Chevelles.com banner

21 - 40 of 70 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,173 Posts
Looks like a 60% or 160% correction factor that seems kind of high. 393 ft pound measured tq with a corrected 630 tq at 4,400 rpm.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,728 Posts
Looks like a 60% or 160% correction factor that seems kind of high. 393 ft pound measured tq with a corrected 630 tq at 4,400 rpm.
I don't how the dynos work, but the elevation in Dolores, CO is 6,936'. I wonder if that has anything to do with the strange numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
977 Posts
You have a correction factor of roughly 1.63. That's a little high, even for the high plains. Maybe Vortecpro can shed some light on this. He dyno's in very similar conditions. You have a beautiful engine. Enjoy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,173 Posts
At 7,000 feet I think the general correction factor is about 125%. I think my 540 becomes a 454 (80% - 1/1.25) if I lived in Santa Fe which is at 7,000 feet. I think at 7,000 the borameter is like 25 inches versus like 29.2 for SAE at 77 degrees. So the temp is close on dyno here. The 1.63 or 61% (1/1.63) would mean the dyno was at like 15,000 feet (borameter is like 19 inches vs 29.3 sae).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
At 7,000 feet I think the general correction factor is about 125%. I think my 540 becomes a 454 (80% - 1/1.25) if I lived in Santa Fe which is at 7,000 feet. I think at 7,000 the borameter is like 25 inches versus like 29.2 for SAE at 77 degrees. So the temp is close on dyno here. The 1.63 or 61% (1/1.63) would mean the dyno was at like 15,000 feet (borameter is like 19 inches vs 29.3 sae).
So using your suggested 1.25 correction factor that would be [email protected] and [email protected], which would probably be higher if he had given it more RPM, still respectable numbers and probably closer to what I was expecting. Does that sound about right? In your opinion, since hp is still on the rise @5000 what would you guess the peak would be?

later, dozer
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,173 Posts
That about right and you probably would be over 500 hp (say 510 hp) if they took it to 5,500 rpm. It was still climbing at 5,000 at about 5-6 hp per 100 rpm. I think that is about right given the modifications you have and still is better than what people were expecting. Based on your cam, which is an LS6 cam (239/246 at .050, .540 lift on a 112), similar compression, little bigger motor, with some worked over heads and a better manifold it is about in line with what you have. It may have even carried to 5,700 rpm making it a little higher. Its going to be a nice street driving engine with lots of tq and some nice top end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Discussion Starter #27 (Edited)
That about right and you probably would be over 500 hp (say 510 hp) if they took it to 5,500 rpm. It was still climbing at 5,000 at about 5-6 hp per 100 rpm. I think that is about right given the modifications you have and still is better than what people were expecting. Based on your cam, which is an LS6 cam (239/246 at .050, .540 lift on a 112), similar compression, little bigger motor, with some worked over heads and a better manifold it is about in line with what you have. It may have even carried to 5,700 rpm making it a little higher. Its going to be a nice street driving engine with lots of tq and some nice top end.
I've been doing a little reading on the interwebs and there are several calculators for figuring CF. Would the extremely dry air increase the CF more than 1.25, say, between 1.3 and 1.4? I'm not buying the 1.63 CF either, I always thought the numbers sounded a little high for this combination.
Thanks for being helpful

