Bandit76

I had my 92 Firebird dynoed this morning. The numbers at the rear wheels are:

107.7@2800 RPM
165.1 ft-lbs@4500 RPM

This is on a 3.1L with over 130K miles on the clock. The books say the motor puts out 135hp stock, when new. I've put in a homemade "filtercharger" with K&N, gutted the cat, and the muffler's a Flowmaster.

Who else has dynoed their V6, and what kind of numbers did you get? And what mods?

Another guy there had a Camaro 2.8L, with SLP exhaust, gutted cat, and a shift kit, and he got 106hp and 131 ft-lbs.

CaliCamaroRS

is that your peak HP??? i thought peak HP was at 4400 rpm?? and peak torque is around 3200 rpm??

------------------
Dan
100% stock 1990 RS 3.1L
and VERY slow

[This message has been edited by CaliCamaroRS (edited November 11, 2000).]

Bandit76

I had three pulls and that's the best the guy could get, said it wouldn't stay in third gear though.

I'm getting it dynoed again at an upcoming show, see what happens then.

Jason E

IMO, those are solid numbers for a 130k mile 3.1. BTW, stock your car had 140hp, not 135. And you had 180 ft/lbs of torque. I think your torque number is very good!

------------------
Jason E
'89 Camaro RS 2.8
Hypertech chip/K&N filters/Accel 8.8 wires/RapidFires
Eclipse CD and 100x4 amp/Boston plates and 6x9s
Alpine Alarm w/ Keyless entry
IROC tailights/tinted windows

Monkie

Jason you think those are solid numbers?? Hmmm, I dunno. Maybe but MY car is just about the same and I KNOW I have alot more than 107 HP!! But then again thats MY car and not his. I dunno, it just doesnt sound right.



------------------
1992 Camaro RS 3.1L
T5 Manual 5 speed
Open Air Intake
Z-28 Exhaust
8.5mm MSD Ignition wires

Monkie

YEA!!! I BROKE 500 POST!!!! WOOOOHOOOOO!!!!

------------------
1992 Camaro RS 3.1L
T5 Manual 5 speed
Open Air Intake
Z-28 Exhaust
8.5mm MSD Ignition wires

Vortex_89rs

When you dyno your car, how fast do you go? I thought you just kept it in 1st and revved it. No matter what gear you are in, doesn't your car keep the same HP, it just takes longer/shorter to get to your peak HP, depending on gear ratios?
Vman

------------------
1989 Camaro RS
2.8 V6
K&N's
700R4 tranny
Cragar Street Pro rims (old Series 30)
Pioneer DEH-P3000

1969 Camaro SC
350 HO from a Vette
Turbo 350 tranny
In the process of being restored

Garmer

Monkie, I agree those are really ****ty numbers! Something doesnt sound right!

------------------
91 RS Camaro
3.1L
Cat Back System, K&N filter,modified air box, Fastchip Stage 2, 160 thermo, Rapidfires and Bosch Wires, soon to come: Homemade Ram Air,and maybe power pulleys, 5 Air Horns

Jester

ok now I'm $%^%@%!#% sure he wasn't even hitting WOT. I've since heard 3 complaints from people, including you, from people that got tested with us that had autos that all said the same thing.

In other words he had them at like 1/3 throttle and they were upshifting. $@%&$% moron. No wonder so many numbers were unusually low.

------------------
"American made baby. 100% American iron. The muscle among the masses. My hero. Yep, you can take your ergonomically designed, space age, computer controlled, 4 door, cup holding map lighted split double wishbone split fold down retractable cargo covered moon roof piece of transportation and keep it. For I have felt the thunder. And I know the difference!"
Jesters's Page of Sick Pleasure
Florida Thirdgenners Message Board
ICON Motorsports

vortecfcar

youre supposed to hit drive gear on the dyno and run into the redline. Obviously this wasnt done and the #s reflect it

------------------
91 RS W/carbed 350, Vortec heads, performer rpm, Comp cams Xtreme energy 280 grind. BFG Drag radials. 3.42 posi,Corvette servoed 700r4, ****ty stock converter
13.24@104

Mike Harvey

OUCH!!!!!!! How the hell did that happen. I got my car dynoed a while back ago and is has 130k miles on it and it dynoed at 142HP @ 5050rpm & the torque was 171ft/lbs @ 4000 rpm. That doesn't make any sense & I have a 2.8L V6 so go figure. Thought that I would add my 2 pennies into it.

