Back from the Dyno

OK, first sucessful dyno / tune since the LS swap.
Good news overall - engine is solid, no issues
Mediocre news - definately need a set of long tube headers and a different manifold.

So, after several jet changes I achieved 303 RWHP w/ 348lb/ft Torque.

figure the edlebrock headers and dual plane manifold are hurting the overal HP as they figure the stock LS1 should put @ 330RWHP...

but, the best news is - the car is definately driveable and ready to go for it's groundbreaking run.

Devin

Couple of questions to understand a bit more about the figures;

What cam/carb/inlet manifold combo is on the engine at the moment?

At what rpm were peak hp & torque?

What brand dyno was the car run on (i.e. Dynojet or other)?

Kel.

Couple of questions to understand a bit more about the figures;

What cam/carb/inlet manifold combo is on the engine at the moment?

At what rpm were peak hp & torque?

What brand dyno was the car run on (i.e. Dynojet or other)?

Kel.

Kel - stock cam, Barry Grant Mighty Demon Carb, Edlebrock Performer Mainifold, Edlebrock Headers on a DynoJet

6300 RPM before we shut it down.

Devin

Kel - stock cam, Barry Grant Mighty Demon Carb, Edlebrock Performer Mainifold, Edlebrock Headers on a DynoJet

6300 RPM before we shut it down.

Devin

Devin, I am no LS expert but I would look at the cam and then the exhaust first.

I have researched several dyno comparisons between single plane and dual plane Edelbrock manifolds for the 5.0 Ford. The air gap style dual plane wins on average torque and hp up to around 6000 rpm. As you probably already appreciate an additional 10ftlbs of torque in the mid range is way more useful on the track than an additional 10 peak hp.

I have used single plane manifolds before and they are excellent on mid capacity big compression (11:1+) solid roller cam engines where you will run the engine from say 4500 - 7500 rpm. If you want to run though from say 3000 - 6000 then the dual plane will most likely be faster on the track. An exception to this is big capacity engines with loads of torque where a single plane may aid driveability by softening low rpm torque.

My understanding is that the LS will have great head flow and around 10:1 compression so will really respond to more duration/lift in the cam. I am sure there will be others out there with LS experience who will be able to provide more experienced advice.

Kel.

Devin,
As these are at the wheel numbers going through a 9 inch, I think they are impressive. And you've cut meaningful weight as well. As Kel noted, it's a big flat torque curve that gets you launched out of the corners. I think you will see a bigger difference in performance on the track than the hp number shows. If that 350 pounds of torque hits at 4000-4500, it is going to screem off the corners compared to the 4.6 you had. Of course, more is better and there is probably more there. I'd develop it based on the area under the torque curve from 3500 to 5800. Reliable and linear goodness!:iceslolan

Mike

Devin, looking at your timing curve you sent me, 2 things, they are not using your MAP signal at all, which you probably should....

They are WAY low on the timing advance.... @ 24 degrees is pretty low for an Ls1, should be closer to 28-30 from all my research all in @ 3000rpm, also your reve limiter is set to 6600, which for stock valve springs is a tad high IMO, lower it to 6300-6400 to stay safe(you also have stock rod bolts which are known to be weak when reved high.

just my 2 cents

#1 headers, the shorties are restrictive, VERY...

Mike - yes, still running through that big arse 9"

Eric - Jeff and I discussed the rev limiter and we were supposed to set it back down - I agree 100% with your opinion there. The MAP - I'd like to understand that a little further when you have some free time - if you are willing to discuss. Not quite clear how that came out to you -- but again, this is new stuff to me.

Headers - yep, I can't agree more - I have way to many bends and the shorty's are well, quite short... :o) looks like a call to Mike is in order for those long tubes.

Keep the comments flowing guys - it's helpful and appreciated, seriously.

Devin

Devin;
I find your dyno results very interesting. I have been thinking about swaping out to an LS motor. More cubes and less weight are the two biggest reasons to go that direction. But due to budget reasons I stroked my 5.0 to a 347 last year. My motor made 350 peak torque at 4000 rpm and 315 hp at 5500 rpm. Pretty similar to your numbers. I stayed with fuel injected using a Typhoon intake on the motor feeding Canfield aluminum heads. I'm going to change out the shorty headers to long tubes in hopes of freeing up the exhaust a bit more.

Good to know that my motor is making nearly idential peak numbers to your LS motor build. Ford cubes and Chevy cubes seem to produce equal results.

I think someone else in this thread stated that you'll be very happy with the way the car pulls out of the corners. They are correct. I like the additional torque that the increased displacement provides. It was very noticable on the first drive. You'll love it too.

Devin
I have been following you LS conversion and I now have an Corvette LS2 and a T56 sitting next to my Panoz. :smile: They are ready to go in. I also have both a LS2 fuel injection and a Vic Jr Carb intake, not sure which one I will finish up with. Anyway, my question, what long tube headers are you planing on going with to clear the Panox frame? I was looking at some build them your self headers from Speedy Bill Racing. The look like you could make some good headers and clear the frame.
What do you think?:uhoh:
Paul

Paul,
Let us know what it takes to get that T56 to fit.

