2.0L LSJ Performance Tech 205hp Supercharged SS tuner version. 200 lb-ft of torque.

Finally Stage 2!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 22, 2015 | 07:29 AM
  #26  
Staged07SS's Avatar
Administrator
Administrator
Platinum Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: 12-30-07
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 197
From: NEPA
Originally Posted by SSfamilywagon
I'm very curious on those trq numbers if you ever get a chance and remember. That is interesting stuff. These things really do need more injector to begin with. I think I've only read one ported head only change on a dyno for a TVS car. I'm just curious what results would be on a m62 car both big and smaller pulley. We all know you'll gain HP for sure, how much just interests me.

That's a good comparison from yours and your buddies TVS set up. Makes me hopeful for the wife's Redline when we finally do the head.


Now that is a nice comparison. It all makes me wonder because lately on the forums and fb pages its all header and dp are a waste of time and no gain on a m62 car. You'll loose trq/flow blah blah. No real dyno of it.

I also thought bolt on's on a stock tune car were a waste because my completely stock Redline is just as fast if not faster then my buddies Cobalt with 3" intake, 3" dp, 2.25 cat back, dual pass, opt b car. Now I'm thinking he sucks at driving haha. I've driven his car and it feels like mine maybe faster. Hpt log times show similar results. Maybe now we'll video a slow as stock race haha.

Anyway I'm just curious guys. Thanks for sharing and info. I'm still leaning on ported head, injectors, tune/e85 as my first mods for my silver car. After a complete stock dyno read out first.
This is exactly the reason the FB pages are making our community look like a bunch of tards. Full of young dumb kids who think they know it all. Let them think this man. They will always have slow under powered LSJ's.
Reply
Old Jun 22, 2015 | 10:03 AM
  #27  
matthewj182's Avatar
Thread Starter
New Member
 
Joined: 10-02-11
Posts: 127
Likes: 2
From: Fargo, ND
Originally Posted by Staged07SS
This is exactly the reason the FB pages are making our community look like a bunch of tards. Full of young dumb kids who think they know it all. Let them think this man. They will always have slow under powered LSJ's.
I agree with you 100% with the FB pages. I was on the cobalt ss gang page but I left because I couldn't handle the stupidity.
Reply
Old Jun 22, 2015 | 12:48 PM
  #28  
Staged07SS's Avatar
Administrator
Administrator
Platinum Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: 12-30-07
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 197
From: NEPA
Originally Posted by matthewj182
I agree with you 100% with the FB pages. I was on the cobalt ss gang page but I left because I couldn't handle the stupidity.
Smart move my friend!
Reply
Old Jun 22, 2015 | 03:23 PM
  #29  
InfraRedline's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: 08-22-08
Posts: 7,177
Likes: 6
From: Alpharetta, GA
I don't even go on any of the regular FB pages besides the IRL one once in a while, and usually only when someone tags me haha. One of my first races over 7 years ago when I was stock with a short ram intake was an LSJ SS with intake and full Hahn header-back exhaust. From a 30 roll we were close until about 50 and then he put 2 cars on me by 100. That's when I learned what exhaust did for these cars...then I bought his header and DP shortly after that when he sold his car

Oh and after that race we raced from a dig in front of like 40 people and I got the launch and he couldn't catch me lol
Reply
Old Jun 22, 2015 | 04:43 PM
  #30  
SSfamilywagon's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: 09-07-08
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 1
From: Tucson, AZ
Originally Posted by Staged07SS
This is exactly the reason the FB pages are making our community look like a bunch of tards. Full of young dumb kids who think they know it all. Let them think this man. They will always have slow under powered LSJ's.
Agreed. Got one person who dynoed on two different days and different dynos with unexpected results and now has the whole community thinking header/dp is a waste or time and money. SMH. I just know from personal experience doing those mods really made a difference, but again no one has and actual dyno proof.