- Mike Harvey -

FAST RS

I remeber on hotrod TV they had a 92 Firebird with a 305 and when tey dynoed it it had like 130 HP and new i think they r like 180 HP

Monkie

It all depends on how you treat your car. Treat it like **** and you wont even break 100 HP mark. Treat it well and you will be happier. Thats what I think

------------------
1992 Camaro RS 3.1L
T5 Manual 5 speed
Open Air Intake
Z-28 Exhaust
8.5mm MSD Ignition wires
TB Coolant bypass

ONEFINE8T9

the 91 firebird that was on horsepower TV was a 305 tbi rated at 170 hp and 255 ft/lbs of torque. It was dynoed with over 100000 miles on it and it came up as 163 hp with 270 ft/lbs of torque. After mods it was at like 181 hp and over 300 ft lbs. I am only 98% sure about the torque #

------------------
1989 pontiac firebird
bright red exterior(just repainted)
grey interior
5 spd
305 TBI (stock)
WS.6 formula wheels
3.73 posi rear end
-------------------------
system: 2 10" MTX thunder 2000 in a Professionally done custom bandpass box.
Blaupunkt CD player
Blaupunkt 4x6 and 6x9
600 watt rockford fosgate 4.6 amp

thinking about a flowmaster

Bandit76

If I treat my car any better it'd be my fu**in' girlfriend. But hey, thanks for your opinion anyway...

------------------
"Please don't litter! There's enough trash on the highway with you on it"

scoob8000

im with jester on this one.. evidently a untrained tech running the dyno machine.. every time ive ever been on a dyno it was at WOT...

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

Uh, Monkie, and garner, you do realize that these are REAR WHEEL horsepower numbers and that the numbers quoted in magazines and such are at the engine

there is typically about a 20% loss give or take 5 depending on transmission on hp to the rear wheels

Jason E

THANK YOU PABLO When I said they were good #s, I assumed everyone knew that!!

CaliCamaroRS

ok, but i would like somebody to explain why his peak hp is at 2800 rpm.

------------------
Dan
100% stock 1990 RS 3.1L
and VERY slow
edit:soon to be 99% stock with a flowmaster but still very slow

ONEFINE8T9

yes i would also like to know y his peak HP was at 2800 rpm?

CaMIRO

No kidding, that's about where my old LG4 used to peak. My 2.8 ain't happy until she's in the 4000-5250 range.

Jason E

THAT doens't make any sense to me either. Maybe he has a vibration at higher RPMs that doesn't allow the engine to get all its available power to the rear wheels? Maybe it isn't breathing well when more air is needed? These are just guesses...I have no clue.

Mkos1980

iTrader: (8)

those numbers are good. for a 135-140 HP car 107 aint bad. your only loosing 25-30 HP through out your accesorries and drivetrain, Be happy with that. Yes they did a 305 on Hot Rod TV and they said the 130 at the rear wheels are good. Remember this is RWH not FWH

TomP

Where was the tranny shifter? Was it in D or OD for the test?


------------------
-Tom P (Hot rodded 1986 Firebird 2.8l) from http://www.f-body.net/mailbag/3rd/3rd_mailbag.html message boards
---Think your car could be pic of the week? Visit http://www.f-body.net for details!

scoob8000

he said that the tech claimed he couldnt keep it in 4th gear, it would downshift to 3rd.. it wasnt a accurate test.. imho he should get a free retest.. theres no way in hell hes peaking at 2800 rpm..

Bandit76

I'm now pretty sure that the tech made a mistake. It obviously wasn't done at WOT. I wasn't sure where my peak HP should be at, but 2800 rpm sounded really off. Still, for being RWHP, an eight-year-old V6 putting out 108 HP and 165 RT isn't too bad.

Tom, I'm not sure where the shifter was, next time I'm keeping a closer eye on things. This guy had a lot of cars ahead of me and I think he got overwhelmed, and tried hurrying through as many as he could.

jcmccool

i ran my car on a dyno a few months ago and the best i could get was 115 HP and i believe 170 TQ, both peak #s were at just over 4000 RPMs. i also had the problem of not being able to keep the car in gear, started in 3rd with it in drive and it would shift to 2nd. i did the driving so i know it was at WOT. i was a little unhappy with my #s but after a few more cars ran i started to think something was up. a friends 94 mustang gt( k&n, headers, h-pipe, exhaust) was only able to put down 200 HP and a 94 supra tt that had put down 365 HP a few months earlier only made 340 HP.

jason
92 camaro rs
K&N, high flow cat, exhaust, msd 6al & coil

Dobber

Hello? Did you pause long enough to look at the torque number? The data was typed in wrong...

CaliCamaroRS

Hello? why don't you ask the guy that posted it if it was a typo, huh?? yes i did notice that but seeing that bandit posted this 5 days ago and nothing has been said about a typo, they must be his numbers.

