Greg Good does it again [email protected] GEN 4

[copperhead007]

Congrats Greg

Your cars make the numbers, customers leave satisfied, smarter and feeling they got the truth and your commitment.

We're proud to own your products.

 

[cerveza v10]

STOCK CLUTCH!!!
I have tried aluminum flywheels in the past.... my driving style doesn't seem to like
Them for some reason.... The steel flywheel carries the inertia I feel is important to
get out of the gate.... One big thing with the gen 4 cars I have noticed is they like
RPM.... the higher I spin it, the happpier it is! Maybe SANTA will bring me a better
camshaft for the GEN 4 motor.... it needs one big time!

 

[V10lover]

STOCK CLUTCH!!!
I have tried aluminum flywheels in the past.... my driving style doesn't seem to like
Them for some reason.... The steel flywheel carries the inertia I feel is important to
get out of the gate.... One big thing with the gen 4 cars I have noticed is they like
RPM.... the higher I spin it, the happpier it is! Maybe SANTA will bring me a better
camshaft for the GEN 4 motor.... it needs one big time!

If you want to kill the inertia faster there is one thing that is the hot ticket for that. A set of 3:55 or 3:73 gears. I know I am doing this mod on mine this winter(can't wait)
Can only imagine what a nasty camshaft would do for these cars specially for yours that has ported heads too.

Unfortunately, I don't see a new camshaft working with the stock CPU on the car. So back to that old story of unlockin the gen 4 ecus but I hope I am wrong.

 

[cerveza v10]

I agree .... We need a way to tune, before a good cam can be used......come on SANTA ! Lol

 

[Paolo Castellano]

Congrats!

Greg is THE MAN!

You are not so bad yourself either!

 

[Viperless]

No.... I did not run it before... wish I did now though! The car has
Only been down the 1/4 mile 6 times now.......

Nice numbers. Would love to know what it would have run before the intake/headwork.

 

[cerveza v10]

"Viperless" You are getting it done also [email protected] is flipping great!
Another testament to those M&M headers! Good stuff!

 

[Nine Ball]

Do you have after market light weight clutch or stock clutch ?
I heard a light weight clutch will help you overcome the bogging and will get you out of the gate faster.
Google BBG light weight clutch and get an idea

That statement is backwards. Lighter clutch assembly actually makes bogging worse, especially at lower rpm. The rotational inertia of a heavier clutch actually helps at the drag strip, to keep the engine from bogging as the clutch engages. Even on the street, I notice my aluminum BBG dual-disk requires more rpm to get the car moving than the stock clutch did.

 

[cerveza v10]

Ran the car on the dyno tonight.....
630.0 H.P.
583.5 Torque
I was looking for better.... It is what it is
The car is still on drag radials at 35psi...
A/F was 11.8 to 12.0 range
It did have a spike run at 635.9 H.P ... That does not count...

 

[Viperless]

Ran the car on the dyno tonight.....
630.0 H.P.
583.5 Torque
I was looking for better.... It is what it is
The caar is still on drag radials at 35psi...

It did have a spike run at 635.9 H.P ... Does not count

I'd be pretty happy with that. That's ~50 rwhp out of the heads and intake without being able to tune it properly. The heads flow pretty good stock. What was your a/f ratio?

 

[Steve M]

Those numbers actually sound about right to me, considering your track times and conditions. I'd be very happy with that, especially with the completely stock driving manners.

 

[ViperTony]

Ran the car on the dyno tonight.....
630.0 H.P.
583.5 Torque
I was looking for better.... It is what it is
The car is still on drag radials at 35psi...
A/F was 11.8 to 12.0 range
It did have a spike run at 635.9 H.P ... That does not count...

Those wheel numbers correct? Impressive especially without any ability to tune. Makes you wonder what the lack of tuning is leaving on the table.

 

[345s-bspinnin]

Those are some very healthy numbers despite the rich A/F. Its a shame that there is no tuning capability. The only way to fix that A/F is go old school, and simply lower fuel pressure by couple of psi in order to raise the A/F ratio.

 

[FastMatt]

630 rwhp for a car with a stock cam, and I'm sure drives like a stock car is quite impressive. were the heads shaved to bump CR also or just ported?

 

[CSXT802]

Your still well over 700 crank HP. Probably about 730.

 

[cerveza v10]

Those are some very healthy numbers despite the rich A/F. Its a shame that there is no tuning capability. The only way to fix that A/F is go old school, and simply lower fuel pressure by couple of psi in order to raise the A/F ratio.

I may try that...I was shooting for mid 640's ....Close, but no cigar... 643 is impressive! I also would like another 500 rpm.... any ideas?

 

[cerveza v10]

630 rwhp for a car with a stock cam, and I'm sure drives like a stock car is quite impressive. were the heads shaved to bump CR also or just ported?

