Pricing and availability of a few parts

[WA 2 FST]

1) Does anyone know if there's an aftermarket hi-flow cat-pipe available for our trucks that bolts on to the stock manifolds? The only ones I've seen out were developed to work with long tube headers.

I really do not want to install headers on the truck, but I know reduced back-pressure is a big + for a forced induction motor.

2) Looking at aftermarket hoods... has anyone seen one of the Cervini "Stalker" (I think its called that... maybe its just the "R" hood) installed? Are there any hoods out there that are as light as the stocker? I like the looks of some of the hoods, but hate the idea of adding weight to the vehicle.

3) The rest I'm sure Terry can answer. What's the typical cost of 255lph pumps, SCT MAF, and 60lb injectors?

[PoorSvtman]

bassani makes a mid pipe with or with out highflows... I had them on my truck for years... I sold them months ago on here...

[WA 2 FST]

bassani makes a mid pipe with or with out highflows... I had them on my truck for years... I sold them months ago on here...

How much $$ are they new?

[PoorSvtman]

only place i know that actually lists bassani prices on the web is rpmoutlet.. I wouldnt buy them from rpm since alot of people over on nloc and f150online have had some problems with them, but this will give u a idea of cost..

http://rpmoutlet.com/lightbassani2cat.htm

[wesman]

I think Terry can help you with Bassani stuff too.

Have you changed your plans a lot for the truck Wes ? It seems you're going a lot bigger than I've seen you talk about on here, usually in the 450hp range. A lot of the mods you are talking about aren't need until you get over 500-525rwhp.

Fuel Pumps are usually a little over $125
60lb's are a little over $4xx I believe.
SCT Maf is ~$300, maybe a little less....I think $279 is sticking in my mind for some reason.

--wes

[WA 2 FST]

I think Terry can help you with Bassani stuff too.

Have you changed your plans a lot for the truck Wes ? It seems you're going a lot bigger than I've seen you talk about on here, usually in the 450hp range. A lot of the mods you are talking about aren't need until you get over 500-525rwhp.

Fuel Pumps are usually a little over $125
60lb's are a little over $4xx I believe.
SCT Maf is ~$300, maybe a little less....I think $279 is sticking in my mind for some reason.

--wes

Thanks for the info guys.

Wes, actually I'd be really happy with 450rwhp/530+rwtq. I wasn't really planning on doing any exhaust work (I have a cat-back already), but do think its wise to reduce backpressure, especially with vastly improved airflow into the motor. I refuse to do headers b/c I do not want the hassle of them. It may be a mental block for me, but after having long tubes on various vehicles before, I just don't want to fool with them on something I drive regularly.

Terry's findings and experiences with other trucks (especially recently) with lean-spike problems ~450+rwhp has made me consider the fuel upgrades. But it may be overkill, and indeed unnecessary at the desired power level. :)

Feel free to offer more of your opinion on this.

[StormShadow]

Thanks for the info guys.

Wes, actually I'd be really happy with 450rwhp/530+rwtq. I wasn't really planning on doing any exhaust work (I have a cat-back already), but do think its wise to reduce backpressure, especially with vastly improved airflow into the motor. I refuse to do headers b/c I do not want the hassle of them. It may be a mental block for me, but after having long tubes on various vehicles before, I just don't want to fool with them on something I drive regularly.

Terry's findings and experiences with other trucks (especially recently) with lean-spike problems ~450+rwhp has made me consider the fuel upgrades. But it may be overkill, and indeed unnecessary at the desired power level. :)

Feel free to offer more of your opinion on this.

I prefer to error on the side of caution. It sounds like you are getting ready to get your KB, if so I would suggest you at least do the MAF if nothing else. I'll pm you the prices I paid for the maf, injectors, and fuel pumps from Terry when I get home.

[Mark #2]

Thanks for the info guys.

Wes, actually I'd be really happy with 450rwhp/530+rwtq. I wasn't really planning on doing any exhaust work (I have a cat-back already), but do think its wise to reduce backpressure, especially with vastly improved airflow into the motor. I refuse to do headers b/c I do not want the hassle of them. It may be a mental block for me, but after having long tubes on various vehicles before, I just don't want to fool with them on something I drive regularly.

