[QUOTE=Nate81camaro;872994]he is dynoing about where he should taking in elevation.. he is only running a 3" pulley.. most people on here are running 2.8s or lower..he also has more exhaust then is needed.. he isnt pushing the power to need a 3"...
just because has mods doesnt mean nothing if they are not matched up to work the best with one another...

side note.. he doesnt really have many mods.. he should be happy to make that.. bolded is actual mods.. so he actually is just 3" pully with header (what type) and a larger then needed exhaust w intake and tune

 

I agree w/ acidangel. He would make a lot more power if he switched out to 2.8" pulley and had it dyno tuned. Those intense tunes are nice and all, but they are still a "canned" tune. It is not specific to his application. A 3" exhaust is still pushing it w/ a 2.8", but it's closer to a better match up. And tell him to take off the MAF-T and Boost Bypass if he gets it dyno tuned. No use for those after a shop gets in there w/ HPT...

 

Well why is he running a Maf-t if he has a Intense tune? Those Maf-Ts were only used before we had any tuning options. It's not really a good way of doing things.

 

Good point...I'm not thinking straight today...

The bypass and the MAF-T shouldn't be needed even w/ the Intense "canned" tune. His MAF-T setting might be over-riding the Intense PCM tune and actually hurting performance.

 

I don't follow you at all. A dyno can correct for thes factors. Hard to imagaine multi-billon dollar company (GM) can't accurately rate a cars hp.

GM MARKETER: So how much hp does this thing make?

GM engineer: We really don't know

As demosntrated GM has a histroy for underrating many engines, usally foir insurance purposes. The Buick Grand Nations/89 Turbo Trans Ams are more proof of this.

Also pressure/elevation/temp play make a far greater difference on NA engines
THats why NA engines run 1 sec slower up here hten sea-leve. While the S/C cars are rougly 0.5 off.

 

im sorry but thats some sad **** to have to hear. Get some mods asap

 

Just had mine dynoed saturday. It was a dyno jet. Only thing I have done is an Injen CAI, and I had 237 hp, 207 tq. My friend with an srt-4 had his dynoed as well, and put down 271 hp, 304 tq. He has a lightly modded srt, and his numbers lined up with what he has done to his car.

 

So your ONLY mod is a CAI and you put down 237whp? That is pretty damn impressive IMO!

 

On an InflataJet Dyno..lol..Still some good numbers though..

 

i believe they were actually rated at 98hp. i only mention it because my first car (90 geo prizm was rated at like 101) and my 91 tempo was rated at LESS power.

 

Hey guys. Sorry bout the last post. My buddy that owned the redline was kinda pissed when you said he ony had a few mods
He had a 2.8 pulley on it before he sold the car. What are the normal dyno #'s with a 2.8?? He raced a stock 01 WS6, and a stock 04 Mach 1. Both put around 1 1/2 cars on him (admitted by him).


I would've loved to see the outcome at something closer to sea level (once again, we're at 6k feet)

Here's an unrelated question, but what are the typical "strong" spots and "weak" spots to roll from (in a Cobalt SS/SC) ???

 

high rpm, 3rd gear=best pulls

 

Cool, whats the weak spot? I know on my buddy's Redline the gear ratio drop from 1st to 2nd was horrible

 

GM also underrates cars to make higher end cars look more desirable. The Limited Edition Pontiac Blackbird(modded WS6 T/A) built by YearOne is a perfect example. They were a joint venture that GM forced YearOne to rate almost 50hp less than actual in order to make the Corvette and Z06 more appealing as compared to the Blackbird.

And as previously stated, it's fun to be underrated.

 

I wouldn't necessarily say the numbers were inflated. Like I said, my friends srt dynoed, and he had previously put down 266, went up to 271. An 02 mustang gt v8, auto, spraying made 310 with spray, 225 without. An infiniti g35 sedan (04, auto) made 227. 2 ford focuses got on, one svt with intake and exhaust, one regular with intake, header, exhaust. They made 149 and 152 respectively. A fox body mustang with a built 302 got on and made 348. They had a 350z on, intake, exhaust, made 256. And of course, the 102 hp, 90 tq civic got on there.

So if everything else was making numbers in their expected ranges, I don't think this one was inflating numbers. I did a 3rd pull (237 hp, 207 tq), a 4th pull (237 hp, 206 tq), and one where we sprays the heat exchanger with ice water before, in 3rd (242 hp, 208 tq). Maybe a factory freak?

 

i think so
thats awesome though. i wish mine was making #'s like that stock

 

they would have been even further ahead. NA cars lose way more pwoer as alititude rises

 

oh boy if my girlfriend had an srt-4 and i had an ss/sc that would be SICK , the only thing better would be is if she had like a 05+ GTO, or 06+ STI

 

Trust me, I'm well aware of it. Reason I said I would love to see the outcome if we were closer to SL is cause I know that LS1 and the Mach would've eaten his ****. I don't know what Mach's usually dyno at stock (was a manual), but I know LS1's usually dyno right at or over 300...to the wheels

At the closest drag strip (Bandimere) they say NA cars lose about a second. I don't know what percentage we lose (of power). I asked on another forum (I think LS1tech) and ended up telling a guy our barometric pressure and a whole bunch of other stuff. He responded back that, if he did his math right (which he was sure he did), we (NA cars) were losing approximately %22.24!!!!!! I've heard everything from that to "FI cars lose approx 6-8 percent, and NA cars lose anywhere from 12-16 percent".

Yeah, it sucks - especially since my cars NA, and some of the cars (FI) I would beat (at SL) I would lose to up here.

 

GM never said it was 205hp at the crank, they just said it had 205

 

well from a dig that isn't really surprising, those are both good for low 13's....