Sam strikes again, baby 220 cam does 412HP

[LX346]

Another happy customer here.

Just got off the engine dyno.

Dead stock engine with tune and pacemaker TriY's 370HP, then the guys installed a Comp baby 220 cam, gained 42HP to bring it to 412HP at 6,000rpm.

Midrange torque seemed to improve a fair amount.

I'm over the moon as I thought anything over 400HP would be a bonus.

Plan B next time you drop by Sam's can you get me a copy of the dyno graph as printer was jamming up.

[Sonny@Autowerks]

hey,
well done dude,good to hear you got it all going ,is that my calais motor ?

regards sonny

[HRT 8]

Another happy customer here.

Just got off the engine dyno.

Dead stock engine with tune and pacemaker TriY's 370HP, then the guys installed a Comp baby 220 cam, gained 42HP to bring it to 412HP at 6,000rpm.

Midrange torque seemed to improve a fair amount.

I'm over the moon as I thought anything over 400HP would be a bonus.

Plan B next time you drop by Sam's can you get me a copy of the dyno graph as printer was jamming up.

Not doubting Sams abilities as he's tuned my own car more than once, but, 370 hp is 270 odd kw and 412 hp is about 300 odd kw. Sounds extremely high for a stock car and then cam only.
Are you refering to flywheel hp and not rwhp??????

[VooDoo]

Just got off the engine dyno

Definately not rwhp. That being said approx 300kw at engine with the cam seems low. Im at approx 330kw at engine unopened.

[vt2vx]

412hp = 307.2283

mmm he did say engine dyno.

better wait for some confirmations i think.

[CarlFST60L]

412hprw (wheels) or 412hpfw (engine) ???

I too have APPROX 325kwfw (435hpfw) unopened...

If its rw, im off to sam's ASAP.

[KeenGolfer]

If one assumes 20% drivetrain loss (approx) 370fwhp = 299rwhp (220rwkw).
412fwhp = 330rwhp (246rwkw).

[Sid447]

Just out of interest,

For all:-

The 218/216 cam tested by Sam on a stock engine gave between 400 & 405hp..........

The 220/218......413hp / 409lb-ft
The 224/224......430hp / 414lb-ft
The 224/220......436hp / 421lb-ft
The 228/228......432hp / 417lb-ft

[ON THE ENGINE DYNO ALSO]

All information from here:- http://www.samsperformance.com/Research.cfm
(...click graph labeled.."Best Packages"...)


p.s. A cam with 220 duration @ .050" has approx 280-290 TOTAL duration. (Comp Cams advertised duration is taken from .006" tappet-lift so ~10 degrees lower). Anything around 300 total and over is considered a racing application only cam.
p.s. Drewbytes, I think you are right in the ballpark.

[bigjoe]

Not doubting Sams abilities as he's tuned my own car more than once, but, 370 hp is 270 odd kw and 412 hp is about 300 odd kw. Sounds extremely high for a stock car and then cam only.
Are you refering to flywheel hp and not rwhp??????
The figures that have been quoted are engine dyno and are correct as i was there to witness. Just goes to show Sams the man.

[CarlFST60L]

There is no dought that sam's the man! he puts a smile on my face every time i launch :D :D :D

[LX346]

Ok to clear a few thigns up, like I said in the first post, this came off the engine dyno, engine needs to be out of car and goes in a room with all hi-tech gear.

I find it hard to believe you guys have have 330kw at engine (440hp)unopened. I'm laughing so hard, maybe with a blower.

Please don't try to convert rear wheel HP into flywheel, it doesn't add up correctly. Ask Sam about making 440HP with an unopened motor.
His own test engine only managed 376hp with extractors and I bet he did a fair bit of tuning to squeeze that out. But if you guys tell me you have 330kw at motor with puny standard cam, then heck I got done. NOT.

On a chassis dyno at the same conversion you guys are using I would have around 260rwkw but chassis dyno's vary greatly.

