5at N/A build, poor results, need help

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
  #46  
Old 02-15-2013, 01:05 AM
Tolboothwilley™'s Avatar
Former G35driver Vendor
iTrader: (37)
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 1,081
Received 71 Likes on 60 Posts
my 2003 bounces off the rev-limit - maybe they changed it after that?

For those who are posting form different dynos - its irrelevant unless your car was at the same dyno

However - your numbers are coming in very low even on the 2nd dyno. Even up at high altitude w/ just a axle back and intake spacer I pulled 222 on a dyno that reads very low - that was at 4600 ft above sea level. Since then I pushed a lot higher - and you should be seeing gains of at least 25-30 hp from when you first started w/ a stock baseline.
 
  #47  
Old 02-15-2013, 09:22 AM
Dsskyline's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Owings Mills MD
Posts: 2,729
Received 84 Likes on 54 Posts
Originally Posted by Tolboothwilley™
my 2003 bounces off the rev-limit - maybe they changed it after that?

For those who are posting form different dynos - its irrelevant unless your car was at the same dyno

However - your numbers are coming in very low even on the 2nd dyno. Even up at high altitude w/ just a axle back and intake spacer I pulled 222 on a dyno that reads very low - that was at 4600 ft above sea level. Since then I pushed a lot higher - and you should be seeing gains of at least 25-30 hp from when you first started w/ a stock baseline.
Im sure we all know dynos are different unless done same day on the same dyno.

If you noticed all the dynos posted are from the same type of dyno a mustang. I don't expect him to pull the same #s too many variables, but be within 15-20hp hopefully.

The OP should post the dyno he emailed me last night dyno sheet looked like a liar polygraph.
 
  #48  
Old 04-03-2013, 05:00 PM
nova15566's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Northeast/Southeast
Posts: 148
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Peoria35sedan
Dude, that car needs a tune in a big way, your af ratios are all over the place.
Your tune sucks... way too rich up top and all over the damn place. I wouldnt want it dipping past 12.6 or so and honestly my car is 13.5 most of the and dips to about 13.1 (but im on methanol). This tune is killing your power and mpg.
 
  #49  
Old 04-03-2013, 10:12 PM
faiz23's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Your mom's bed
Posts: 2,198
Received 290 Likes on 218 Posts
Originally Posted by nova15566
Your tune sucks... way too rich up top and all over the damn place. I wouldnt want it dipping past 12.6 or so and honestly my car is 13.5 most of the and dips to about 13.1 (but im on methanol). This tune is killing your power and mpg.
It is stock tune from factory on 87 octane. I expected AFR to be wack but wanted to see what power output it puts down with lower octane. I will probably go back some time in the future to retest and see how 93 octane does. Car is a daily driver to get me to and from work so I can make $$$. I don't see myself pouring thousands of dollars to gain 40hp. I rather ditch the vq and pick up a ls1 after I retire the car from daily driver and get a replacement commuter vehicle.
 
  #50  
Old 04-04-2013, 10:26 AM
seymore4's Avatar
Premier Member

iTrader: (114)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: West coast
Posts: 4,924
Received 421 Likes on 339 Posts
Originally Posted by faiz23
It is stock tune from factory on 87 octane. I expected AFR to be wack but wanted to see what power output it puts down with lower octane.
You obviously know a lot about how engines work. You should open a shop and start tuning professionally
 
The following 2 users liked this post by seymore4:
JaE35 (04-04-2013), nova15566 (04-04-2013)
  #51  
Old 04-04-2013, 11:27 AM
faiz23's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Your mom's bed
Posts: 2,198
Received 290 Likes on 218 Posts
Originally Posted by seymore4
You obviously know a lot about how engines work. You should open a shop and start tuning professionally
Return on investment is crap in that field. I prefer other avenues to make $$$ and plan to stick to that. Thank you very much for your advice and I will ponder upon it for .003 milliseconds.
 