Mike

Devin
I have been following you LS conversion and I now have an Corvette LS2 and a T56 sitting next to my Panoz. :smile: They are ready to go in. I also have both a LS2 fuel injection and a Vic Jr Carb intake, not sure which one I will finish up with. Anyway, my question, what long tube headers are you planing on going with to clear the Panox frame? I was looking at some build them your self headers from Speedy Bill Racing. The look like you could make some good headers and clear the frame.
What do you think?:uhoh:
Paul

Paul - Mike Poupart has already done the longtube header - that's where Ill purchase mine, he sent me some photo's and they are a work of art.

If you decide not to go Carb - Ill buy the victor jr from you, if you want to sell it.

Ditto on the T56 -

I really want to get rid of the 9" rear and do an IRS, but will drive the car for several events to see how things really shake out. Good luck on your build, keep us all posted.

Devin

You guys have me in a panic, do you know something I dont know about the T56 not fitting !!!!!!!!!:uhoh: I'm on my way out to the garage with a tape measure rght now.
CAn you send me a link to the headers?
Paul

I would think the wieght advantage you gain from the aluminum block you would lose with the T-56. It's a great trans but it is BIG and HEAVY.

I put one in a Fox body Mustang before.

I would think the wieght advantage you gain from the aluminum block you would lose with the T-56. It's a great trans but it is BIG and HEAVY.

I put one in a Fox body Mustang before.

A bit of Googling indicates a T56 is between 115 - 130lbs depending on model. The 3550 is approx 95lbs. Looks like a weight gain of between 20 - 35lbs going from a 3550 to a T56.

Paul, what sort of hp/tq do you expect to make as may not be worth the trans swap. The 3550 can handle lots of power especially with the uprated TKO600 internals fitted. The frame is pretty narrow around the trans in places but nothing that a hacksaw and MIG welder cant fix I guess!!

Kel.

Well, I spent some time with tape measure and created a card board cut out of the Panoz frame and it fits over the T56. Very close in some places, and it will take some hammer work to the sheet metal in a few places, but it will fit. But you are right, this thing is heavy compaired to the 3550. I was hoping I could avoid changing the input shaft on the 3550 and using a stock bell housing by going to the T56, but it might not be a good trade. Also thought it would be easier to sell my 5.0 Ford take out as a complete drive train package, but it might not be a good trade. I'm going to have to sleep on this. The stock LS2 is rated at 400hp, and I'm told a cam swap can get you to 450hp with out any trouble. I'm runnung that sort of power through the 3550 in my Cobra 351w stroker, so I guess it should be ok.
Thanks for the warning before I sell my 3550. I would be real pissed if I wanted another 3550 in the end and sold mine cheap.:runaround:
Paul

send that 3550 tranny to Walt at www.promotionpowertrain.com (http://www.promotionpowertrain.com) in ft.lauderdale and tell him to make it as strong as the TKO600 while he is changing the input shaft.

The input shaft swap took 20 minutes and cost a whopping $150 and IMHO the extra size and weight of the T56 was not worth it.

Brian is right you'd be better sending the 3550 off to get built up.

Someone will want to buy that T56 from you anyways so it won't be money lost.

You guy are killing me, just kidding. Thats sort of what I figured, I can sell the T56, bell housing and shifter for what I have in them. Will need to get a special LS2 to 3550 bell housing and keep my cable driven clutch. However that means I will have a full dressed 5.0sbf that maybe some one will want, maybe, someday.
By the way, I was told that I should take my stock front springs and move them to the back and get a set of 550lb springs for the front and a set of Penski shocks all around to greatly improve the handling. Comments?
Paul

If your are going to run sticky tires then yes. If you are running street tires then not so much.

Paul:
http://www.quicktimeinc.com/products.html

We also changed to a hydraulic clutch vs cable.

Devin

i would also recommend getting the "window" option on the quicktime housing so you can see and measure the clutch without removing anything...

Nice feature (scroll down it on the same page as Devin's link above)

i would also recommend getting the "window" option on the quicktime housing so you can see and measure the clutch without removing anything...

Nice feature (scroll down it on the same page as Devin's link above)

YES!! I could not agree more, I wish I would have done that one!

they will add it to your existing if you ever pull it out send it to them to add the window.

they will add it to your existing if you ever pull it out send it to them to add the window.


I just cut my scatter sheild in half, so i can remove 3 bolts and drop the scatter shield with the tranny in place. works well :-D

Paul, let me know if you need some motor mounts. I have the art of making them down pat, and they use the stock motor mount locations. Made installing the engine VERY easy!

Where did you end up with the headers? I would like to use some long tube headers but does any one make them?
Did the hydro clutch come with the bell housing, or could you have stayed with the cable system?
I liked you motor mount system, simple and it looks like it works.
Paul

Where did you end up with the headers? I would like to use some long tube headers but does any one make them?
Did the hydro clutch come with the bell housing, or could you have stayed with the cable system?
I liked you motor mount system, simple and it looks like it works.
Paul

Headers I am making custom, used some fbody shorties in the interum.

I went Hydro, there is NO room for a cable setup, the bellhousing sits to far back and the frame interferes with the mounting of a cable system.