Low $ pump gas streetable 565 hp SB Chevy.

[In-Tech]

I'm with ya Frank, I know this is a tad off topic for the original post, it needs to be said many many times.

I took a car making 775whp on the electric dyno I like to use and drove it across town and picked up 75whp in 15 minutes without the laptop hooked up

Which dyno sheet got printed?

[Warp Speed]

It's just a number..........who cares!

[nickpohlaandp]

...Sorry for the rant, but, its like a government conspiracy.... they end up twisting it around...

I completely agree with you. I used to have a Land and Sea water brake dyno that we would run our engines on... hard... but not to get power numbers, it was for quality verification. Generally if you're going to have something go wrong with a new engine, it's going to happen soon after the initial startup when you really start leaning on it. These were all aluminum water cooled turbocharged V8's going into aircraft. There's no room for blowing your stuff up when you're flying. That's a little off topic, but it brings me back around to my point... we never paid close attention to power numbers until the engine was broken in and ready to rock. At that point we'd turn up the wick, build boost, and let 'er eat. Once we got to that point we'd simply verify that the engine was making the target HP (these were "cookie cutter" engines, all built with the same parts, specs, etc.). We marketed a 375hp, 400hp, and 425hp version of them, and there was no manipulation on the dyno to get larger numbers. Even if there had been it would've become painfully apparent and we would've had to answer to some pretty pissed off customers when the xxxHP engine wouldn't turn their prop to the proper operating RPM.

One of the things that just digs at me more than ANYTHING in the whole engine building/racing community is when someone posts their "dyno" numbers or "track times" but they are immediately followed with the caveat of "corrected for MSL" or whatever. Really?!?!? Look dude, if your engine made 400hp and you live in Denver, it'll probably dyno better in Ft. Lauderdale, FL, but that's not where you dynoed it, you did it in Denver... and you made 400hp. If your car runs 12 seconds in Denver, guess what... time is the same in Denver as it is in Aiken, SC... your car ran 12 seconds. I don't give a crap what you want to correct it to, I only care about what actually happened.

So if your loved one is being held hostage by some crazy jackass and you only have 10 seconds to get to them and save them, are you going to hop in your car, run down there in 12 seconds, and explain to said madman that it's corrected to 10 seconds so you're right on time? Corrections are for people who have trouble accepting reality.

[nickpohlaandp]

As a follow up to my rant, please don't ask me for specific BSFC numbers, barometer readings, etc. I could tell you numbers but they'd be a complete fabrication. That was almost 15 years ago and I don't remember, sorry. The only thing I remember with crystal clear clarity is the HP packages we sold... 375, 400, and 425 (there were two exceptions for a twin engine aircraft that put out 510hp, but I was not a part of those builds).

[nickpohlaandp]

Reading David's books and cam articles prompted me to select a cam with a tighter LSA than I would have otherwise selected for my last mild 350 build (108 LSA, vs the 110-114 that everyone else seems to push for mild street engines). I am more than pleased with the results.

I've had the privilege of using COS Cams several times. I'll never call a cam company for a spec again.

Where were you able to use that program? I've contacted David Vizard regarding it but have yet to hear back from him. I doubt I'd be able to get my hands on a copy (if I could that would be FREAKIN AWESOME!!!), but if I could just find some authorized users that have it, I'd really like it to spec out my cam at some point for my 496. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction if you can.

[nickpohlaandp]

Duplicated post... sorry

[CamKing]

Blame Superflow, for selling inaccurate dynos, and marketing them as sales tools.

[nickpohlaandp]

Blame Superflow, for selling inaccurate dynos, and marketing them as sales tools.

I think a lot of it has to fall on the shoulders of the dyno operator. If they are knowingly manipulating variables to produce bigger numbers then they are just as guilty. I'd rather have a 400hp engine that could rocket my car down the quarter in mid to low 9's vs. an 800hp engine that barely clicks off a 12 second pass.

I no longer have that dyno I was talking about a few posts back. When my father died the business was more or less liquidated and I ended up living in an apartment going back to college. There's not much room for a water brake dyno or the 1000 gallon water drums that go along with it in an apartment. When I tune cars now I do it on the street (I know, I know, not safe, blah blah blah) with datalogging and at the track with timeslips. Maximizing those two right there will get you to where you really want your engine to be.

[n2xlr8n]

Not saying he is lying either.....There you go, you still have a bit of work to do, because you could be going a bit quicker yet.

Thanks for clarifying.

I think many folks are tired of the dyno games. It's a tool, sure, but the fudging becomes a marketing tool for businesses. We get it.

I appreciate your contributions, as well as Chad's and others on here.

CGT- that was intended for Frankshaft; I apologize.

[GARY C]

Have you ever noticed that the only dyno #'s a man will accept are his own...Everyone else is cheating.

Not that it matter's but my machinist does almost the exact same engine down to the 108 lsa the only difference would be a few #'s on duration, he shoots for around a .43 to .45 bsfc and his power #'s would basically mimic Chris' 383.

[levisnteeshirt]

The 4in stroke is helping the heads and the timing situation , , there is more taking place in less amount of time so it needs less initial to get the job done , the mediocre heads are seeing the piston speed up during the valve events so that's a plus also