Terry's findings and experiences with other trucks (especially recently) with lean-spike problems ~450+rwhp has made me consider the fuel upgrades. But it may be overkill, and indeed unnecessary at the desired power level. :)
Feel free to offer more of your opinion on this.

Go ahead and put the headers on, they are not a pain on these trucks, I think the key is to reuse the stock gaskets. I haven't even re-torqued mine in 2 years.

[LS1 Eater]

I have a all most new bassani mid pipe with high flow cats. For sale in your intersted. looking to get 290 for it. Just thought I would post it for you.

[QDRHRSE]

Go ahead and put the headers on, they are not a pain on these trucks, I think the key is to reuse the stock gaskets. I haven't even re-torqued mine in 2 years.

When you say "not a pain" are you referring to the install or the upkeep? I have the JBA shorties and I want to go back to stock. Are they hard to do with the engine in?

[L8 APEX]

I saw a big difference in tuning Adams truck vs Brook's trucks which were both stock block KB installs. Adam's long tubes seemed to flow a lot more and stack less boost. We were only seeing 15-16psi with a 3" and 6#. On Rocks truck I saw 19-20psi on a 3" and 8#.
We dynoed Wes' truck on the street tune and saw 540 rwhp at 12.5 degrees of timing. Rocks truck made a very similar 545 at 14' timing.
I'd say MAF is a must and injectors would be nice. Brooks MAF was 999 counts at 5400rpm with 10% road load with a 3.25 and 4# lower. 1023 is maxed out. Adams truck with the 2400MAF was in the upper 870's at 16psi. Rocks and Wes were about 940 at 19psi.

[Mark #2]

When you say "not a pain" are you referring to the install or the upkeep? I have the JBA shorties and I want to go back to stock. Are they hard to do with the engine in?

Both,
Not hard with the engine in, easier than most traction bars, just pull the front fender liners and the bolts are right there.

[WA 2 FST]

I saw a big difference in tuning Adams truck vs Brook's trucks which were both stock block KB installs. Adam's long tubes seemed to flow a lot more and stack less boost. We were only seeing 15-16psi with a 3" and 6#.

And Brook is running a 3.25" and 4# lower, right? Do you know how much boost his is making? I know he's at 433rwhp/509rwtq.

What are Adam's HP/TQ numbers at 15-16psi? I don't remember.

Can you run 60# injectors on these at 80+% duty cycle without upgrading the stock 155lph pumps? I'd think a 30% larger-than-stock injector would starve the pumps under full load on the top end.

Thanks for all the info guys. This is good.:tu:

[Sixpipes]

Wes - I don't have a KB yet, but am in the process of adding pumps, MAF, and 60# injectors. Terry will be doing the work in May. The KB can be safe with stock pumps, but why compromise the performance of the blower? The pump upgrade is not a big purchase by comparison and making sure there is enough fuel available when adding a bigger MAF is a critical part of getting the best performance out of the KB IMO. I'm also getting the A/F guage for realtime info. :cool:

[WA 2 FST]

Dennis,

I agree with this thinking, which is why I'm just researching everything to the "nth" degree. The only rebuttle I could give if I'm playing :evil 's advocate is that I will not be trying to approach getting the maximum out of the blower. I'll be happy at 450/530. If the stock fuel system is fine there, then none of it may be necessary for my truck.

I also realize I could run a ported blower, e-fan, Cobra water pump, and lots of other smaller items and get close (or even go beyond) my performance goals. However, I am sold on getting the most efficient blower possible for the job... even if I am not utilizing it to its fullest potential.

[02BOLT]

Wes,
In reference to the Long Tubes.....I held off on them until well after I'd put the KB on my truck. If I remember correctly, they were worth 15 RWHP and 15 RWTQ across the ENTIRE rev range. Now, I realize that 15 HP may not sound like much, but as you well know, when you pick up that kind of power across the entire rev range, that's a difference you can feel. My main reason for getting them was to reduce cylinder pressure, and they did that nicely; the extra HP was an extry bonus.