  #52  
Old 04-04-2013, 11:37 AM
seymore4's Avatar
Premier Member

iTrader: (114)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: West coast
Posts: 4,924
Received 421 Likes on 339 Posts
Originally Posted by faiz23
Return on investment is crap in that field. I prefer other avenues to make $$$ and plan to stick to that.
like running 87 octane in an engine specifically designed for premium? Good luck with that, your shortsightedness in saving 20 cents a gallon will be reflected with a potentially damaged engine, more wear and tear/ maintenance issues, lagging performance, and crappy gas mileage.

If you want to maximize your "investment" please go buy a civic
 
The following users liked this post:
nova15566 (04-04-2013)
  #53  
Old 04-04-2013, 01:03 PM
faiz23's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Your mom's bed
Posts: 2,198
Received 290 Likes on 218 Posts
Originally Posted by seymore4
like running 87 octane in an engine specifically designed for premium? Good luck with that, your shortsightedness in saving 20 cents a gallon will be reflected with a potentially damaged engine, more wear and tear/ maintenance issues, lagging performance, and crappy gas mileage.

If you want to maximize your "investment" please go buy a civic
I ran 87 octane for a month to see the effect first hand and dyno test for my own curiosity. Other than that month it has always seen top tier rated 93 octane. Not really worried about the engine with IPP in my backyard. Civic might be fine for you but I prefer a luxury sport sedan. Thanks your your precious input.
 
  #54  
Old 04-04-2013, 01:08 PM
seymore4's Avatar
Premier Member

iTrader: (114)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: West coast
Posts: 4,924
Received 421 Likes on 339 Posts
um, ok?
 
  #55  
Old 04-04-2013, 06:56 PM
nova15566's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Northeast/Southeast
Posts: 148
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by seymore4
like running 87 octane in an engine specifically designed for premium? Good luck with that, your shortsightedness in saving 20 cents a gallon will be reflected with a potentially damaged engine, more wear and tear/ maintenance issues, lagging performance, and crappy gas mileage.

If you want to maximize your "investment" please go buy a civic
You and i think a like lol... Running 87 as they say in fast and the furious... is a good way to spend 10 grand (after when you blow your motor)... Seymore4 is a well known tuner and pretty knowledgeable on these platforms. I personally have also run 87 (did it one day when my station was out of 93 and no one local had it within 5miles and i needed it and wasn't going to dump my c16 in)... I also was on meth injection (kinda makes up for the lack of knock resistance)... even with my nitrous map (lots of fuel lots of timing) the car ran like **** and i only put 2 gals in (now im cammed so...) but idk why you would ever think saving $3-5 a week on gas is worth losing that lux and power you speak of. It prob sounds like a popcorn machine.


What that dyno sheet is showing is= lean lean lean lean... and knock knock= pull timing add fuel rich rich rich rich (still knocking) rich rich rich...
 

Last edited by nova15566; 04-04-2013 at 07:02 PM.
  #56  
Old 04-04-2013, 07:21 PM
rcdash's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 2,173
Received 32 Likes on 26 Posts
No pro on this platform would ever recommend cams for an NA build unless also building the bottom end for higher compression. Even with free labor, it just does not make sense.

Anyway, now that its done and you don't have the power you're looking for, how do you know the cams have been properly installed? It's either the tune (as others have indicated) or something was mucked up in the install. The S1 cams should show a gain in the upper midrange, well past 6k rpms. Call Jim Wolf and talk to him, or better yet, have your installer call him and go over the install.
 
  #57  
Old 04-04-2013, 10:57 PM
nova15566's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Northeast/Southeast
Posts: 148
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by rcdash
No pro on this platform would ever recommend cams for an NA build unless also building the bottom end for higher compression. Even with free labor, it just does not make sense.

Anyway, now that its done and you don't have the power you're looking for, how do you know the cams have been properly installed? It's either the tune (as others have indicated) or something was mucked up in the install. The S1 cams should show a gain in the upper midrange, well past 6k rpms. Call Jim Wolf and talk to him, or better yet, have your installer call him and go over the install.
eh... Im cammed stock bottom end (future plans to build but in the past didnt know what I wanted and had other projects) and it was one of the best mods to the car... NA for NA when I run a 6mt i pull 3-4cars by 65-70 from a 30 roll (on my 3.3 diff) and on nitrous ... well Im sure it's helped because the car is making decent power.