As for cam it is puny, has 273 advertised duration, 220 @0.050" on 113LSA, its just a baby cam that makes decent midrange

I thought 42HP gain from a $400 cam was cheap power. Maybe I was wrong again. I might go buy or get given some standard cams if they make that much power. Heck even this cam onto of a 330kw stock motor would bring it to about 470HP, YEAH RIGHT. BTW nice et's with your 440HP.

[VooDoo]

If one assumes 20% drivetrain loss (approx) 370fwhp = 299rwhp (220rwkw).
412fwhp = 330rwhp (246rwkw).


i have 241rwkw unopened. id say thats pretty close to 330fwkw. A GTS gets around 220rwkw (300fwkw) and im close to 10% up from that. This was done on a QLD dyno day with 46 other cars there so figure would be accurate.

Dont forget my ET's are with a 2000kg car too. Hope to be the first unopened Stato into the 12's :)

[Sid447]

Voodoo,

241rwkw is around 300-303fwkw on a manual. Maybe around 315 if it's an auto.

If you use the GTS as a yardstick, that must assume the GTS is actually making the advertised power. IMO I don't think it does.

[VooDoo]

np Sid447. Im no machanic so only based my assumptions on what ive seen with a GTS. The car is an Auto so im not too far out :)

Gunna be fun with the twin turbo's bolted to the lux-0-barge though :) :burnout:

[LX346]

Don't think so.

1 a statesman is heavy but not 2000KG, put it on the weighbridge if you don't believe me.

2 your engine doesn't make 330kw

3 the chassis dyno reads high just because its 241rw kw its still only 370HP at engine, take it out of the car, put your money where ur mouth is and run it up on an engine dyno.

4 don't be upset when your engine suddenly looses 70HP and only makes 370HP.

By the way we only ran the baby extractors, no big 4-1's here, after a midrange powerband.

[vt2vx]

those reading sound good for that little cam in what a VX motor is it? vys have an ls6 cam so get better readings unopened, some get the 240s, as much as earlier motors witha small cam. look at the old dyno days results.

you can squeze more on tunes but sam like to keep em safe for all conditions

[Plan B]

Don't think so.

1 a statesman is heavy but not 2000KG, put it on the weighbridge if you don't believe me.

2 your engine doesn't make 330kw

3 the chassis dyno reads high just because its 241rw kw its still only 370HP at engine, take it out of the car, put your money where ur mouth is and run it up on an engine dyno.

4 don't be upset when your engine suddenly looses 70HP and only makes 370HP.

By the way we only ran the baby extractors, no big 4-1's here, after a midrange powerband.

Michael,

The peak power is not the thing we should look at... Average power is the key and your new engine has plenty of it.... I noticed the curve last night, its making a lot more power through the rev range/under the curve. I bet it's up at least 30 more fwhp at 5,000 rpm over any stocker!

Pete.

[markone2]

Don't think so.

1 a statesman is heavy but not 2000KG, put it on the weighbridge if you don't believe me.

2 your engine doesn't make 330kw

3 the chassis dyno reads high just because its 241rw kw its still only 370HP at engine, take it out of the car, put your money where ur mouth is and run it up on an engine dyno.

4 don't be upset when your engine suddenly looses 70HP and only makes 370HP.

By the way we only ran the baby extractors, no big 4-1's here, after a midrange powerband.


Whoa :confused: calm down ,nobody's having a go at ya ;)

Yep what Plan B said..I have a similar situation myself...all good ;)

[KeenGolfer]

Don't think so.

1 a statesman is heavy but not 2000KG, put it on the weighbridge if you don't believe me.
.

It wouldn't be far off by the time you take into account driver, fuel etc which is how it is raced.

Even my wagon would be close to 2000kg. It's 1760kg odd according to Holden website, add 95kg for me + fuel etc, and I'd be over 1900kg easy.

[seldo]

It wouldn't be far off by the time you take into account driver, fuel etc which is how it is raced.