I personally, absolutely LOVED the LT's on my truck. They never gave me any issues of any kind. They never rattled, leaked, or made any kind of undesirable racket. Coupled with the Bassani catback, the truck sounded wicked as hell, but was still docile enough during normal cruising, that it never wore on my nerves. There are several guys here, who've had them for a while; Mark, Ron, Adam, and a few others who could tell you their experiences with them. I'm not into obnoxiously loud exhausts either, and if you run hi-flow cats, and a mild catback, I think you'd like the sound and responsiveness it gives the motor. Once again, just my preference.

[WA 2 FST]

Rob,

I agree that 15/15 is substantial when its realized over the entire rev-range. I also agree about reducing cylinder pressure, which is why I was inquiring about the hi-flow cat H/X-pipe.

So you gained 15hp/15tq without changing the blower pulleys? I assume boost dropped a bit, too. Did you ever redyno it after swapping blower pulleys to raise the boost back up to the original level?

[02BOLT]

Rob,

I agree that 15/15 is substantial when its realized over the entire rev-range. I also agree about reducing cylinder pressure, which is why I was inquiring about the hi-flow cat H/X-pipe.

So you gained 15hp/15tq without changing the blower pulleys? I assume boost dropped a bit, too. Did you ever redyno it after swapping blower pulleys to raise the boost back up to the original level?

No sir, I left the pulleys alone. I was running a 2lb lower/ 3" upper, and was seeing right at 17 psi at the 5300 rpm shift point(prior to the LT's). It would jump to 14psi when I matted it, and climb to 17psi by the time it shifted. Also, just prior to the LT's I was running the Bassani Hi-Flow cat-pipe. With the LT's, it dropped 1-1.5 psi over the Bassani Cat-pipe, but pulled harder, so I was happy. It was making more power with less boost, and my main objective at that time was to reduce the stresses being placed on my stock bottom end. The truck went consistent 11.60's at the TFC that year.

Now, once I had the built shortblock in the truck, then I went to a 4lb lower/ 3" upper combo that showed close to 19psi on my boost guage at the shift point.(I had a 30psi guage that may have been a tad optimistic, but at the time, they didn't offer a 20psi guage in the Lunar series....but anyway; you get the idea...)

FWIW....When I went from the factory cat-pipe to the Bassani cat-pipe, it only netted me about 2-3 RWHP, and maybe 7-8 lb/ft of torque. It did drastically changed the sound of the truck, but I was disappointed with the power production. There was no noticeable SOTP difference in acceleration that I could tell. That was just my observation.

[rickgig]

Wes... sounds like your getting ready to play again. Still kicking around the thought of having the blower ported?

If you need some help with the wrenching let me know. I owe you one.

[WA 2 FST]

Wes... sounds like your getting ready to play again. Still kicking around the thought of having the blower ported?

If you need some help with the wrenching let me know. I owe you one.

Hey Rick,

If I do all this, I'm getting a KB blower. I'm not going with a ported blower.

[Mark #2]

Crap, no more advantage for me now.
Glad that Rob inspired me, maybe I have inspired a few more with stock blocks?

[Sixpipes]

Crap, no more advantage for me now.
Glad that Rob inspired me, maybe I have inspired a few more with stock blocks?

Don't think of it as competition, think of it as company. :beer:

[Mark #2]

Don't think of it as competition, think of it as company. :beer:

Welcome to the club everyone.
I copied Sixpipes for many years, Roush, Metco lowers, Swanson, etc.

[WA 2 FST]

Crap, no more advantage for me now.
Glad that Rob inspired me, maybe I have inspired a few more with stock blocks?

I am not going to come close to your performance figures... either on the dyno or on the track. I'm shooting for 450rwhp/530rwtq. I'm not going to run lots of boost through this thing. If/when something explodes, I'll fix it, but that will just be to handle the 450/530 power it will already be making, not in an effort to make more power.

I also have no plans to set it up to drag race with adjustable shocks, traction bars, slicks, etc. Would be happy to see 115mph trap speeds, and whatever ET that might yield. :)

[Lyfisin]

I copied Sixpipes for many years

It's where I got my start too. The hood and Roush suspension on my truck are solely due to his vision. :bows I really like the way his truck looks and I told him when he gave me a ride to sample the Roush, my truck was going to look like a copycat. At least mine is white.

