SSBalt

Went with a small group.
Cobalt SS/TC - Stock (240.8 HP 258.3 TQ)
02 Mustang Gt - Mild cam, full bolt ons, tune (280 HP 310TQ)
86 Mustang Gt - Bolt ons + something else (250 HP 250ish TQ)
WS6 Trans Am - cam, heads + a lot more (440 HP don't remember TQ)



Here is a quick vid. Thats the dyno guy not me.
http://s451.photobucket.com/albums/q...t=P8290180.flv

I have vids of the other cars if anyone is interested

Altiery54

very nice man

ToTaLeD

wow excellent numbers

BostonBoy

Nice to see these kind of post, & nice numbers. That WS6 is a monster, just a bitch to work on.

glhs379

nice numbers!

MARIN007

Sweeeeeeeeet

Zander916

Anybody else notice (not that it's a big deal) but peak torque is happening at like 2,500 - 2,700 rpm... not 2,000 as claimed by GM.

1WhiteSSTC

yes, that is interesting.........lemme try and find some more stock ss/tc dyno's I know they exsist.

peachpuff

When you start a dyno at 2000rpm you cant expect to hit peak output by 2001rpm, next time start the dyno at 1000rpm.

SSBalt

Yeah they were having some problems at first with my car. The first run the Rpm's maxed at 9k according to the computer. My buds were like no way ur car does 9k!?? I grinned and said yep. haha The dyno dude had to mess with it a bit to get everyting to work. Guess it was the first SS/TC they had. The mechanic yelled direct injection and other mechanics came out to inspect my car over. I heard comments like good design. This car is only 24k? and so on. Kinda funny that my car got the most attention since it produced the least amount of HP.

As far as the other car owners, I got the usual friendly jabs like you cant make a 4 cyl exhaust sound good. Also "whats that ticking sound?" "Your valves are tapping" was a big hit between them. But when that car was screaming on the dyno they were all impressed. Not to mention I was only 10 HP down and a couple lbs TQ up on the 86 mustang that just poured a grand into what I think were new heads.

here is the Ws6. Bad ass car

http://s451.photobucket.com/albums/q...t=P8290186.flv

glhs379

Those 86 gt's were VERY down on power vs the newer mass air cars(88+) though in his defense. They were only like 205 hp from the factory in 86 I think.



however new heads/cam/etc and only putting 250 to the wheels, i would be pissed.



Those LS1's with H/C are monsters.

SSBalt

I used to be a mustang freak. 87 Gt, 92 lx 5.0, and 92 gt were my previous cars. So it was nice to see a foxbody even if it was a carb. If im not mistaken even the 87-90 mustangs should have been rated at 205. They were marked 225 before Ford changed their rating system for 91-93. My 87 stock dynoed at 191. And my 92 lx was 187 stock. But your right, 250 for a high mileage non mass air car isn't so shabby. The car sounded sooo good as well.

glhs379

I think 1986 was injected, 85 was the last carb year and 86 was 205 hp, I believe the 1987 and newer were 225 hp cars, but yeah high 100's is about all you were going to get from those year 5.0's. Heck the 1994 5.0's were only like 215 hp, was pretty sad still even after they changed body style.

But since mustang parts are available just about anywhere for real cheap, you can make them pretty fast, and the old notches were pretty light also.

My buddy had a 86 gt and he put some headers on it and a cai but it ran like low 15's or so.

there is no sub for a nice sounding V8 however.

red2001ss

Hope that WS6 has an aftermarket rear end with those #'s. Stock 10-bolt will soon enough on a Stock LS1 F-Body, let alone a H/C one. My Camaro SS #'s would be similar, save for the fact that I have a Moser 9" and 4.11 gears in the back.

an0malous

looks like a pretty accurate dyno.
thats exactly what one would expect from a stock dyno.

nice numbers

titaniumss

Could be one of the lucky ones I know I dropped the **** hammer on mine and it took abuse (yes through a 6 speed). Some are just better than others somehow haha.

Zander916

So I have a question since I'm not totally familiar with dynos.

Stock dynos are reading high 250's for torque. Do driveline losses affect torque in a similar way to hp?
Cause that would mean crank torque is like 270-280 no?

I know that hp is really just a calculation of torque. hp = (tq x rpm) / 5252

SSBalt

Not sure I'll have to ask him.

My numbers aren't anything special. Similar to others. Though it's good to see that these cars are pretty consistent.

240 is only a 8% loss to the wheels. GM could have rated this car around 270 - 275 Hp. TQ around 280 -285

Glhs - Yeah I do miss the cheap aftermarket for the mustang. I just can't bring myself to fork out $650 for a catback for my car. As bad as I want it. It will have to wait. bills bills bills

titaniumss

Is it really $650 for a catback? Damn I think I spent the same amount on longtube headers, offroad y pipe, and catback (all stainless steel) for my 01 SS

SSBalt

It's a really nice 3" stainless. I'll take it rusty (except the tip) for $250 then im game

titaniumss

lol yeah, I'll wait till I have other cheaper things to put on, tune it, be done for a little while. Wait for a few more exhausts to come out to see which one sounds the best/performs the best.