GM847/cc306 dyno chart?
03-07-2008, 06:02 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Columbia, SC, USA
Posts: 746
When did i ever say anything negative about the 847? 
I personally think the duration is a little too extreme for what is optimal on an LT1. Sure it might make more power... but i think it demands too much RPM for a lasting combo. If you dont mind revving to the moon, then the 847 is the way to go im not even going to argue that.
I personally think the duration is a little too extreme for what is optimal on an LT1. Sure it might make more power... but i think it demands too much RPM for a lasting combo. If you dont mind revving to the moon, then the 847 is the way to go im not even going to argue that.
Streetdemon - I know what you mean about dynos not meaning much, but even the people that say they aren't worth much change their tune when they get the numbers they are expecting, or it exceeds their expectations. Franks car was an exception I believe, I think it was a lightweight racer. Hell, I weighed 400lbs when I went the times in my sig. Put a 150lb driver in my car and it would shave off a few tenths. All my friends say I can't drive a stick, so put an experienced driver in, and you've got a better time. A dragstrip has too many variables and I've seen too many heads/cam combos running low 13s to even consider trusting them completely. I remember when a good heads cam setup ran 110 in the traps. Poop on that I say. I would have LOVED to do a 6000 rpm clutch dump on slicks in my car, but it kept breaking rearends and I didn't have $2K to drop on a nice one. FWIW, I think dynos are very reliable and valid if done correctly.
03-07-2008, 06:49 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: palmview, TX (RGV)
Posts: 676
I guess negative is the wrong word. Just as you say that you have to rev to the moon, and that it demands too much rpm, is a false notion. The 847 in my car is making peak power at 5800, making the ideal SHIFT point around 6400ish. If you make peak power AT 6300, like the 230/238 suggests, then your shift point is nearer to 7000. Sounds like a bit closer to the moon to me.
Streetdemon - I know what you mean about dynos not meaning much, but even the people that say they aren't worth much change their tune when they get the numbers they are expecting, or it exceeds their expectations. Franks car was an exception I believe, I think it was a lightweight racer. Hell, I weighed 400lbs when I went the times in my sig. Put a 150lb driver in my car and it would shave off a few tenths. All my friends say I can't drive a stick, so put an experienced driver in, and you've got a better time. A dragstrip has too many variables and I've seen too many heads/cam combos running low 13s to even consider trusting them completely. I remember when a good heads cam setup ran 110 in the traps. Poop on that I say. I would have LOVED to do a 6000 rpm clutch dump on slicks in my car, but it kept breaking rearends and I didn't have $2K to drop on a nice one. FWIW, I think dynos are very reliable and valid if done correctly.
Streetdemon - I know what you mean about dynos not meaning much, but even the people that say they aren't worth much change their tune when they get the numbers they are expecting, or it exceeds their expectations. Franks car was an exception I believe, I think it was a lightweight racer. Hell, I weighed 400lbs when I went the times in my sig. Put a 150lb driver in my car and it would shave off a few tenths. All my friends say I can't drive a stick, so put an experienced driver in, and you've got a better time. A dragstrip has too many variables and I've seen too many heads/cam combos running low 13s to even consider trusting them completely. I remember when a good heads cam setup ran 110 in the traps. Poop on that I say. I would have LOVED to do a 6000 rpm clutch dump on slicks in my car, but it kept breaking rearends and I didn't have $2K to drop on a nice one. FWIW, I think dynos are very reliable and valid if done correctly.
BTW- I weight 170lbs so If your ever in south Tx let me know so I can race your car...LOL!!!
03-07-2008, 10:29 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Houma,Louisiana
Posts: 274
Streetdemon you are correct my car weighs 3327 and i do drive it on the street. I went 11.40 with a 210/224 cam very streetable. Then I went 11.15 119.86 with a custom Joe O cam but that cam makes low vaccuum(not cool with power brakes) and is not so street friendly. I made 331 rwhp unlocked with the 210/224 and 357 rwhp unlocked with the Joe O custom cam. Frank95z
03-08-2008, 07:29 AM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Columbia, SC, USA
Posts: 746
Streetdemon you are correct my car weighs 3327 and i do drive it on the street. I went 11.40 with a 210/224 cam very streetable. Then I went 11.15 119.86 with a custom Joe O cam but that cam makes low vaccuum(not cool with power brakes) and is not so street friendly. I made 331 rwhp unlocked with the 210/224 and 357 rwhp unlocked with the Joe O custom cam. Frank95z
03-08-2008, 09:51 PM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 2,926
I guess negative is the wrong word. Just as you say that you have to rev to the moon, and that it demands too much rpm, is a false notion. The 847 in my car is making peak power at 5800, making the ideal SHIFT point around 6400ish. If you make peak power AT 6300, like the 230/238 suggests, then your shift point is nearer to 7000. Sounds like a bit closer to the moon to me.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
tdigger9899
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
9
09-07-2015 10:56 AM