Back on topic, Wes, how are you going to achieve those torque numbers? I feel like I'm already at the HP level I wanted to be at, but you are indicating you can pick up about 40tq.

What's going to get you there?

[WA 2 FST]

Back on topic, Wes, how are you going to achieve those torque numbers? I feel like I'm already at the HP level I wanted to be at, but you are indicating you can pick up about 40tq.

What's going to get you there?

Maybe its just me being a bit optimistic. My truck right now is at 480+rwtq. I don't see a 50rwtq gain being out of the question... not with an estimated 60+rwhp gain being the goal.

But what really matters is power under the curve. The _peak_ # means very little when racing. If the TQ figure at 4000rpm is 30ft/lbs higher after everything is installed compared to what it is now at 4000rpm (an rpm figure where we are already past the _peak_ #), then the truck will run significantly better... even if the peak #s don't show it.

I'm also going to do some exhaust work, which I do not believe you have done on your truck. Looking at Rob's truck, for example, he showed a gain with just exhaust work of 15/15 and boost _dropped_. Swap pulleys to bring boost back up to the desired level, and it would be a 25-30rwhp gain easily, if not more. Granted, I'm not going to run as much peak boost as he was on his, but the gains should be close relative to a given combination.

It would be very interesting to know how much boost you're running right now. I would really like to keep mine in the 14+psi range.

[Lyfisin]

I realized after reading your reply that I can't add. It was a 20tq difference. My 510 vs your desired 530. For some reason I was reading 550.

As always good info though and thanks. Unfortunately it raises more questions for me.

I don't plan on changing my exhaust, but I don't quite understand the numbers yet and I'd like to. It appears Rob's 15/15 gain didn't put any additional stress on the motor and since he also dropped boost, it's a win/win.

Where you lose me is where you talk about changing out the pulley's. Theoretically, if you had a truck that was 450/530 and did the exhaust work, you'd have 465/545. By swapping pulley's you'd have the same original desired boost level, but the engine would be working harder and isn't that what you were trying to avoid by keeping the HP at 450 originally?

I went shopping for meters and I was overwhelmed. :(

[wesman]

I realized after reading your reply that I can't add. It was a 20tq difference. My 510 vs your desired 530. For some reason I was reading 550.

As always good info though and thanks. Unfortunately it raises more questions for me.

I don't plan on changing my exhaust, but I don't quite understand the numbers yet and I'd like to. It appears Rob's 15/15 gain didn't put any additional stress on the motor and since he also dropped boost, it's a win/win.

Where you lose me is where you talk about changing out the pulley's. Theoretically, if you had a truck that was 450/530 and did the exhaust work, you'd have 465/545. By swapping pulley's you'd have the same original desired boost level, but the engine would be working harder and isn't that what you were trying to avoid by keeping the HP at 450 originally?

I went shopping for meters and I was overwhelmed. :(

He meant swapping out the pullies to get back to the original boost level.
Generally addition of LT's and other free flowing mods will reduce the boost pressure. You can regain that pressure by pullying up or down depending on where you do it. If Rob would have done that, he would have had the 15/15 gain in addition to the likely 15-20hp gain from changing the pullies.

Yes, this would increase the stress on the motor.

--wes

[Lyfisin]

He meant swapping out the pullies to get back to the original boost level.
Generally addition of LT's and other free flowing mods will reduce the boost pressure. You can regain that pressure by pullying up or down depending on where you do it. If Rob would have done that, he would have had the 15/15 gain in addition to the likely 15-20hp gain from changing the pullies.

Yes, this would increase the stress on the motor.

--wes

Well, great. Then I understood everything except for why Wes would want to increase stress on the motor when his initial goal was the 450 number pre-exhaust mods.

To me, it seems like he could have put the other pulley on at the beginning (before exhaust mods) and end up with the same result.

[wesman]

Well, great. Then I understood everything except for why Wes would want to increase stress on the motor when his initial goal was the 450 number pre-exhaust mods.

To me, it seems like he could have put the other pulley on at the beginning (before exhaust mods) and end up with the same result.