There are tons of great na builds using stock bottom end that are running close to sc/boost times at the track... Look at Darron's car... The oem cams aren't very good and there is a lot that can be gained. Not everyone wants boost or xxx power. Calling cams a bad idea on stock bottom end is silly when it's getting close to 300whp on a de (more if ur willing to push it). 300whp NA on the g/z is pretty fun to dd...

Some people build in stages as well. Cams for NA are a great mod.
 
  #58  
Old 04-05-2013, 02:11 PM
rcdash's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 2,173
Received 32 Likes on 26 Posts
Originally Posted by nova15566
eh... Im cammed stock bottom end (future plans to build but in the past didnt know what I wanted and had other projects) and it was one of the best mods to the car... NA for NA when I run a 6mt i pull 3-4cars by 65-70 from a 30 roll (on my 3.3 diff) and on nitrous ... well Im sure it's helped because the car is making decent power.

There are tons of great na builds using stock bottom end that are running close to sc/boost times at the track... Look at Darron's car... The oem cams aren't very good and there is a lot that can be gained. Not everyone wants boost or xxx power. Calling cams a bad idea on stock bottom end is silly when it's getting close to 300whp on a de (more if ur willing to push it). 300whp NA on the g/z is pretty fun to dd...

Some people build in stages as well. Cams for NA are a great mod.
You are missing the point. Your personal street racing/butt dyno impressions are irrelevant (not to mention you threw nitrous into your statement ). I'm not saying cams won't usually make "some" power. I am saying that the cost/effort for making relatively small gains with cams simply do not make sense. Cams are really only worthwhile IF you are building (dropping) the motor anyway.

EDIT: And there are no "great" mods for NA 6MT, other than a spacer, gears, and if you like noise, throw in a nice exhaust, but everything else has significant downsides. Your 3.3 gear on a 100/150 shot does not make any sense either. You will be faster in every gear with a 3.5 and some better tires and optimized alignment.
 

Last edited by rcdash; 04-05-2013 at 02:22 PM.
  #59  
Old 04-05-2013, 04:21 PM
nova15566's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Northeast/Southeast
Posts: 148
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by rcdash
You are missing the point. Your personal street racing/butt dyno impressions are irrelevant (not to mention you threw nitrous into your statement ). I'm not saying cams won't usually make "some" power. I am saying that the cost/effort for making relatively small gains with cams simply do not make sense. Cams are really only worthwhile IF you are building (dropping) the motor anyway.

EDIT: And there are no "great" mods for NA 6MT, other than a spacer, gears, and if you like noise, throw in a nice exhaust, but everything else has significant downsides. Your 3.3 gear on a 100/150 shot does not make any sense either. You will be faster in every gear with a 3.5 and some better tires and optimized alignment.

I'm talking about dyno results as well as real world track results. Sorry I don't post on here often enough for my opinion/experience to count

If you won't take my word for it talk to https://g35driver.com/forums/members...dsskyline.html who is in this thread above and cammed on stock bottom end and has one of the quickest 1/4 times na and spray and when he was boosted. Oh and he is a 5at...

(fyi I have a 3.69/3.96/4.08 setup. I dd on the 3.3 as im a 5at...) Btw I have great tires... If M/T ET DRAGS are not good enough for you... and on the street I have a few sets of wheels and tire combos... not eveything is as you think it is.) But your an expert and HAVE TRIED THIS RIGHT?
 

Last edited by nova15566; 04-05-2013 at 04:25 PM.
  #60  
Old 04-08-2013, 12:37 PM
DEMoLITIoN's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North Bay 707
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 46 Likes on 35 Posts
The trick and truth to Cammed VQ's is to leave the exhaust cams stock.
 


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average.

Quick Reply: 5at N/A build, poor results, need help



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:41 PM.