing using a 100% stock car on straight 93 octane. I think all the other results out there are awesome, but its nice to see it go from ground up, I myself am just VERY interested in what the limit of the car is 100% stock without screwing with injection pump lobe. Once ECS gets the plugs changed and the tune dialed it, it would be nice to then see them do a cam upgrade and retune using both a cam with a standard fuel lobe and one with a modified fuel lobe but both with the same grind to see where the fueling becomes a issue, if it doesnt with the stock cam.
12-23-2013, 03:30 PM
#55
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Here is another video for you guys. We are thinking about turning the boost up to see how much this stock engine can handle but with the holidays coming up I am not sure we will get time to until the first of the year. I am sure Andy will be posting a new graph of his later tonight.
12-23-2013, 04:03 PM
#56
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Jan 2006
Location: Saint Louis MO
Posts: 4,761
Likes: 0
Received 219 Likes
on
110 Posts
St. Jude Donor '14-'15
While I support that decision, please don't make the bottom end go boom in cranking up the boost.
Then again... we'd know what it was good for...
Then again... we'd know what it was good for...
12-23-2013, 07:35 PM
#58
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Everyone keeps saying they are sad that the factory fuel system will not support a boosted application. Now I am not saying it can, I am just stating that LMR has not tried it yet. Give us time, all the R&D takes away form working on customer cars and we like to meet our deadlines on our package builds. We R&D when we have time, and trust me guys, we want to have these packages perfected for all of you so when you send us your car you get a turn key package LMR will stand behind just like it does on all its current C6 builds.
12-23-2013, 07:49 PM
#59
Team Owner
People complain about not being able to go over 550 or 600rwhp on stock fuel system, yet a c5 or c6 can't do that either. They need pumps/injectors/etc. So if the "fuel system" involves a cam swap instead of $900 in injectors/pump/BAP/etc does it really matter?