If you just pully up without the supporting mods, there is actually more stress on the motor than pullying up with the other mods. If you add boost/power, you will increase cylinder pressure. This of course adds heat, stress etc. If you do the breathing mods as well, some of that heat/stress is alleviated and you have the gains of the increased power with a bit less stress.

--wes

[WA 2 FST]

Brook,

I was speaking more in theory as wesman has accurately described, rather than what I would actually do in my situation. As has been pointed out, running less boost but making the same power is beneficial. I don't think 14+psi is hard on these motors. Let's say you're making 14psi now and you add exhaust mods and it drops to 12. You're still "safe", so you change pulleys to get back up to 14.

In Rob's case, he was making a lot more boost, so the exhaust mods made even more sense than my mild application.

Heck, I may not have any real need for KB blower. I might be better off with a ported Eaton making 14psi... cheaper and less chance of oil leaks. And it would still make 450+rwhp.

[StormShadow]

Heck, I may not have any real need for KB blower. I might be better off with a ported Eaton making 14psi... cheaper and less chance of oil leaks. And it would still make 450+rwhp.

I'm thinking about 16-17lbs on a ported eaton "with" all of the supporting mods. Plus your spinning the crap out of the eaton and creating more heat. I still say go with the KB and spin it slower and get the same amount of power with less boost.

[Lyfisin]

I guess I was just thinking about it from an engine/pulley perspective. In your scenario of 450/530 when you have achieved 450hp, you have achieved the amount of stress on your motor that you felt was safe. By changing to a smaller pulley to bring the boost back to 14, the motor would spin more and by default be past the area where you previously felt it would be safe.

How can you add boost and HP by changing to a smaller pulley and not put more stress on the engine. Or maybe what I really need to understand is how is 14lbs of boost, 14lbs of boost regardless of what the pulley sizes seem like they would do to an engine, where you indicate is still safe.

I'm obviously not trying to deny it here. I really want to understand. :beer:

[WA 2 FST]

Adding power to anything adds some stress to it, no doubt.

450rwhp achieved at 12psi of boost on an 8.4:1 CR engine will be create less stress on the engine, than 450rwhp achieved at 14psi of boost on the same motor. In the first scenario, you more than likely have a more efficient intake/exhaust setup which allows the motor to make the same power with less boost than the second scenario. I know you understand all this.

One thing to consider is the maximum static compression ratio of a given motor. There is a threshold that you cannot cross and continue to add boost without other variables being changed dramatically (lower base compression ratio, significantly retarded ignition timing... sometimes to the point where additional boost/airflow is negated, etc). That's why when guys swap pulleys at the track, they are also running race gas.

However, if the engine is in a safe state of tune at 14psi, and you free up the intake/exhaust tract which drops boost, but still maintains (or in Rob's case, ADDS) power, then it is often perfectly acceptable to swap pulleys to return to the desired/safe boost level. Now, as you pointed out Brook, this will increase the power the engine makes, and if the parts cannot handle the additional power then it makes no difference how safe the tune is. The parts will fail anyway.

Your question is a good one, and could read like this: Will 14psi creating 470rwhp be that much more stressful on engine components, than 14psi creating 450rwhp? I can't answer that specifically, but its a good thought to ponder. Certainly more power = more stress. But given various parameters, the power might be well within the safe range of a given engine.

Adam's point about about having to overspin the ported Eaton significantly _and_ run more boost just to make the same number is a great example of what I've brought up in some earlier posts in this thread.

"Not all boost is created equal", either... but that can lead to another discussion.

[Mark #2]

Are there any Talon guys going Turbo yet on a Gen II?
There is about a 100 "free" HP at the same boost.

[Lyfisin]

I'll pass on the turbo. The HP might be free, but the expense of doing it for someone like me would be not so free. :tongue:

Thanks for the explanations you guys. I had to read them a couple of times and walk off, come back and read again, but I have a lot better understanding of it now.

And when I say thanks, I really mean it. It's really cool of you to take the time to explain in detail.

[WA 2 FST]

Are there any Talon guys going Turbo yet on a Gen II?
There is about a 100 "free" HP at the same boost.

