6.2 Dyno with Common Bolt-ons

[Badass69]

Looking at it wrong. He gained about 7 more ft lbs than I did with mine.... I just gained basically no horsepower lol.

Edited March 23, 2016 by 1994Vmax

[Jon A]

So at 1700rpms you gained around 200 tq, or am I looking at it wrong haha?

 

Yeah, here's how to read the chart: Two runs were compared, one in green one in blue. At 1700 RPM the high lines are torque from each run, the low lines are HP from each run (they cross at 5252). So at 1800 RPM, I gained around 32 lb-ft of torque (run 14 wasn't fully going at 1700 RPM yet).

[country_09]

Just figured since I have pretty much same setup as you I'd post my dyno numbers I just had done. Sadly I didn't have stock numbers so it was nice to see the gains since ours are roughly the same. I'm on 33s and 20x10s as well.

 

-Pacesetter long tubes and ORY

-airaid MIT

-magnaflow muffler

-HHP tune

 

386 HP and 419 tq

 

 

Edited June 6, 2016 by country_09

[camcamaro1991]

Jon A thanks for taking time to take before and after dyno measurements

 

what are your PE settings, I am curious if you played with your PE "EQ ratio" boost your low end TQ?

 

given that the standard tuned PE curve is around 12.8 AFR, I was able to add 0.75+ AFR was about 11.8ish (from memory, let me dig around my older files) fueling from 2,500 up to 5,000 rpms and gain 20-25lbs TQ across the curve, it brings more TQ in early and GM's seem to like it, I haven't seen any rich knock.

 

^ got that little trick from the tuning school, they showed me the normal 12.8AFR is good but add a little hump in there and the GM's gain good TQ.

Edited June 7, 2016 by camcamaro1991

[volcom8190]

Jon A thanks for taking time to take before and after dyno measurements

 

what are your PE settings, I am curious if you played with your PE "EQ ratio" boost your low end TQ?

 

given that the standard tuned PE curve is around 12.8 AFR, I was able to add 0.75+ AFR was about 11.8ish (from memory, let me dig around my older files) fueling from 2,500 up to 5,000 rpms and gain 20-25lbs TQ across the curve, it brings more TQ in early and GM's seem to like it, I haven't seen any rich knock.

 

^ got that little trick from the tuning school, they showed me the normal 12.8AFR is good but add a little hump in there and the GM's gain good TQ.

Can you post a screen shot of your PE table?

[camcamaro1991]

Can you post a screen shot of your PE table?

 

I can't seem to find it, I may have deleted it, it was done on my older 2005 & 2013 Trucks, and 2002 Camaro. I should have kept my older files. I have not tuned my 2016, I only have 250 miles on it LOL.

 

basically when you look at the stock file its all over the place even like 10 AFR ??? in some spots, tuned they normally flat line of 12.8 AFR you add some fuel in the PE table to bump it to 11.3-11.8 AFR and they do well, just don't go too crazy, you will get rich knock.

 

I can make a screen lot later of a random file.

Edited June 7, 2016 by camcamaro1991

[truckguy82]

I intended to do this a long time ago but have just been so busy over the last year and a half I never got around to it. I really want an accurate before/after for the next (and likely last) bolt-on I have planned so it was finally time to see what I've gained so far. New mods since the initial (mechanically stock) dyno:

 

American Racing Headers, 1 3/4" Primaries, Catted Y-Pipe

Magnaflow Catback

AFE Momentum GT Stage 2 CAI

Ported TB

180 Thermostat

Taylor Wires

 

I expect the bulk of the power increase is due to the first three, the other mods had other reasons behind them but if they add a couple odd HP it all adds up. Both times I was on the same 34.1" E-rated Duratrac tires. Anyway, here are the results, mechanically stock and with the bolt-ons, both tuned as well as I could get them before running out of time on the dyno:

 

 

 

 

An increase of 47 HP and 43 lb-ft peak to peak. I was quite pleased with that result. While naturally the biggest HP gains are at high RPM (nearly 70 HP increase at 6500 RPM) there's a healthy gain of torque throughout the RPM range that's very usable in normal driving and moderate towing (not just when you have your foot to the floor). I would guess the headers are responsible for most of the lower/mid RPM torque gains. I have as much torque now at 2700 RPM as I had at peak (4100 RPM) before. That's nice for towing.