Originally Posted by InfraRedline
I don't even go on any of the regular FB pages besides the IRL one once in a while, and usually only when someone tags me haha. One of my first races over 7 years ago when I was stock with a short ram intake was an LSJ SS with intake and full Hahn header-back exhaust. From a 30 roll we were close until about 50 and then he put 2 cars on me by 100. That's when I learned what exhaust did for these cars...then I bought his header and DP shortly after that when he sold his car

Oh and after that race we raced from a dig in front of like 40 people and I got the launch and he couldn't catch me lol
Lol driver makes all the difference in these cars. See another exhaust test showing it helped. Just like staged said, gonna continue to have a lot of underpowered LSJ cars because people can't put their money in smart places.
Reply
Old Jun 22, 2015 | 04:49 PM
  #31  
07blackg5's Avatar
Slobodan Milošević
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: 11-05-07
Posts: 5,959
Likes: 215
From: Serbia
The fb pages amaze me. I just recently joined them and it is like css in 2005/whenever it started. ground zero
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2015 | 07:28 AM
  #32  
Staged07SS's Avatar
Administrator
Administrator
Platinum Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: 12-30-07
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 197
From: NEPA
Originally Posted by SSfamilywagon
Agreed. Got one person who dynoed on two different days and different dynos with unexpected results and now has the whole community thinking header/dp is a waste or time and money. SMH. I just know from personal experience doing those mods really made a difference, but again no one has and actual dyno proof.



Lol driver makes all the difference in these cars. See another exhaust test showing it helped. Just like staged said, gonna continue to have a lot of underpowered LSJ cars because people can't put their money in smart places.
I spoke to a GM engineer about it many times, and he always told me "the lsj responds very well to exhaust modification". Start there when modifying.

From how he guided me with my build to the many other cars making good numbers with a free flowing exhaust, that's proof enough for me.

Last edited by Staged07SS; Jun 23, 2015 at 10:56 AM.
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2015 | 10:49 AM
  #33  
Viperoni's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: 04-18-14
Posts: 424
Likes: 7
From: Mississauga, ON, Canada
What kind of gains would you see from the stock catback to a 2.5" one? Can a pullied M62 take advantage of a 3.0" catback, or is 2.5" the sweet spot?
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2015 | 10:55 AM
  #34  
Staged07SS's Avatar
Administrator
Administrator
Platinum Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: 12-30-07
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 197
From: NEPA
Originally Posted by Viperoni
What kind of gains would you see from the stock catback to a 2.5" one? Can a pullied M62 take advantage of a 3.0" catback, or is 2.5" the sweet spot?
3.0" is overkill on an M62 car unless u are spraying.

The stock SS/SC catback is 2.5" for the most part, minus a neck down portion over the rear axle and a tiny inlet to the resonator.

The gains from a catback are due to a straight through muffler, and larger inlet to the resonator.

Gains from a catback on the SS/SC are generally 5 hp or so. The real restriction lies in the exhaust ports in the head, and the downpipe.
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2015 | 11:40 AM
  #35  
Viperoni's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: 04-18-14
Posts: 424
Likes: 7
From: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Originally Posted by Staged07SS
3.0" is overkill on an M62 car unless u are spraying.

The stock SS/SC catback is 2.5" for the most part, minus a neck down portion over the rear axle and a tiny inlet to the resonator.

The gains from a catback are due to a straight through muffler, and larger inlet to the resonator.

Gains from a catback on the SS/SC are generally 5 hp or so. The real restriction lies in the exhaust ports in the head, and the downpipe.
I knew about the size reduction to 2.25" before the rear axle, but not the tiny inlet into the resonator..... so there might be a few horses to be had by replacing the resonator inlet and resonator to something that's 2.5" in/out, but probably not worth it.

That's exactly what I needed to know, thanks!
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2015 | 12:50 PM
  #36  
Staged07SS's Avatar
Administrator
Administrator
Platinum Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: 12-30-07
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 197
From: NEPA
Originally Posted by Viperoni
I knew about the size reduction to 2.25" before the rear axle, but not the tiny inlet into the resonator..... so there might be a few horses to be had by replacing the resonator inlet and resonator to something that's 2.5" in/out, but probably not worth it.

That's exactly what I needed to know, thanks!
The inlet to the stock resonator is 2 1/16".
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2015 | 03:13 PM
  #37  
Viperoni's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: 04-18-14
Posts: 424
Likes: 7
From: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Originally Posted by Staged07SS
The inlet to the stock resonator is 2 1/16".
A little small indeed... I can't find anything about anybody upgrading or deleting the factory resonator unfortunately. I do have a Dynatech 2.5" muffler sitting around that might do a decent job...
Reply
Old Jun 24, 2015 | 06:12 PM
  #38  
SSfamilywagon's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: 09-07-08
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 1
From: Tucson, AZ
People are so stuck on pipe size being the determining factor for performance that's really half the battle probably even less then that. What you should be more concerned about is cfm flow. Even 2.25 is enough for the m62, its getting rid of the restrictive parts of the exhaust, the factory cat, the resonator and muffler.