Even my wagon would be close to 2000kg. It's 1760kg odd according to Holden website, add 95kg for me + fuel etc, and I'd be over 1900kg easy.
I think from memory, VooDoo has a weighbridge ticket which shows 2020kg :shock: so it's fair dinkum..

[VooDoo]

Actually 2012kg on a weighbridge in Qld with me in it. The Caprice is a little heavier than a stato as well. Thats with 3/4 tank fuel, spare in the boot, a set of fold up chairs and a helmet for the drags.

Please dont think im having a go. As i stated, i was basing my assumptions off a GTS. It doesnt really matter either way if its 370hp or 440hp at engine. Its not coming out of the car in the forseeable future. I dont beleive my car would have the mid range torque as a cam'ed car.

Yes there is a differance between an engine dyno and a chassis dyno but based of experiance with the 2 dyno's here in Qld i dont believe my assumptions would be too far out.

vt2vx: the caprice isnt a VY engine. Its VX era at best so wouldnt have a VY/LS6 cam in it.

[Plan B]

Actually 2012kg on a weighbridge in Qld with me in it.

Was that before lunch big fella? :p

FWIW, this engine of Statesman304's is apparently going into his brothers Torana. Not designed to be a race car though I reckon it’s gunna be a little rocket with the amount of torque it makes…. 407ftlb’s @ 4,200 rpm from memory. It should be a fun ride… :burnout:

[VooDoo]

Actually yes it was :)

im on a diet to loose some weight and so is the old girl. I want that 12sec unopened dammit.

Pete, your confusing me now. You stated 407ftlb's of torque would make it a rocket. I take it thats from the engine dyno. Any chance you would care to help me decifer mine? looks like 554ftlb's at a bit higher rev but at the wheels.

http://voodoo.theddrzone.com/images/stato/dyno.jpg

[LX346]

Geez Pete, you got a memory and a half. I forgot how much torque, rpm and all the rest and it was only last night.

Sorry if I sound rude VooDoo but 99% of people that have asked me about my engine etc have just paid it out, ask Pete I told him before it ran on the dyno last night I would be happy with 400HP. And everyone I know was laughing at me saying know way in the world I would crack 400hp. Or calling me a dreamer, saying my cam was too small.

I don't wish to run the 1/4 mile and wheel spin the 1st 200 metres, I want to hook n go.

A stock auto with lock-up converter won't use much power, when compared to a high stall unlocked converter.

Just by seeing what most average maflesss tunes get its around the 220-230rw kw, maybe more depending on how happy the dyno is. Roughly 300HP, 70HP loss thru standard auto, walla 370HP at crank, simple. If you said you had a 3000rpm non lockup converter, then on the average street motor theres another 30-40HP loss depending on how efficient it is.

Pete or Joe can one of you guys grab a pic of the graph for me or just post it up as Sams printer wasnt working last night, I need a copy to send to Jason at Dominator for my converter.

[LX346]

Voodoo as far as I know, pretty sure you will have more torque at the wheels as torque gets mulitplied thru TC, gearing etc.

Like you said B it's not about Peak power, if it was I wouldn't of gone for this cam, I would of went a 226-228 0.585" on stock heads. I want that sharp midrange so when it flash stalls at 3,600rpm its ready to jump out of the hole.

[VooDoo]

At the dyno day most cars were 210-225. 2 of us were 240+ so it wasnt a case of a "happy dyno" (I gots me a gooden :D )

BTW I have a 3500rpm lockup stally.

In no way was i trying to put down your efforts or engine. Im trying to learn as much as i can and comparing different developmental paths helps me with this knowledge. Hopefully it helps others too. Im very soon aiming for 400rwkw so the more i learn the safer and cheaper it will be. No point doing things wrong and needing to re-do them later.

Edit: Ta. id forgotten about the torque multiplication.

[Criso]

Statesman304 i bet you are stoked good power enjoy your ride.
Cheers Criso

[LX346]

Yep I understand dude, I'm trying to learn as well and help out by posting up a graph so it takes a lot of peoples guess work out of trying to convert rear wheel HP to Engine HP etc. Then people can see if they like this, if they want something similar, something slightly more HP-RPM, more Torque etc. Bla Bla Bla.