Show me a bolt on kit that is CARB legal, and I'd seriously consider it.

However, I'm not sure there is a better power adder than a twin-screw, positive displacement blower for "power under the curve". A centrifugal blower/turbo just doesn't make the same bottom-end power. Before anyone screams at me, I didn't say they don't make "any bottom end power" or "good bottom end power", but the facts are that they don't make as much. For a heavy, auto trans vehicle like a Lightning that also has a relatively low engine redline (~5300-5500rpm shift points), you need/want as much low-end TQ as you can get.

The goal is average HP in the useable rev-range. A turbo (or twin-turbo) would be better than a centrifugal blower, and it would be extremely streetable, and as Mark said it would make more power at the same boost level. However, to take full advantage of it I think you would have to be building a 9-sec truck (higher engine rpm capability, 3500+rpm stall converter, possibly more rear gearing)... not a 11-12sec daily driver.

Just my opinion. Trust me, I understand the benefit, and the thought of doing a turbo setup has crossed my mind. :)

[PoorSvtman]

I'm thinking about 16-17lbs on a ported eaton "with" all of the supporting mods. Plus your spinning the crap out of the eaton and creating more heat. I still say go with the KB and spin it slower and get the same amount of power with less boost.


Alot of guys are still complaning about the ported blowers.. They already have a stage 4 port now and well i dont think it did to well...

Im going to be running a self ported eaton for awhile and then slap a kb on more than likely.... all depends on money and i want to get my bills undercontrol.. The 5 months of no job realy hurt me..

[StormShadow]

Alot of guys are still complaning about the ported blowers.. They already have a stage 4 port now and well i dont think it did to well...

Im going to be running a self ported eaton for awhile and then slap a kb on more than likely.... all depends on money and i want to get my bills undercontrol.. The 5 months of no job realy hurt me..

I've read the stories about the stage 4. All I know is that the Apten port that I had ran its ass off. It got me back to back 11 second timeslips at 16lbs of boost. (granted at hallsville at about 45 degrees) but it still ain't no KB

[wesman]

Show me a bolt on kit that is CARB legal, and I'd seriously consider it.

However, I'm not sure there is a better power adder than a twin-screw, positive displacement blower for "power under the curve". A centrifugal blower/turbo just doesn't make the same bottom-end power. Before anyone screams at me, I didn't say they don't make "any bottom end power" or "good bottom end power", but the facts are that they don't make as much. For a heavy, auto trans vehicle like a Lightning that also has a relatively low engine redline (~5300-5500rpm shift points), you need/want as much low-end TQ as you can get.

The goal is average HP in the useable rev-range. A turbo (or twin-turbo) would be better than a centrifugal blower, and it would be extremely streetable, and as Mark said it would make more power at the same boost level. However, to take full advantage of it I think you would have to be building a 9-sec truck (higher engine rpm capability, 3500+rpm stall converter, possibly more rear gearing)... not a 11-12sec daily driver.

Just my opinion. Trust me, I understand the benefit, and the thought of doing a turbo setup has crossed my mind. :)

I'm with you on the centrifugal blower (essentially a pullied turbo), the low end power suffers greatly but the upper RPM's are generally very good.

However with a properly matched turbine/housing turbos can't be beat for the dollar. They are much more effecient, don't require you to drive them(other than air, where a blower requires power to make power) and are generally easier to manage/ upgrade etc.

If the L was a turbo vehicle to begin with, I'm willing to bet there would be no talk of folks switching to a twin screw SC .

I miss the turbo days, this might get me motivated to get another TT monster back on the street. :throw:

--wes

[WA 2 FST]

www.Proturbokits.com (http://www.Proturbokits.com)

Anyone have any input on the above kit? I don't think it would run close to optimum without at least a 2400-2800 stall converter, but the kit looks nice from the pics and vid.

[BC Lightning]

Show me a bolt on kit that is CARB legal, and I'd seriously consider it.



+1


www.Proturbokits.com



Anyone have any input on the above kit? I don't think it would run close to optimum without at least a 2400-2800 stall converter, but the kit looks nice from the pics and vid.

