For those who tested, if you want to see if your mods have made an increase over the initial flywheel rated ratings, correct your drivetrain loss and see if you jumped over stock.

For 700r4 and most standard drivetrain configurations
(transmission/driveshaft/differential posi or open/wheels)

That is a loss of 18% if you have an aluminum driveshaft 17%
Unless its significantly larger/heavier tires little variation there, heavier getting you more loss.

If you have a manual transmission (t-5) its a loss of only 8% as proved at the dynoday to smack the 15% loss that vette's get.
Same conditions apply to the rest.

I have a 10 HP engine boost over stock with most of the benefit of porting and pulley giving me a whopping 65 ft/lb flywheel torque gain.

 

So what are you saying, that my "corrected drivetrain loss" on my dyno results are 18% less than what it would be at the flywheel? That would mean that even with my lowly 145 RWHP and 232 ft/lbs torque would be 173 rwhp and 273.8 ft/lbs of torque. The base for my car, from the factory is 165 HP and 245 Ft/lbs of torque. Overall the results were pretty much where I expected them. I think if my carb was working properly I could of had better results. I am happy to say that my K&N filters were worth the money in regards to my increase of 17 Ft/lbs of torque, even though there wasn't any difference in HP. I now have a baseline in which I hope to see improvements in the near future.
Kevin

 

From the factory, results were never taken at the rear wheels just engine with full accesories, and full exhaust. So the factory numbers are everything save for the transmission, driveshaft, differential and wheels as they all sap power in torque and horsepower. Take rear wheels and driveshaft, what if you had steel alloy rims and a steel driveshaft? That would put more strain on the engine than the aluminum driveshaft. The difference b/w a manual and standard. One is pushing fluid around while another is mechanically linked. Just as we had gross readings (pre 1971, engine tested with no accesories, no exhaust nothing holding it back) and net readings (all accessories and exhaust cat/muffler) A net reading showed significantly lower than a gross reading because the engine had its power being sapped by the accessories and exhaust restricted by a cat and muffler. The drivetrain does not transmit 100% of all the torque of the engine. You notice how that TPI 305 seemed to make a hell of a lot of power almost like the 350 setups? I don't think he really modded the engine that much, but that drivetrain is mechanically transferring more torque to the rear wheels than our automatics. On this site is an article depicting a 305TPI and 350TPI vs the firstgen Camaros and you see how in their tests the 305TPI with stick was coming close to the 350TPI with auto?

https://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/articles/zvsz.shtml

Article summary 90 IROC-Z

305 TPI 3.42 5 Speed Manual
230 HP 4400 RPM
300 FT/LB 3200 RPM
60 MPH time 6.8 S
1/4 Mile 15.1 S @ 91.5 MPH

350 TPI 3.23 4 Speed Automatic 700r4
245 HP 4400 RPM
325 FT/LB 3200 RPM
60 MPH time 6.5 S
1/4 Mile 14.8 S @ 93.4 MPH

Key notes:
305 TPI and 350 TPI share same intake and runners
Gearing and transmission do nothing for max engine torque and hp
gearing and transmission do make a big difference in 1/4 mile as the 5 speed stick is only off a 350 by a whopping 0.3 S

Conclusions can be made
1)The 305 has a better intake setup suited to a 305
2)The 350 is hampered by its intake setup
3)A stick is considerably more powerful than auto.
4)Given the chance a 305 could give a 350 a run for its ci
5)305 owners aren't weak at the displacement, just on the intake/exhaust

I think this point was well reinforced by the stick IROC 305 TPI.

Kev you increased the cfm of your engine with that holley carb, even if running rich it still flows more air than the stock carb ever could and that means you gained 33 ft/lbs of torque and 10 HP. If that isn't a clue that stock 305 intake/exhaust sucks, I don't know what is.