The graph will have stock engine, Tuned with Pacemaker 1 5/8 TriY's and a run with 220 cam to compare.

Was run up with original spark plugs, leads etc. Cheapo Repco $20 oil, no royal purple, no special NGK's, no big dollar leads, no throttle body mods etc.
Injectors have been sitting for the past 3 months unused, who knows if there partially blocked etc.

[Sid447]

Actually yes it was :)

im on a diet to loose some weight and so is the old girl. I want that 12sec unopened dammit.

Pete, your confusing me now. You stated 407ftlb's of torque would make it a rocket. I take it thats from the engine dyno. Any chance you would care to help me decifer mine? looks like 554ftlb's at a bit higher rev but at the wheels..........

Voodoo,

Forget the 554lb-ft. The way the dyno has been programmed has it showing gearbox torque.
If you are able to get a print-out ( I assume your details have been saved in the dyno computer) with rpm along the bottom as mentioned before in a previous post, you will be able to work out the rear wheel torque yourself from that. By:-

1] Picking an rpm point, going up to hp line and reading off the hp at the side.
2] With this figure [hp] you then multiply it by 5252 and then divide by the rpm you read it off at. This will give you torque in lbs-ft (rear wheel) for that same rpm.

If you are keen and want a complete "picture," do that every 100rpm.
If not, every 250rpm or even 500 would do.
This would then give you a torque curve and show where it's peaking at along with hp peak too. And if it's plotted on an accurate graph (like Sam's are) then the hp and torque will cross each other at exactly 5252rpm.

[Plan B]

Actually yes it was :)

Pete, your confusing me now. You stated 407ftlb's of torque would make it a rocket. I take it thats from the engine dyno. Any chance you would care to help me decifer mine? looks like 554ftlb's at a bit higher rev but at the wheels.

http://voodoo.theddrzone.com/images/stato/dyno.jpg

There have been quite a few threads in here regarding this. A chassis dynamometer measures everything correctly including true torque at the wheels… awddynotodd has indeed posted a massive amount of info regarding this in here. I’ve just searched for it and I guess one of the cleaners who once changed a wheel on the side of the road, thought it was useless for him at the time… :( Sad really!!!! True facts like this which take a long time for the contributors get wiped all the time... Most of the archives look stupid.... Again...... Sad.... What is it? THe MOneY? :confused:

[vt2vx]

There have been quite a few threads in here regarding this. A chassis dynamometer measures everything correctly including true torque at the wheels… awddynotodd has indeed posted a massive amount of info regarding this in here. I’ve just searched for it and I guess one of the cleaners who once changed a wheel on the side of the road, thought it was useless for him at the time… :( Sad really!!!! True facts like this which take a long time for the contributors get wiped all the time... Most of the archives look stupid.... Again...... Sad.... What is it? THe MOneY? :confused:

i recall that thread it was full of good info, that was a while ago now.
stuff like that needs to stay. a number of good ones have gone when looking recently on other things also.

maybe the post were in with other squable. need to lift the good bits and keep them for reference.

[vxchev]

This might be the thread your after (http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?p=245156&highlight=217mm#post245156)

That will help. There was another with links to a spread sheet as well. Ooops! Edited instead of reply..... :confused:

[motomk]

This might be the thread your after (http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?p=245156&highlight=217mm#post245156)

That will help. There was another with links to a spread sheet as well. Ooops! Edited instead of reply..... :confused:

:D :lol:

If it is not freely available which I find hard to believe and has been removed to the moderator dustbin then I will tag the post into this forum.

motomk

[awddynotodd]

Voodoo,

Forget the 554lb-ft. The way the dyno has been programmed has it showing gearbox torque.
If you are able to get a print-out ( I assume your details have been saved in the dyno computer) with rpm along the bottom as mentioned before in a previous post, you will be able to work out the rear wheel torque yourself from that. By:-

1] Picking an rpm point, going up to hp line and reading off the hp at the side.
2] With this figure [hp] you then multiply it by 5252 and then divide by the rpm you read it off at. This will give you torque in lbs-ft (rear wheel) for that same rpm.