later, dozer

P.S. the altitude at his shop is right at 6500 ft, he made that last pull early in the day so temp would have been about 50° and the humidity has been in the single digits or teens for far too many days, we need precipitation very bad
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,173 Posts
It may change it a little but the cold air is in your favor (on your 392 tq number before correction if it were 77 degrees this number might be 380) which would lower the correction factor as cold air makes more hp so your base would be higher thus they would reduce it to reflect what the engine would make at 77 degrees. So maybe offsetting errors. You elevation may have a higher CF but I think you are in the 1.25 to 1.30 range. There maybe some guys with some dynos or dyno sheets in Denver that could chime in.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,922 Posts
I just noticed the intake has the same hydrografics as the VC very cool (y)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,173 Posts
Motor looks great. Love the graphics and the header look nice. On the small harmonic balancer pulley keep on eye on that as now with all this power it will generate heat and you may need to go to a bigger pulley to get water pump and fan up to speed for idle / traffic situations.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,922 Posts
I reused my ext. bal. 454 pulleys on my int. bal. 489, bolt patterns the same so wouldn't they spin same rpm as the 454 did?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Discussion Starter #33 (Edited)
Motor looks great. Love the graphics and the header look nice. On the small harmonic balancer pulley keep on eye on that as now with all this power it will generate heat and you may need to go to a bigger pulley to get water pump and fan up to speed for idle / traffic situations.
Thanks. I've got a new set of stock pulleys if the four core radiator, shroud and seven blade clutch fan don't do the job. I'm hoping it works out as the smaller pulley means less parasitic loss and less chance of throwing the alternator belt at high RPM.
Yes Rick the ratio is the same so speed won't change between the 4t4 and 489.

later, dozer
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
I just noticed the intake has the same hydrografics as the VC very cool (y)
Actually I had the intake done first and was going to use black finned aluminum VCs but the manifold looked so good I bought a set of tall stock looking VCs and dipped them too. I think it worked out pretty well.

later, dozer

P.S. the aluminum covers would have been cheaper though
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,922 Posts
I've been tossing around getting my 22" truck wheels done with skulls or something and black back round?? it's a wht truck, I think I missed the point on the pulleys earlier, I guess if you have an overheat issue you can run larger diameter pulleys?, my 10.77:1 489 is running hotter than the 9.1/.2:1 454 was, 190-200 compared to 180-185 using all the same pulleys & rad except an alum eddy WP on 489
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
The feller that did mine does mostly firearm stuff but I've seen a couple sets of wheels that he's done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Discussion Starter #37
Progress is slow, it's seems like two steps forward and one step back. The headers were total pain in the ass and the full size starter won't fit so now I need a hi-torque mini starter. Had to modify the crossmember to fit the Doug Nash, 9/16 lower, 3.75 back. I leaned the carb out a little because it dynoed without an air cleaner. The bolt hole in the head is 7/16 and the alt mount is 3/8. I'm running the fuel line and don't like the way the fuel filter is so close to the heater hose, so I'm thinking I'll run hard line to the carb and use sintered bronze in the carb. Thoughts?

later dozer
695941
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,005 Posts
Dozer, I sort of hardlined the filter inline with a steel line from the f pump. I'm not trying to show off here but.....I do prefer a proper steel inline filter than sintered bronze, even tho the install has a "Ford" appearance.
696008


PS, I;ll check my dyno sheet but it seems the beast only made 424 HP at 7000' in CO Springs. Corrected to 603. Forgot the baro on that.

Also, Dozer Mark's enigine also had ts peak TQ aT 43-4400 rpms. Peak HP was at 6100.

OK yours looks cooler! :)

PSS I finally stuck a 6300 rpm pill in mine, as I was starting to have WAY too much fun. AS will you!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Discussion Starter #40 (Edited)
Dozer, I sort of hardlined the filter inline with a steel line from the f pump. I'm not trying to show off here but.....I do prefer a proper steel inline filter than sintered bronze, even tho the install has a "Ford" appearance.
View attachment 696008

PS, I;ll check my dyno sheet but it seems the beast only made 424 HP at 7000' in CO Springs. Corrected to 603. Forgot the baro on that.

Also, Dozer Mark's enigine also had ts peak TQ aT 43-4400 rpms. Peak HP was at 6100.

OK yours looks cooler! :)

PSS I finally stuck a 6300 rpm pill in mine, as I was starting to have WAY too much fun. AS will you!
Nice!
I can't put my filter there because I'm running a passenger side alternator. But if you look closely in this picture you might see part of the line I Bent up to go into the carb.
696022
 
21 - 40 of 70 Posts
Top