no_ss

iTrader: (2)

The power he's making on stock bottom end is nice though.

zeeky420

I was wondering what rpm you running up to with the built head KMO

KMO43

There's more to come

7500

09CobaltSS1

I'll be building my top end this spring/summer. Can I still say I have a 100% stock engine when I break into the 500's with a little 6758? lol

tuned08ss

He probably meant to say stock bottom end

soundjunky

iTrader: (4)

your point was made.

So he hasn't bothered changing his sig.... please let it slide;
Let's get back to the fun discussion...



As I see it, his old sig (488whp) was a stock engine, and he just didn't fully correct it.
KMO43 is no dummy...
He's just a very busy guy, with a really fast "boring white" Cobalt

KMO43

Ya she is quite boring right now I need more time to get the suspension better. Also need some fresh NT01s

09CobaltSS1

Listen, I get what you're saying. The point I'm simply trying to make is, and like it or not, there is a very large distinction between a completely stock motor, and a completely stock bottom end with a ported head, stage 2 cams, valve springs, ported exhaust manifold and aftermarket intake manifold. Of course, all done on a larger turbo.

As far as his old sig, he still wasn't stock motor. He was stock bottom end with a ported head, stage 1 cams and aftermarket intake. Which just furthers my point. In my eyes it's very deceptive to word things that way when you know very well it's not the case.

Is a 4.4 60-100 with that power really that fast though? Meh, I don't know about that one.

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

Ok he stated why his 60-100 was slow....

soundjunky

iTrader: (4)

The question you need to ponder, is making an issue of this really worth your time.

No one is arguing the distinction between a stock long block (in this case the terminology was "engine"), and a shortblock (stock bottom end);
His old dyno was on a stock engine, the new dyno is with the only stock remaining portion being his shortblock - this has been made known.

No one is going to cry foul and say that someone doesn't have a stock motor because an accessory (in this case the turbo) has been changed;
This is really not worth pointing out, as he has never posted numbers without mentioning the turbo - which was the whole reason of the thread.

IIRC, his old dyno was done on tune, and turbo - the engine was to the best of my recollection, untouched.

Where do you think the hp gains were made since last year(?) - it was all in the top end!

He only installed a ported head well after the 481hp dyno - Please believe me I know the timeline.

I didn't received any exhaust parts back till well after the old dyno (my spares were ported, then I got his unmodified ones back in exchange, as I requested);
Also, KMO43 has never run an aftermarket intake manifold - he simply modified a stock one to look different - this was another one of my pieces that he borrowed, modified, and then after installing, gave me his stock unmodified one in return.

Yes KMO43 is a local, and yes he is a friend, but I'm not going to lie about this.

Please let it go... I'm sure he'll get around to fixing his signature at some point.

09CobaltSS1

I was referring to soundjunky saying the car is really fast.

Look, I get that some don't like that I'm outspoken, however I have never spoken badly about him, so let's try to not confuse this. I'm not saying he's a bad guy, I just think it's only fair to point out the distinction between the 2 things.

09CobaltSS1

The distinction isn't even remotely the turbo. It's the fact of having a built top end and not a stock manifold. If I have to explain the vast difference between a stock engine and a stock bottom end, this is a sad sad day my friend.

soundjunky

iTrader: (4)

before replying, please note that I edited the above post... I needed to finish it up on a computer rather than my phone.

sorry if this causes any confusion.

soundjunky

iTrader: (4)

crap, you replied too quickly, please re-read my post (the bolded part makes it abundantly clear that you have your facts off, and need to check what I wrote).

soundjunky

iTrader: (4)

09CobaltSS1;
Sorry I was taking a "break" and started typing my reply on my phone;
Then I posted it and moved to my computer to fine tune my reply to be sure I got my words right, and covered all the points which you brought up, and I felt needed a response.

KMO43

My first dyno was 100% stock engine only thing ported was the o2 housing. I didnt take off either manifold only took of the valve cover years back to powder. Stock internals from oilpan to valve cover. I hit 481hp @ 28psi. Listed the mods with a stock bottom end and i picked up power. On 25psi I hit 478hp which actually was my 1st run last year. Ended up with 511hp on 27.3psi I'm sorry im not an english professor but listing it how I did I believe you can figure out what I meant. Talking about this for 2 pages is a waste of time but I guess it keeps my thread at the top

KMO43

All mods are liated in the dyno thread if u cared to look anyways

09CobaltSS1

Ok ok, now we're really splitting hairs. If he's on a stock intake manifold then my mistake. My main point though was the difference between a completely stock engine and stock bottom end with a built head and aggressive cams. They are 2 very different worlds.

A built bottom end does nothing for making power (unless displacement and/or cr is increased). Head work (and of course turbo size) are where the vast majority of power increases are going to be made. So point is, you simply can not refer to that as a 100% stock engine.

soundjunky

iTrader: (4)

we get it, you point was made, and I don't think anyone is arguing with you...

As mentioned, his old dyno was on a stock engine, and he listed his mods in a couple places before doing this year's dyno.

So your main beef is his signature, and that, you're just going to have to deal with until he gets around to changing it.

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

511 on stock bottom end though. That's the point made here.

09CobaltSS1

It's long been done before him my man.

Slowbalt2000

iTrader: (1)

Y u mad tho

63 Nova SS

iTrader: (3)

The way I read it is- both kmo and John have higher hp lnf's with stock bottom ends running efr's turbos. Congrats to both of you!

soundjunky

iTrader: (4)

Sure... As I recall by shop cars that were not really streetable, or reliable enough to drive daily;
KMO43 has a now proven setup, that is attainable by anyone who wants to spend the money.

What I appreciate about him, is how he has shared everything he has done, and how he has shown that you don't need to have a huge bankroll or a shop backing you up to be in the horsepower realm of some of the more elite factory V8/supercharged cars out there...

I remember when ZZP broke 500whp, iirc they had a chstom turbo setup, with the 5th injector, and alot more time and money in their car than most who roll in a Cobalt could ever dream of spending.

yup...

It seems like only a couple years ago, SS/TC's were hitting a hp ceiling that turbo swapped SS/SC's were able to break through quite easily...

soundjunky

iTrader: (4)

I am quite glad that we now have cam options... which has gone a long way to help us break through that former hp ceiling...