Good components like Borla, Corsa, Dynomax are good places to start. People don't realize that in most Magnaflow components the like of the inner diameter of the mufflers or resonator shrink. 2.5 mufflers or resonators usually have 2.25 cores. They also use baffled resonators or louvered ones which hurt flow.

People think they are gaining going to a 3" exhaust, but what's they really get from that is not the piping size, but the mufflers size increase adding more flow. Eventually 2.5 will restrict a high flowing set up, gotta dyno to find out when.
Reply
Old Jun 25, 2015 | 07:12 AM
  #39  
Staged07SS's Avatar
Administrator
Administrator
Platinum Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: 12-30-07
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 197
From: NEPA
Originally Posted by SSfamilywagon
People are so stuck on pipe size being the determining factor for performance that's really half the battle probably even less then that. What you should be more concerned about is cfm flow. Even 2.25 is enough for the m62, its getting rid of the restrictive parts of the exhaust, the factory cat, the resonator and muffler.

Good components like Borla, Corsa, Dynomax are good places to start. People don't realize that in most Magnaflow components the like of the inner diameter of the mufflers or resonator shrink. 2.5 mufflers or resonators usually have 2.25 cores. They also use baffled resonators or louvered ones which hurt flow.

People think they are gaining going to a 3" exhaust, but what's they really get from that is not the piping size, but the mufflers size increase adding more flow. Eventually 2.5 will restrict a high flowing set up, gotta dyno to find out when.
High exhaust gas velocity w/o eddies is key to a nice flowing setup. People also said the stock exhaust manifold is restrictive which I proved with a little porting can easily support 300+ whp.
Reply
Old Jun 25, 2015 | 11:03 AM
  #40  
Viperoni's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: 04-18-14
Posts: 424
Likes: 7
From: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Originally Posted by SSfamilywagon
People are so stuck on pipe size being the determining factor for performance that's really half the battle probably even less then that. What you should be more concerned about is cfm flow. Even 2.25 is enough for the m62, its getting rid of the restrictive parts of the exhaust, the factory cat, the resonator and muffler.

Good components like Borla, Corsa, Dynomax are good places to start. People don't realize that in most Magnaflow components the like of the inner diameter of the mufflers or resonator shrink. 2.5 mufflers or resonators usually have 2.25 cores. They also use baffled resonators or louvered ones which hurt flow.

People think they are gaining going to a 3" exhaust, but what's they really get from that is not the piping size, but the mufflers size increase adding more flow. Eventually 2.5 will restrict a high flowing set up, gotta dyno to find out when.
That's exactly what I'm trying to narrow down...

Per David Vizar (Auto Exhaust Science - View All Page), 1sqin of pipe flows about 115cfm, and you need about 2.2cfm of exhaust gas flow per HP. Now, assuming we're talking about a mild bolt-on LSJ M62 engine, we're in the range of 240whp, which is about 264 crank HP (10% driveline loss). That's about 580cfm of airflow, or 5sqin of pipe area requirement or 2.52" diameter.

Obviously things like a cat will increase exhaust flow reqs after it, and mufflers/resonators will decrease flow reqs, and some engines just seem to prefer different sizes for whatever reason.

In any case, everybodies experience pretty much aligns with the math - 2.5" is good for an M62... and the challenge is fixing the choke points in the factory system

Also interesting that all of the long tube headers have 3" collectors, where the math says that 2.5" would be a better match...
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
06MetallicBalt
Mid East
10
Jul 20, 2025 08:47 PM
RaginChopsuey
War Stories
16
Oct 27, 2015 01:27 PM
brandon04
Problems/Service/Maintenance
46
Oct 21, 2015 07:04 AM
Trav3480
Problems/Service/Maintenance
0
Oct 1, 2015 08:17 PM
Trav3480
Problems/Service/Maintenance
0
Sep 28, 2015 02:46 PM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:39 PM.