ILLSMOQ
Enthusiast
See if sac or sears is open I'm not available tuesday afternoon or saturday day untill 4:00pm.
put it together Jonny.
put it together Jonny.
Bob, 732rwhp seems reasonable enough to me given the mods Jon has on his car.
Big numbers are easily attainable if you know what you are doing with the tune in the PCM and the split second box....LOOKEY HERE.
The paxton kit gives you a ton of power out of the box and as many of us have proved leaves plenty of room for guys like us to wring more power out of them.
As for the road course, while your car does well at the track, I would be nervous running mine on a track. Maybe I'm overly cautious but I think with my setup things would get a little hot for those cast pistons....even though it runs very rich.
See if sac or sears is open I'm not available tuesday afternoon or saturday day untill 4:00pm.
put it together Jonny.
The Dyno that my Viper was on is from a well known tuner and respected tuner here in NM, and it pulled 704rwhp. Our NM Viper club was there and the other number pulled on the other stock Vipers were right within the range of other Dyno Jets.
Hi IllSMOQ. In the referenced post ( "lookey here" ) it states: 05 srt with a set of forged pistons, cat back exhaust,and a vec 2.
The dyno graph does not show the A/F chart and 93 octane fuel was used. I remember the thread within which the post is contained. In the instant situation, we are dealing with cast pistons, 91 octane fuel and an 11.5 A/F across the chart. If I remember correctly, Joe indicated that the A/F on the car in his post was about 12.5 or there abouts - a significant difference. My questions regarding the numbers here were not meant to in any way impeach the poster's credibility. They go to the physics of the situation. I do not understand how the numbers ( 732RWHP/670RWTQ) can be produced with an 11.5 A/F and 91 octane fuel. Furthermore, based on the thread you mentioned, Joe made it clear that at the power levels he was obtaining forged pistons were a must. So I also do not understand, assuming that the 732RWHP/670RWTQ numbers are correct, how the tune is safe since it would appear to exceed the built in tolerance of the stock pistons per the comment of Joe and other tuners who have posted regarding Gen III mods.
Jon, I have the print out. I can have them e-mail my file and send it to you. I don't know how to post it. Mods where basic Paxton Corsa and tune. I have since put on the DLM goodies and a DC tune as well as a lower thomostat.
I called both:
Infineon Raceway | Schedule | Dragstrip Schedule Not until March for them.
http://www.sacramentoraceway.com/ They are open on saturday's only, but today was rained out
Any others ?
hahhahaha... That looks BROKEN to me !! Hey Don't worry DLM will offer you a replacement FOR FREE. Thats what we need a lifetime replacements of parts that ****!! (nah, I'd get something else if I was you. BTW DC Performance index's the Paxton Tensioners, look into that as a better option).
Ok, I wont keep going. I think it took a lot for Kurtis to admit the DLM tensioner broke, I thank him for his honesty.
Jon
Hi GTS ACR. Producing the requested data would be helpful to those of us who like precise data in order to undertsand the posted results. Some are less strict with their data requirements and that is their choice. You started out saying the A/F did not exceed 11.5 across the RPM range. In a post above, you now say it is less than 12. Which is it? Posting the dyno data including temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, and A/F and boost levels across the entire RPM range would be useful. You are about 82 horsepower above the norm for your mods. That did not happen by itself. Since you have represented yourself to be an expert, perhaps you can explain to those of us that are not the mechanics of how this power level was achieved on 91 octane fuel at, using your original data, an 11.5 A/F ratio. You also might want to explain how the engine's durability will not be impacted by a result which is about 82 horsepower above the norm without changing the pistons.
Please quote where I say 'its less then 12' in reference to what my car CURRENTLY does for AFR ? I said one thing about what its current AFR ration is and I said its got a solid 11.5 across the range. I have NOT said its 12 and under. (although those who are 'sceintific' as you state certainly would agree 11.5 is under 12.) So I guess my car is BOTH less then 12, AND 11.5 ... crazy how that works huh? But to be more SPECIFIC. Its 11.5 across the board. (Per Dan).
What you may not have read closely enough is that to ME... anything under 12.0 is SAFE for AFR on a boosted car. I think 11.99 and below is not lean, and is a great place to be. I think going into 10.99 and blow is TOO fat, and will be too rich and cause to much soot/carbon/black smoke.
I whole heartedly dissagree that I am 83 hp above the 'average' for my mods. Instead I demand YOU prove that the 500+ Paxton kits that are out there today, show an average hp rating where you say it is. Please provide COMPLETE data showing this. NOW. Otherwise, I'm done wasting my time with you.
Next, Every HP over stock I feel takes life away from the motor, just like every rpm past a certain point in the rev range also takes life away from the motor. A STOCK car is definitely going to have MORE engine life over a modified car all things equal. More strain = more chance of breakage. What I am and was talking about is that 'safe' AFR is below 12 and that has been achieved by dan (again 11.5 is below 12, I can get a chart out showing you that too). So by my car having a solid afr 11.5 across the board, the motor is FAR safer then if it was running around in the mid 12's for AFR or heaven forbid 13s.
Every hp you add to a car, you put the associated parts that are left dealing with it under more strain. Your car is definitely LESS RELIABLE then it was stock.... Sorry.
Jon
IllSMOQ,
Ouch! Allow me the honer of replacing your tensioner free of charge. I'd like to remedy the problem to the best of my ability
I hate to see this happen at any cost!
Unfortunately, I can't make them much stronger; If I did something more expensive would have broken.
Best regards,
Doug Levin
On the air/fuel it's all about the tune and the fuel system. More timing and more fuel ( PBJ pushed that car to 878 using the paxton fuel system) as long as you know what you're doing while tuning the tuner should be able to get the ratio where he wants it. 11.5 is generally considered safe but some people consider 12 safe...even 12.5.
also the 91 octane may be adding a few ponies to Jon's rwhp number....compared to others (like me) who run a higher octane mix.
On the air/fuel it's all about the tune and the fuel system. More timing and more fuel ( PBJ pushed that car to 878 using the paxton fuel system) as long as you know what you're doing while tuning the tuner should be able to get the ratio where he wants it. 11.5 is generally considered safe but some people consider 12 safe...even 12.5.
also the 91 octane may be adding a few ponies to Jon's rwhp number....compared to others (like me) who run a higher octane mix.
Can you explain this comment? The energy content per gallon (i.e. more or less BTUs in 91 octane vs. 93 octane) becomes a minor effect since the air/fuel is rich. The higher octane may perform better because pump 93 octane "may" have more ethanol, so the cooling effect is greater. If you were comparing to "race gas" with even higher octane, then for some reason the engine can't take advantage of the octane?