Video of me at the track.
02-21-2007, 11:57 AM
#46
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bridgewater, MA
Posts: 5,645
Yeah, your right. I'll just sit back and wait for the new results. Fast car nonetheless.
02-21-2007, 12:19 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: newton, kansas, USA
Posts: 6,070
Marcin or xxsaint69xx ran mid 12's with just a cc306 and i remember his mph was 116-118 with just the cam and no heads. He post a bunch about it when he first installed it. He dynoed the car and either put down 350 or 360 rwhp with it. Marcin's car wasn't a weight reduction car either i believe his car was full race weight. Marcin is also from the Florida area i think so the air/sea level thing might help.
02-21-2007, 01:38 PM
#48
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,518
Jesus at least these aren't like Vengence LS1 TFS dyno results that show 520rwhp SAE and the car can't go 125mph in the 1/4 with that. This is track results (which is what all the haters ask for anyways) not pumped up dyno results.
Bret
Bret
02-21-2007, 01:48 PM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Jackstandican
Posts: 3,144
Let's go from there shall we? 
02-21-2007, 01:50 PM
#50
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Jupiter (NPB), Fl
Posts: 3,852
What's not in your nature? The discussion? Based on the past few weeks, I'd say you like to discuss things quite a bit
02-21-2007, 02:00 PM
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Jackstandican
Posts: 3,144
With that said I can only go by what I've experienced for myself and what I've seen for myself along with knowing first hand what combos have been used instead of reading it on the internet. I've always been like this. I've pretty much decided I won't ever change.
02-21-2007, 02:28 PM
#52
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Jupiter (NPB), Fl
Posts: 3,852
I don't know what story is where nor am I going to make any kind of allegations. It's just that from past experience there usually seems to be something that doesn't quite make it out to the public unless it is witnessed first hand.
With that said I can only go by what I've experienced for myself and what I've seen for myself along with knowing first hand what combos have been used instead of reading it on the internet. I've always been like this. I've pretty much decided I won't ever change.
With that said I can only go by what I've experienced for myself and what I've seen for myself along with knowing first hand what combos have been used instead of reading it on the internet. I've always been like this. I've pretty much decided I won't ever change.
People want proof that BRE's stuff works nicely, and when it's given via track #'s, a doubt shadow is still casted over it. Convenient.
02-21-2007, 03:39 PM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 2,640
02-21-2007, 03:40 PM
#56
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,525
That's because most people don't set up their cars right, they have mail order tunes, and they can't drive. Just randomly throwing parts at a car won't make it that fast like most people tend to believe. If you do some digging I'm sure you can find a bunch of cars trapping 120+. And I don't know what I'm going to pick up its not an exact science. And if you look at the pics you can tell my heads were far from an all out portjob.
02-21-2007, 03:41 PM
#57
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Ocala, Florida
Posts: 3,245
Just the heads and getting it re-tuned obviously. I'll be putting on my suspension stuff (koni s/a, strano springs, strano swaybar, UMI panhard bar) so I'm probably going to spin my *** off at the track.
02-21-2007, 03:55 PM
#58
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 2,640
Maybe you don't remember Tim's(95bird) thread about his flow numbers?
You're putting TOO much emphasis on flow numbers. His BEST port wasn't over 250!
This is an average of all ports.
lift int. exh.
.200 121.9 101.3
.300 176.9 132.0
.400 216.8 153.3
.450 231.9 160.2
.500 242.4 165.7
.550 238.5 169.8
.600 230.8 172.4
.650 229.8 174.3
.700 227.9 175.6
I dynoed 427 427 dyno (cut/past link) on pump gas and 439.7 439 dyno on race gas. All dyno runs were made through a 9" and 4.71 gears so I would guess 15-20 rwhp down from a stock rear end with 4.10s from what I have seen other cars loose from a 9".
lift int. exh.
.200 121.9 101.3
.300 176.9 132.0
.400 216.8 153.3
.450 231.9 160.2
.500 242.4 165.7
.550 238.5 169.8
.600 230.8 172.4
.650 229.8 174.3
.700 227.9 175.6
I dynoed 427 427 dyno (cut/past link) on pump gas and 439.7 439 dyno on race gas. All dyno runs were made through a 9" and 4.71 gears so I would guess 15-20 rwhp down from a stock rear end with 4.10s from what I have seen other cars loose from a 9".
Care to explain this one for me?
02-21-2007, 07:58 PM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Jackstandican
Posts: 3,144
I am not accusing anyone of anything. Just giving an opinion on what I've witnessed all too many times before.
The explanation for the head flow numbers.... I don't like numbers. They never got along with me during high school and I never got along with them. This is a painfully perfect example as to how flow numbers and dyno numbers mean absolutely dick... that's... of course if those flow numbers are correct. We'll never know. Furthermore the quote of the flow numbers on top of dyno numbers is nothing more than setting a pile of variables on top of another larger pile of unstable variables. All I see on this sight are dyno numbers with no ET's and if there are ET's then EVERYONE is dissappointed because their car dynoed well yet at the track they sucked. As said before it seems more and more the norm is having to dyno 420rwhp to do the mph that demon's car has produced.
I wish all the best for demon and hope he has great success w/ this project. If it were me, being the staunch conservative I am I wouldn't touch those ports with the kind of mph he's trapping and invest in the drivetrain. I wouldn't want to take the gamble. I would be rather upset for paying a thousand plus dollars for maybe gaining a few mph through the traps.
Hell through all this I'm being a bit of a hypocrite. My buildup will be a 396 solid roller and I'm going to use my 9 year old, salty dog LPE CNC LT4 heads in hopes they will produce well. It's a gamble I'm willing to take at this point to save some cash.
The explanation for the head flow numbers.... I don't like numbers. They never got along with me during high school and I never got along with them. This is a painfully perfect example as to how flow numbers and dyno numbers mean absolutely dick... that's... of course if those flow numbers are correct. We'll never know. Furthermore the quote of the flow numbers on top of dyno numbers is nothing more than setting a pile of variables on top of another larger pile of unstable variables. All I see on this sight are dyno numbers with no ET's and if there are ET's then EVERYONE is dissappointed because their car dynoed well yet at the track they sucked. As said before it seems more and more the norm is having to dyno 420rwhp to do the mph that demon's car has produced.
I wish all the best for demon and hope he has great success w/ this project. If it were me, being the staunch conservative I am I wouldn't touch those ports with the kind of mph he's trapping and invest in the drivetrain. I wouldn't want to take the gamble. I would be rather upset for paying a thousand plus dollars for maybe gaining a few mph through the traps.
Hell through all this I'm being a bit of a hypocrite. My buildup will be a 396 solid roller and I'm going to use my 9 year old, salty dog LPE CNC LT4 heads in hopes they will produce well. It's a gamble I'm willing to take at this point to save some cash.
02-21-2007, 08:02 PM
#60
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,525
I hope for your sake that the car isn't slower for whatever reason. I'm anxious to see how this turns out for you.