They were ported and trued....intake was done also

 

[Dan Cragin]

Were these the heads he is doing with a bigger intake valve? Great ET and 60 foot time!

 

[cerveza v10]

Were these the heads he is doing with a bigger intake valve? Great ET and 60 foot time!

I know greg is very proud of these heads.....the flow numbers were crazy!
Out of respect to Greg, I will let him chime in on what kind of art he has done....

 

[ACRucrazy]

Who is Greg Good, what is his website?
Clicking this link at the top of the page = Oops! Error

 

[345s-bspinnin]

Any chance you can post the dyno curve? I am really curious to see what your torque/power curves looks like. Your trap is 4mph higher than Henny's "650r" package that uses monstrous 1 7/8" headers; he ran a 10.7 at 131.9mph. Henny claimed 603whp and 566 wtq.

 

[ssjcreeper]

Not much for webpages, but Greg's results are what matters. Do a search for Greg Good and you'll see why he's the guy for heads/cam builds.

Who is Greg Good, what is his website?
Clicking this link at the top of the page = Oops! Error

 

[cerveza v10]

I have never done an attachment..

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[JAY]

Thanx for posting ! Niiiice Numbers ! It would be interesting to see a Gen 3 with Gen 4 heads , Cam , and a good tune .

 

[Greg Good Cylinder Heads]

Were these the heads he is doing with a bigger intake valve? Great ET and 60 foot time!

Yes Sir. Big intake valves and concentrated on mid lift flow since we don't have much lift.

A CNC shop will be porting these for me soon. They're making the fixtures to hold Viper heads. Can't wait.

 

[Greg Good Cylinder Heads]

Ran the car on the dyno tonight.....
630.0 H.P.
583.5 Torque
I was looking for better.... It is what it is
The car is still on drag radials at 35psi...
A/F was 11.8 to 12.0 range
It did have a spike run at 635.9 H.P ... That does not count...

I wouldn't worry too much about the dyno numbers with 135.8 mph. Some combinations run a lot better at the track than they dyno. Those are the builds I like. The asphalt dyno is what counts.

 

[Viperless]

Those are some very healthy numbers despite the rich A/F. Its a shame that there is no tuning capability. The only way to fix that A/F is go old school, and simply lower fuel pressure by couple of psi in order to raise the A/F ratio.

I'd like to know what his A/F ratio was. Hard to believe that it's still fat with almost 100 more whp than stock and no changes to the fuel map.

 

[345s-bspinnin]

Ran the car on the dyno tonight.....
630.0 H.P.
583.5 Torque
I was looking for better.... It is what it is
The car is still on drag radials at 35psi...
A/F was 11.8 to 12.0 range
It did have a spike run at 635.9 H.P ... That does not count...

I'd like to know what his A/F ratio was. Hard to believe that it's still fat with almost 100 more whp than stock and no changes to the fuel map.

Keith, Cerveza v10 updated one of this older posts with the A/F ratio. I am not certain that the fuel map is still unchanged. On a purely MAP based system, the "fuel map" would not have changed when referencing atmospheric pressure as seen during a WOT pull. If this was truly the case, this car would be running way lean. However, I understand that you Gen IV folks have a combined MAP/MAF system. While I have never seen the MAF sensor on a Viper, Dan Lesser has posted some info regarding this Gen IV's MAF sensor.

Apparently, the PCM is still able to meter the increased air flow and provide a suitable fuel flow to meet the demand.. Cerveza 10's is proving that the PCM is effectively "adapting/tuning" real-time and still maintaining a safe A/F ratio. This adaptive behavior is not present in my Gen III. After heads/cam install, I took it around the block on the OEM tune. At WOT, I would immediately start leaning out on anything past 3000 rpm. In other words, my Gen III PCM was not adapting to the increased air flow (as expected). On the other hand, the Gen IV's appear to do this seamlessly.


I am just a tree shade mechanic making meager inferences. Perhaps some of our experts can weigh in on the subject matter.

 

[345s-bspinnin]

I have never done an attachment..

You must be registered for see images attach

Thanks for the dyno sheet. You were not kidding, that horsepower curve keeps on climbing right until 6500.

I went ahead and took a screen print for Henny's 650r dyno (see below) from one of his videos. The graph is blurry, but clear enough to see that at 3000 rpm, you make about 480wtq, while Henny's only makes 400wtq. Oh the high end, by 5500rpm, you are already making 600whp, while Henny's just touched that mark at 600rpm later at 6100.

Either way, you have impressive results all across the rpm range.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[cerveza v10]

I agree... it is very impressive to see 630rwhp from just bolt ons!
Something else that impressed me .... I made 7 dyno pulls that night
And every pull was between 624 and 630....no horsepower dropoff at all....
That is something to ponder......