|
Author
|
Topic: Going to the chassis dyno tomorrow night..Any guesses?
|
f100cleveland
Gearhead Posts: 361
From: St. James, MN
Registered: Sep 2004
|
posted 08-21-2005 02:01 PM
   
Tomorrow night I'll be taking my truck to a shop and having it dynoed. I'm really excited that I'll get to see what it really has and where it makes peak hp/tq and how close my carb tuning is. Anyone want to throw any guesses out to what kind of hp/tq it will make? Here is the combo:351 Cleveland 4v. Bored 0.030 over with TRW flat tops that yield about 10.8:1 compression. Heads are closed chamber 4v that have been ported, exhaust side was also polished, Parker port stuffers in intake ports, Manley Race Master Valves 2.19"/1.71", and Crower Stainless 1.73:1 Rockers. MME custom hyd roller 242/[email protected] with 0.640" lift on both sides. Funnelweb Intake with a 1" custom tapered Wilson's spacer that is matched to the cloverleaf pattern on the intake, 950 HP Holley DP. MSD billet distributor, MSD Digital 6 Plus ignition box, and MSD HVC coil. Hooker Super Comps with 1 3/4" primary tubes into a 3" collector. Exhaust is dual mandrel bent 3" with Borla XR-1 Sportsman mufflers. Full Roller c6, Sonnax Super Servo, Broader Stage 5 valve body, 4000 Dacco Torque Converter, Gear Vendors Overdrive, 4.86 gears and a Detroit Locker equipped 9". Any guesses are appreciated so I know what to expect and I'll post results after I get home tomorrow. ------------------
1982 Ford F100 2wd Shortbox. Powered by a 357 Cleveland w/ closed chamber 4v's and a Funnelweb. Full Roller c-6 trans with Gear Vendors Overdrive and 4.86 geared Detroit Locker equipped 9" rear. 1982 F100 351c 4v 1977 F150 460 Burnout Truck [This message has been edited by f100cleveland (edited 08-21-2005).]
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6395
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 08-21-2005 02:12 PM
Less than you are probably expecting. The C6 is a power eater regardless of it being rollerized, and the relatively loose convertor will also hurt the power it shows to the wheels. I'm betting it doesn't show much over 300 to the wheels, if that much. Maybe 330 rwhp if it's not 100* in the shop when you dyno it.Plus, I really think the Funnelweb intake isn't what it's cracked up to be either. It sounds great in theory, but from some of the history I have heard about Parker and his design techniques, I have no faith in his products.
IP: Logged |
f100cleveland
Gearhead Posts: 361
From: St. James, MN
Registered: Sep 2004
|
posted 08-21-2005 02:22 PM
KV, I'm aware the the convertor and the c6 will eat up a fair amount of power. I know the Funnelweb makes more power than the Blue Thunder did. I can't judge anything below 4,000 rpms, but the Funnelweb gained everywhere about that. But, about Parkers design, what is bad about it? I'm not saying you're wrong, I was just curious what your views were on it. ------------------
1982 Ford F100 2wd Shortbox. Powered by a 357 Cleveland w/ closed chamber 4v's and a Funnelweb. Full Roller c-6 trans with Gear Vendors Overdrive and 4.86 geared Detroit Locker equipped 9" rear. 1982 F100 351c 4v 1977 F150 460 Burnout Truck
IP: Logged |
Ci8UUP
Gearhead Posts: 183
From: Renton, Washington
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 08-22-2005 06:56 PM
362
IP: Logged |
Ci8UUP
Gearhead Posts: 183
From: Renton, Washington
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 08-22-2005 07:21 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kid vishus:
Less than you are probably expecting. The C6 is a power eater regardless of it being rollerized, and the relatively loose convertor will also hurt the power it shows to the wheels. I'm betting it doesn't show much over 300 to the wheels, if that much. Maybe 330 rwhp if it's not 100* in the shop when you dyno it.Plus, I really think the Funnelweb intake isn't what it's cracked up to be either. It sounds great in theory, but from some of the history I have heard about Parker and his design techniques, I have no faith in his products.
How much more power do you think a C6 eats?
Can't be much, maybe 25hp?
IP: Logged |
Built351c
Gearhead Posts: 140
From: Big Lake, MN
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 08-22-2005 08:53 PM
Im thinking the headers will hurt the truck the most. So i am thinking 320+ hp and 300+ on the torque because of the small headers. Whos doing the dyno? Keep us posted.
IP: Logged |
68 Coop
Gearhead Posts: 2869
From: Mesquite, NV. 89027 M&M# 4256
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted 08-22-2005 09:44 PM
I was gonna guess a little high then, because I was figuring at least 325 to 350. I want to see the results too.------------------
William 68 Coupe
289
Edelbrock 600
Performer Intake
Headers/X-pipe/Flowmaster 30's
C4
8"rear/2:79gears
"Restomod in Progress" Good friends are hard to find, even harder to leave, and impossible to forget.
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6395
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 08-22-2005 10:12 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Ci8UUP:
How much more power do you think a C6 eats?
Can't be much, maybe 25hp?
A normal non rollerized c6 'eats' around 60 hp. A c4 takes around 25 hp to drive. A powerglide takes something minimal like 15 hp. The only 3 speed auto trans that takes more hp than a c6 is a chrysler 727. If I remember correctly, it takes something like 65 or 70.
IP: Logged |
68 Coop
Gearhead Posts: 2869
From: Mesquite, NV. 89027 M&M# 4256
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted 08-22-2005 10:19 PM
DAMN! 25 hp to drive around town, no woder my gas milage sux.
IP: Logged |
Ci8UUP
Gearhead Posts: 183
From: Renton, Washington
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 08-22-2005 10:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kid vishus:
A normal non rollerized c6 'eats' around 60 hp. A c4 takes around 25 hp to drive. A powerglide takes something minimal like 15 hp. The only 3 speed auto trans that takes more hp than a c6 is a chrysler 727. If I remember correctly, it takes something like 65 or 70.
So a net of -35hp? That's more than I thought, but not a bad trade-off for a more heavy-duty transmission.
IP: Logged |
RogueS
Journeyman Posts: 71
From: Wichita, KS, USA
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted 08-23-2005 06:24 PM
Now what about an AOD, more than 60?[This message has been edited by RogueS (edited 08-23-2005).]
IP: Logged |
Ci8UUP
Gearhead Posts: 183
From: Renton, Washington
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 08-24-2005 09:22 PM
KV, so is there any loss on a manual transmission?
IP: Logged |
'69PonyRider
Gearhead Posts: 238
From: Hawthorne, CA
Registered: Sep 2001
|
posted 09-13-2005 06:04 PM
what happened with this? did you ever get to the dyno?
IP: Logged |
'69PonyRider
Gearhead Posts: 238
From: Hawthorne, CA
Registered: Sep 2001
|
posted 09-13-2005 06:09 PM
nm i just saw the other post.
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