If you are keen and want a complete "picture," do that every 100rpm.
If not, every 250rpm or even 500 would do.
This would then give you a torque curve and show where it's peaking at along with hp peak too. And if it's plotted on an accurate graph (like Sam's are) then the hp and torque will cross each other at exactly 5252rpm.

Sid447,

As PlanB mentioned, the Torque mentioned is Wheel Torque, and nothing else.
Torque(Ft/lbs) and Power(HP) only cross @5252rpm on an Engine Dyno, this does not happen "naturally" on a Chassis Dyno, due to Torque Multiplication thru the Diff etc., but you may be familiar with Dynojet Graphs or Mustang Dyno Graphs (Chassis dyno's) where you see this.
Basically, on these dynos, the Torque measured @ the wheels is fudged by a factor of the Engine Rpm/Roller Rpm so they cross at 5252RPM, this is how it has always been done in the US, and they don't accept(understand) wheel torque.
The Torque "curve" is identical whether you are looking at Engine Torque or Wheel Torque, the only difference is the curve is higher up on a scale with Wheel Torque.

[Sid447]

Yes,

understand what you're saying, thanks!
Though if you have a graph with just the rwhp curve on, you can plot the torque (in lbs-ft) yourself from the hp, which is what I thought I explained.
This will cross at 5252rpm.
To plot a rear wheel hp curve you first have to have the torque to get that hp anyway!

The reason it was commented on is because of confusion & there are so many different standards and ways of measuring.
Yet hp or Kw is the one thing most people are very focused on here!
Only to find there is no standard graph presentation; different ways of correcting DA etc, etc. (we've talked about this before!).

p.s. I've never seen a graph like the Leading Edge one; it mystifies me.
--- Steve ---

[LX346]

p.s. I've never seen a graph like the Leading Edge one; it mystifies me.
Few people have commented on the leading edge tune graphs, but as long as they are making the power who cares how pretty the graph is.

[Roger]

..... this engine of Statesman304's is apparently going into his brothers Torana. Not designed to be a race car though I reckon it’s gunna be a little rocket with the amount of torque it makes…. 407ftlb’s @ 4,200 rpm from memory. It should be a fun ride… :burnout:

I hope it gets some seam welding & a cage, even if not a track car.

They were never expected to cope with that much torque - it will be a mini twister !!

[Sid447]

Few people have commented on the leading edge tune graphs, but as long as they are making the power who cares how pretty the graph is.

It's not a case of being pretty.

The torque line is as flat as a pancake.

[LX346]

Roger I also went soft and opted for a baby cam for that reason, when over 400 ft/lbs of torque cam up I had visions of my 1/4 panels twisting. I hate roll cages, if it was a race car yes I would install one but I would rather detune my engine they spoil the car by adding a cage.
I should of seam welded it like the A9X's but didnt think about it til the car was painted. Too late now.

Maybe I should tie my chassis, add some tubs and go racing.

Right now I just want to get this baby on the road and enjoy it. It isn't/wasn't/never will be a dyno queen/drag car, just want a nice street car.

[Roger]

Roger I also went soft and opted for a baby cam for that reason, when over 400 ft/lbs of torque cam up I had visions of my 1/4 panels twisting. I hate roll cages, if it was a race car yes I would install one but I would rather detune my engine they spoil the car by adding a cage.
I should of seam welded it like the A9X's but didnt think about it til the car was painted. Too late now.
Maybe I should tie my chassis, add some tubs and go racing.
Right now I just want to get this baby on the road and enjoy it. It isn't/wasn't/never will be a dyno queen/drag car, just want a nice street car.

Just a gentle nudge on the throttle is going to get it to twist - wouldn't like to be the engineer who ticks that one off. Imagine you're putting better than HQ discs front & rear on ?