 

For those wondering how that might equate to flywheel numbers, with these heavy tires I'm losing about 21% through the drivetrain. That would indicate roughly 480 HP and 520 lb-ft rating if it came this way from the factory.

 

In case people are wondering what they'll get with all the bolt-ons and no tune at all, I did a run on the stock tune. Here that is compared with the stock dyno with no tune:

 

 

 

 

An increase of 46 HP and 46 lb-ft peak to peak. One caveat is that I think it did better on the stock tune than it should have, largely due to a slight MAF calibration change between the stock air intake and the AFE. That run was a bit leaner than the stock program should be; I have a feeling after a couple hundred miles of driving the computer would compensate and some of those gains would disappear. Regardless, this does show the mechanical parts are good for some serious gains with no tuning at all.

 

What I'd love to see is another with an lt1 intake

 

I mean we all know the l86 is the same as the lt1 except the intake and exhaust

 

Vette's are putting down 400 to the wheels stock, and like 430-440 to the wheels with just exhaust. You did the exhaust already, seems like an intake manifold with give you huge gains up top. The dyno would tell us what we lose down low if any.

 

According to the vette dyno's, we should be making well over 400 to the wheels with just an intake and exhaust.

Edited June 30, 2016 by truckguy82

[OUT2WIN]

Awesome numbers, which magnaflow catback are you running? 3.5 inch also?

Edited September 9, 2016 by OUT2WIN

[gregrob20]

Direct injection does not like to be that rich.... 11.8 and richer N/A is silly. 12.6 at peak tq and 12.9-13.0 at peak hp will give the best results.

Edited September 10, 2016 by gregrob20

[camcamaro1991]

Direct injection does not like to be that rich.... 11.8 and richer N/A is silly. 12.6 at peak tq and 12.9-13.0 at peak hp will give the best results.

 

Thanks gregrob20, I am always game for learning. Ill keep that in mind when I get around to doing my own GDI. In a "stock tune" on 2016 6.2 I see GM only runs down to 12.3 and peaks about 13.2ish AFR so I see what you mean about GDI's AFR's esp after looking at others uploaded "not stock" tunes, they seem to be happy around the mid to upper 12's. A lot less sporadic from the GEN 3/4's stock tunes.

 

I bet there is some gain in the lower RPM's, before peak TQ.

Edited September 11, 2016 by camcamaro1991

[truckguy82]

So I was studying the c7 corvette lt1 dynos, and I thought it was interesting that after the OP's bolt-ons, the torque and hp was almost identical to an lt1 from 2k rpm until around 4300rpm, then around 4500rpm the l86 starts to choke while the lt1 continues to make power.

 

So I overlaid the c7 dyno to your graph by hand and scanned it. I think it's a pretty accurate guess to say you'd make over 400whp with just an intake manifold, 411hp according to the overlay. Being that you dyno'd 330whp stock, looks like we could potentially make an extra 80hp with just bolt on's. Which would be incredible.

 

This is exactly the type of torque powerband I'd like to have in my truck personally. Still has plenty of low end grunt, but then it just continues to pull really hard as you get higher in the powerband.

 

Scan_2016_09_12_15_36_34_545.pdf

Scan_2016_09_12_15_36_34_545.pdf

Scan_2016_09_12_15_36_34_545.pdf

Scan_2016_09_12_15_36_34_545.pdf

[truckguy82]

My scanner would only create a pdf, if someone knows how to convert a pdj into a jpeg so it can be displayed, that would be helpful

[OutBurst]

So how lean was it running when you ran with the stock tune? I'm getting a lot of sh*t for my plan of Kooks 1 3/4" with GREEN cats and a stock tune.

[gregrob20]

So how lean was it running when you ran with the stock tune? I'm getting a lot of sh*t for my plan of Kooks 1 3/4" with GREEN cats and a stock tune.

Mine wasn't lean, it was 12.4 across the board on the stock tune.

[Rawyzf]

Mine wasn't lean, it was 12.4 across the board on the stock tune.

So how lean was it running when you ran with the stock tune? I'm getting a lot of sh*t for my plan of Kooks 1 3/4" with GREEN cats and a stock tune.

I'm not trying to give you crap, Im just stating that it would be best to tune when installing headers, just like the OP on this thread.

 

Sure, his numbers were fine on the dyno, but will the best that way in day to day driving conditions, etc?

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk