as shifted said, there is a direct correlation between your a/f and numbers. right as your numbers fall, you get fat. you need to control the fuel, the computer is probably compensating for the extra air its seeing.

It also has a lot to due with the weight of the 18" rims your running. I was running around 18-19lb. 17" rims , then dropped to 17" 12.5lb. rims and gained 12-15hp.





"The FACTS are always subject to CHANGE once the TRUTH is applied"
"In the entire history of man the only stupid questions are the ones that don't get asked"

that graph looks terrible, looks like your suffering some ignition breakup. what are your plugs gapped at? try tightening the gap to .028 or if that doesnt work try .026. my guess is your running the stock gap of like .040 and its killin ya

also your running terribly rich. but that aside, cleaning up the afr and regapping your plugs, will probably only net you 15-20 more whp. your looking at around a 185-90ish whp setup

i wouldnt expect much more than that

gm dyno'd the s/c = 175whp.
there was a article in a few mag's where they dyno'd it and got right at /near 175whp. this is in a bone stock car.

mr goodwrench- stock car with s/c - 174 whp, right near 175.

calvin(now lafngas's car). like 210 whp with all the bolt ons no w/i smaller pulley.

andy from michigan- 207ish whp with all the bolt ons/ smaller pulley and 270whp on 70 shot of nitrous

hanzenrider stock pulley- 176whp(hot humid day) 320 cc injectors, no reflash(99 ecu). he had a intake and cat back.

jc92camaro- he has a ported head, ported s/c, 10/11psi all the bolt on's, i forget his dyno, but he was running mid 13's with a stock clutch, now he has a HO' Tranny, better clutch, HP tuners.

not sure what john dnyoed, nice set up he has.!

if i dynoed my set up( getting rid of it here soon though), i would expect right near 200whp on 5 psi.

no one has dynoed yet (i seen, john?)with cams/ water injection and a lighter flywheel. i think a smaller pulley and all the bolt on's plus the few mods i just listed would be around the 220 range. you are maxed out after that fo sho'.

SPDDMON wrote:I'm running the GM charger with a 2.7" pulley, check my registry for other mods. It was a cool night, I iced the charger and had several fans on the car.

Why am I running off the scale rich above 4000 rpm (the red dotted line is 11.5:1)?
And looking at the shape of graph it looks like its pulling alot of timing above 5000 rpm?

But what really concerns me is why am I only making 165 hp?

FIgure out and fix why its running so rich.
Ignore everything else till then.

Note: there is something broken or misassembled causing it to run rich.



sig not found

Last dyno I did (without n2o)in April was 217whp... I'll try again in a few weeks after I'm done playing with all the PCM swapping and get some tune time in.

BTW , I'm only seeing 7-8lbs. boost with a 2.6 pulley and all the head work , lower compression , water/meth , and cams.





"The FACTS are always subject to CHANGE once the TRUTH is applied"
"In the entire history of man the only stupid questions are the ones that don't get asked"

so noone else thinks he might be suffering some ignition breakup, look how choppy that graph is, that @!#$ is supposed to be smooth. like i asked before, what gap are you running on your plugs.

Jake wrote:gm dyno'd the s/c = 175whp.
there was a article in a few mag's where they dyno'd it and got right at /near 175whp. this is in a bone stock car.

mr goodwrench- stock car with s/c - 174 whp, right near 175.

calvin(now lafngas's car). like 210 whp with all the bolt ons no w/i smaller pulley.

andy from michigan- 207ish whp with all the bolt ons/ smaller pulley and 270whp on 70 shot of nitrous

hanzenrider stock pulley- 176whp(hot humid day) 320 cc injectors, no reflash(99 ecu). he had a intake and cat back.

jc92camaro- he has a ported head, ported s/c, 10/11psi all the bolt on's, i forget his dyno, but he was running mid 13's with a stock clutch, now he has a HO' Tranny, better clutch, HP tuners.

not sure what john dnyoed, nice set up he has.!

if i dynoed my set up( getting rid of it here soon though), i would expect right near 200whp on 5 psi.

no one has dynoed yet (i seen, john?)with cams/ water injection and a lighter flywheel. i think a smaller pulley and all the bolt on's plus the few mods i just listed would be around the 220 range. you are maxed out after that fo sho'.

jake is right, i threw down 207hp and 197tq @ the wheels, i need my w/i kit setup properly and im gonna dyno it again and gonna have hp tuners in my possession as well so im hoping to somehow manage 220-230whp

My boost gauge has been showing me 9 psi with my setup but I always thought my gauge calibration was off. But I drove around today with my scanner and my MAP sensor was showing me 165 kpa absolute which equals 9 psi (what my gauge showed).Quick clip of my boost gauge.

I have my boost gauge hooked up to the map sensor line I'm going to try and use the FPR line as my source.

Why its running rich I don't know, its the stock fuel system with the stock 310cc injectors. The only thing I can think of is the injectors have begun to clip and have become static. Or my map sensor is reading a higher boost level than the motor is seeing.

ccfab wrote:so noone else thinks he might be suffering some ignition breakup, look how choppy that graph is, that @!#$ is supposed to be smooth. like i asked before, what gap are you running on your plugs.

I was thinking the same thing about the ignition. The charger instructions tell you to gap the plugs at 0.050" but I think I gapped them lower closer to 0.040". I'm going to regap them to 0.030" and see how that works.

Extra info: my intake temps were around 145 degrees. And it was a single roller dynojet dyno (I know the clayton dynos, two roller style, usually show lower).

Eugene, we should get together sometime and compare scanner readings between our cars. Let me know.





14.330 @ 96.37mph

BlownBlackZ wrote:Eugene, we should get together sometime and compare scanner readings between our cars. Let me know.

Sounds great. I need some one who can what my scanner and actually understand what it says.

SPDDMON wrote:

BlownBlackZ wrote:Eugene, we should get together sometime and compare scanner readings between our cars. Let me know.

Sounds great. I need some one who can what my scanner and actually understand what it says.

Oh I don't know enough to be able to do all that haha. I meant could try out my MAP on your car and vice versa. Is your boost gauge electric or mechanical?




14.330 @ 96.37mph

I don't have the sheet in front of me but I seem to recall mine did 178 hp almost entirely stock. Bigger TB and K&N filter but that was about it.

i wouldnt hook up the boost guage to the map sensor hose. rather hook it up to the FPR line.

That just seems like a bad idea to me. as the boost/vacuum now has 5 feet+ of extra tubing to go through, instead of not even 5inchs.

Like said b4, check out your plugs, gap them smaller. How does your plug boot thingy's look? your white coil pack housing have carbon tracking on it?

Bill either way, I'd wouldn't mind comparing our cars. And I have a mechanical boost gauge.

When I go back to work Tuesday I'm going to see if I can drive around with the Tech2 so I can see if I'm knocking and what my injector duty cycle/pulse width is (the only things my scanner won't tell me)?

Jake,
I got 135.8 WHP when the car was "of the factory floor stock" down right to the GM original filter. Then after GMPP S/C installed, I registered 178.6 WHP. I have not done any new dynos with the little mods I got going.
The charger alone gave me a 42.8 WHP boost.
But you were close.





>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----

dont feel bad i only made 174whp and i have a sh!tload done......hptuners in a couple weeks tho....yay for me



2000 Camaro V6.
| SLP Loudmouth | CAI Intake | HID's |