Sorry, don't mean to have a go, it's just an LH/X with that much torque just reaks of tearing itself apart, even ignoring you don't want to drag it.......

Even an HZ with lots of power would get a little wonky - although at least the Chev is a little lighter than the 308.

[LX346]

Yep brakes are HQ stud pattern, VX rotors with AU2 XR8 twin piston PBR's, custom kit made by Hopper Stoppers.

I will probably end up having to get a chassis kit as I know its going to twist and don't want to twist it. But right now the car is in a state I can't get it done. I want to get everything running then get it the chassis setup.

Also running rubber bushes all round to take a touch more flex into them, hate stiff cars.

[vx ss 350kw]

I think alot of you guys are way out on some of your conversions. A stock 300GTS makes around 210-215rwkw and with someone like Brocky driving it down the 1/4, 15-20 times it only runs a mid to high 13sec on the 1/4. So even if it is not making the advertised 300kw @ engine, it is pretty close, maybe only 5-10kw out. My Auto SS with stock 3.07 gears has a smallish cam 218-224 maf tune by sam, exaust, gts maf pipe and had a little over 225kw @ wheels. 1st time at WSID ran low 13's with only me at the wheel on street tyres. So if my motor is 225rwkw, from what you are saying im only making around 290-300kw @ engine. Why did i smash the GTS time if I only have the same power or close to it. I must be a damn good driver! I think that having raced my SS with standard drive train and a 225rwkw motor and running low 13sec 1/4, more than proves im putting out a resonable amount more power than a 300GTS. Just some thing to think about guys. :)

[Sid447]

vx_ss_350kw,

Welcome to the Forum,.....& nice diplomatic first post.

There's not much experience on here; so we could do with some education & understanding from what you've picked up in all your experience of driving!

[We'll give you a clue: It's not all about peak power].

[LX346]

Who are you replying to with your post vx 350kw?

Your engine would make a lot of midrange torque, probably more then a GTS does in midrange.

[Craig]

I think alot of you guys are way out on some of your conversions. A stock 300GTS makes around 210-215rwkw and with someone like Brocky driving it down the 1/4, 15-20 times it only runs a mid to high 13sec on the 1/4. So even if it is not making the advertised 300kw @ engine, it is pretty close, maybe only 5-10kw out. My Auto SS with stock 3.07 gears has a smallish cam 218-224 maf tune by sam, exaust, gts maf pipe and had a little over 225kw @ wheels. 1st time at WSID ran low 13's with only me at the wheel on street tyres. So if my motor is 225rwkw, from what you are saying im only making around 290-300kw @ engine. Why did i smash the GTS time if I only have the same power or close to it. I must be a damn good driver! I think that having raced my SS with standard drive train and a 225rwkw motor and running low 13sec 1/4, more than proves im putting out a resonable amount more power than a 300GTS. Just some thing to think about guys. :)Interesting comments...

My gts ran a 13.2 @ mid 108 mph's stock multiple times and if i knew back then how to drive a little no doubt it would have just dipped into the 12's.

After Edit (by Sam) exhaust and diff it did 12.63 @ 112mph

Lets also add that your SS is lighter than my GTS which by the book is 1800kg with me in it.

All my runs on street tyres btw.

[SS346]

It's not a case of being pretty.

The torque line is as flat as a pancake.


Well its torque that needs chasing, not the peak figure, the flatter the torque curve is the more aggressive the power will be, it will also be there for longer. Down low torque is the main thing that should be looked at when tuning, when you get a good down low torque reading, it will push your power figure up in the midrange and top end, that will keep the power hanging on.

[Sid447]

Well its torque that needs chasing, not the peak figure, the flatter the torque curve is the more aggressive the power will be, it will also be there for longer. Down low torque is the main thing that should be looked at when tuning, when you get a good down low torque reading, it will push your power figure up in the midrange and top end, that will keep the power hanging on.