[This message has been edited by CaliCamaroRS (edited November 16, 2000).]

Bandit76

Hello? Goodbye?

Cali's right, those are the numbers. What is obvious is that the tech did it wrong, but it will be dynoed again next month, like I've said.

The truth will, hopefully, come out then.


------------------
"Please don't litter! There's enough trash on the highway with you on it"

Grim Reaper

Those numbers are most definitely transposed.

It is mathematically impossible to have 165ft-lb@4,500 WITHOUT having 141HP (165*4500/5252=141)...that's the formula to convert TQ to HP.

The technichian meant to say/write the reverse. The numbers originally typed by Bandit are a mathematical impossibility. And if you reverse them, they look quite probable.

And I seriously doubt that Bandit has 165 RWTQ@4,500 (and 141RWHP) based on his modifications.

And Pablo's right about the powertrain loss...about 20% for an automatic.

[This message has been edited by Glenn91L98GTA (edited November 17, 2000).]

Bandit76

Glenn, I have two seperate sheets for the hp and the torque. I know it's wrong, but it's what it says.

And why wouldn't I have 165 ft-lbs torque? If I originally had 180, plus the few meager mods, minus the wear and tear and the drivetrain loss, 165 is not impossible.

Now, 165 ft-lbs RT but only 108 RWHP, that's impossible.

c-5invalid

"107.7@2800 RPM"
lol most HP i ever saw a v6 idle at...
lol he had to mess up the test

c-5invalid

you could do a burnout at idle...

michael

iTrader: (1)

Where the hell can i have a car dynoed???
I'm courious how bad mine will turn out with a ggillion miles on it haha :-)
and a code 34 hmm anyone know if that could be the maf or the ecm ???? a little help with that question is when i nail the brakes it shuts off like it floods then it has to sit a little while to refire:-(

------------------

1987 Chevrolet Camaro
2.8 Ltr HO Cut air boxes K&N Filters Gutted Cat (Did I say gutted opps don't tell the officer)
Duel catback Exhaust With Flowmaster series 80 dual 5"X24" MONSTER Echos
97 Firebird 16X8" Rims

Graeme'sFirebird

wow.. my moms 4.0 jeep grand cherokee with a full accel ignition, k&n and borla headers pulled 195 rwhp and nearly 230 tq... something he did wasnt right.. id say demand a retest

------------------
1974 Nova
350 w/ dress up items, B&M Starshifter, Flowmaster 40 series mufflers, Weld rims.

Stereo:
Pioneer Premier head unit, 2 12" pioneer subs run by orion mono amps.
In Memory of #3 Dale Earnhardt

SAEspinz80

technically though if the tech didn't know anything about thirdgens and put the car in OD and then tried running at WOT you would never get into fourth because of the kickdown. that could be why he was saying that it wouldn't stay in fourth. in that case would you just dyno it in D or leave the peddle to the floor and redline in third in OD.....probably wouldn't make a difference. but any dyno i heard of or saw was always at WOT. just my .02

------------------
1990 Firebird 3.1
------------------
- Auto Trans, TA Body Kit
- Home Made C.A.I. (KNN-RE-0810)
- ASP Underdrive Pulleys
- MSD 8.5mm Superconducter Wires (custom-cut)
- MSD GM Blaster Coil (8226)
- AC Delco Cap & Rotor
- Bosh Platinum +4 plugs
- Mobil 1 Synthetic Fluids
- 2.5" Hooker Aero-Chamber Cat-back (27121)
- 2.5" Hooker Elite Stainless Extension Tips (31503)
- GTS Blackouts (stickers removed - #GT034)
- TB Bypass

KILLS = Dodge Daytona, 2000 Toyota 4 Runner 4WD,
1999ish Explorer XLT, "older" Jeep Cherokee, 68ish Mustang (died completely when the light went green )

LOSSES = 300zx (took me in 2nd )

"The racing dice added 5hp...I SWEAR!"

CaliCamaroRS

WTF??? This post is sooooo old. BTW, IGNORING the RPM's, he said he pulled 107 hp at the wheels. 135 hp - 20% driveline loss = 108 hp at the wheels. Sounds right to me.

EDIT: For a 3.1: 140-20%=112
------------------
-Dan
-1990 3.1L RS
-Mods? no
-Slow? yes
-Currently collecting parts for T5 swap


[This message has been edited by CaliCamaroRS (edited September 30, 2001).]

CaliCamaroRS

How is that impossible??? You don't lose as much torque through the driveline. These hp/tq numbers are RIGHT ON.....but the rpm's are wrong.


------------------
-Dan
-1990 3.1L RS
-Mods? no
-Slow? yes
-Currently collecting parts for T5 swap