You are preaching the converted. I learnt all this quite a few years ago.
I put this link in a few months back:-

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=25904&highlight=Talk+torque

Also what you say is not quite right:
Good low-down torque gives good low-down hp (responsiveness); it has some effect on mid-range hp & none on high rpm hp.
In fact generally if you have good low-down torque you won't have good high end torque (hp).
It's a physical impossiblity, though a lot of modern (ohc) engines with variable cam control have been able to achieve a better spread of torque.
But it's still pretty much a compromise.

People are still missing the point about the graph ....never mind.

[Oztrack Tuning]

My standard engine car with pro ex 4 into 1 , sureflo exhaust, Dicks tune based on VY GTS with A4 and 3.73 has run 13.0 and 108mph. This is much quicker than an A4 GTS ie probably in the vicinity of 0.7s and even accounting for the 3.73 being quicker the gap would still be at least 0.4s.

Using many dyno calculators a 3800lb car needs near to 450hp at flywheel to run 108mph. This is 335kw.

Also 12hp extra is needed to run 0.1s faster over a 1/4mile with a 3800lb car. So to be faster than a GTS by 0.4s is 48hp or 35kw.

The car was running a OR CAI so that may give it gains not seen on a dyno of 15-20kw ?

The main thing is that relative to a GTS being 300kw then 335kw seems close to the mark. I am interesting in getting a new cam put in and would be keen to get an extra 60hp at flywheel which is 45kw. Giving a "RELATIVE TO GTS figure of nearer 380kw"
......and 0.5s which seems about right. I know of similar cars that have run about 12.5s with standard stall.

So maybe with same cam as the start of this thread my car would have 365kw relative to GTS and run abt 12.65.

Maybe this helps people make a good comparison between cams and hp.

[Martin_D]

My standard engine car with pro ex 4 into 1 , sureflo exhaust, Dicks tune based on VY GTS with A4 and 3.73 has run 13.0 and 108mph. This is much quicker than an A4 GTS ie probably in the vicinity of 0.7s and even accounting for the 3.73 being quicker the gap would still be at least 0.4s.....Maybe this helps people make a good comparison between cams and hp.

Yes, a VYGTS A4 would more than likely run 13.7s on a Correvit, the way they are tested in magazines, and yours (having run 13.0 off the tree) would be closer to 13.5 - 13.6. You may have 12hp more than a stock GTS. MAY. The trick to remember is that Correvit is much slower than the track due to no rollout being used.

[plonkerchops]

Roger I also went soft and opted for a baby cam for that reason, when over 400 ft/lbs of torque cam up I had visions of my 1/4 panels twisting. I hate roll cages, if it was a race car yes I would install one but I would rather detune my engine they spoil the car by adding a cage.
I should of seam welded it like the A9X's but didnt think about it til the car was painted. Too late now.

Maybe I should tie my chassis, add some tubs and go racing.

Right now I just want to get this baby on the road and enjoy it. It isn't/wasn't/never will be a dyno queen/drag car, just want a nice street car.
is this an LH/lx Torana?? hatchback ??
love to see some pictures..... :)
edit: duuhh should have your post better ...answers my question
pics would still be good :)

[Oztrack Tuning]

Hi Martin
I havent seen a GTS at WSID get anywhere near 13.2 at WSID. The manuals seems to struggle to do any better than 13.5s.

I have also collected data from mine with a stop watch and know it can go low11s to 160k from a standing start (My business often involves precise timing of athletes so i know i am reliable with the watch) The GTS autos tested by any of the magazines did mid 13s to 160kph

I am interested to know exactly what the rollout vs correvit is. It gives us a way of comparing to the magazines from data collected at the track. Surely a correvit starts on first movement of the car. Which would be less than 0.5s difference. ??

[ADV51]

The trick to remember is that Correvit is much slower than the track due to no rollout being used.

ST,
Are you referring to the Rollout as the distance between the pre-stage and full stage beams?
I thought it was less than 8 inches. 0.5 sounds a little high.

Another point is most Correvit testing isn't done on a drag strip where traction is a smidge better on the start line. Meaning the Correvit times are more real street times rather than drag strip times.