This is the company alot of folks told me to stay away from, some say dont deal with them, like RPMoutlet, however I have never had any bad issue with RPM and I've ordered from them half a dozen times.

Anyways, proturbokits are building Johnny Lightnings twin turbo kit, and were supposed to use his truck for mock up of a bolt on turbo kit.

I had heard from some of the Waco Lightning guys that the kit they have right now only uses 2 inch pipes. You have to send your truck to them for a custom 4" pipes. They were supposed to be getting a bolt on kit, but we shall see.

[wesman]

I think it will be a while before a true bolt on kit exists. Then throw in the tuning factor and it's a nightmare.

Most of the folks that are sucessful at turbo fabrication etc do the fab/tuning in house only or have a list of authorized distibuters/installers.

I predict when the first "bolt on" kits come out, there will be a rash of blown motors.

--wes

[99WhiteBeast]

I predict when the first "bolt on" kits come out, there will be a rash of blown motors.

--wes

True dat- but I'm waiting so I can pick up a KB for cheap when they'll be all over the boards for sale

[Mark #2]

True dat- but I'm waiting so I can pick up a KB for cheap when they'll be all over the boards for sale

Just like right now with the Whipples now out.
I haven't seen too much posted lately about how great they are either;)

[wesman]

Just like right now with the Whipples now out.
I haven't seen too much posted lately about how great they are either;)

That's true, I've seen a ton for sale and folks moving to the whipple, but not a lot of talk about how great they're doing at the track etc

Maybe some of it can be attributed to the time of year, starting to get hot in a lot of places . I'd think the NE boys would still be doing well though, not to mention their big downhill racetrack up at Atco.

--wes

[PoorSvtman]

about the turbos... if you havent found the turbo forum on nloc then you wont hear alot about them.....

Reason most so far dont like proturbokits is because they are made to order so it takes time...

[L8 APEX]

We almost hauled a Z06 up to Atco to shut up a C5 tuner up there using that track to claim rediculous times on head/cam packages. They never accepted our challenge.

[WA 2 FST]

We almost hauled a Z06 up to Atco to shut up a C5 tuner up there using that track to claim rediculous times on head/cam packages. They never accepted our challenge.

Atco = downhill ski slope + 35-40^F air + 31.00+"Hg barometric pressure = .5-6. and 4-5mph faster than anywhere in the US.

[wesman]

Atco = downhill ski slope + 35-40^F air + 31.00+"Hg barometric pressure = .5-6. and 4-5mph faster than anywhere in the US.

Which isn't bad if you can get it :) :beer:

--wes

[WA 2 FST]

Which isn't bad if you can get it :) :beer:

--wes

No doubt. However, when people get on the internet forums and "claim" to have the fastest such-and-such out there... and I find out they race anywhere in the northeast, it changes everything in my mind drastically.

A "good air" day in Texas is average for them.

[03LightningRocks]

If any of you guys make it to Houston next week you should be running 2-3 tenths quicker than here at Ennis. I Always run quicker at Houston than Ennis. As a matter of fact....I know a couple Yankees that have their best times ever from Houston.

Having actually raced all over the country, I can tell you that there usually isn't more than a 2-3 tenths difference between tracks if you take the weather out of the equation. I have run like a "bat out of hell" at Hallsville on a "good weather" day, and then gone back with similar conditions and run like crap due to bad track conditions.

It's kind of like hunting or fishing. Hit the spot on the right day and you can't go wrong. Hit the same spot on the wrong day and you can't go right.

Rocks;)

[WA 2 FST]

Yes, HRP is always a bit quicker than Ennis given the same type weather. If nothing else it runs south to north, so you can get any prevailing wind.

But, you have to take weather into account, I believe. In fact, I don't think its so much the actual _track_ itself as it _is_ the weather/air conditions. You will not see -2000' DA in Texas. It doesn't matter where you race. You will see this often at Englishtown and Atco.

Just like Bandimere in CO is a neat track. It's not slow b/c the track sucks. It's slow b/c its @ 5000' altitude. DA's are typically in the 5500-6500'. That's going to be possibly a second slower than HRP, no matter what.

[03LightningRocks]

Yes, HRP is always a bit quicker than Ennis given the same type weather. If nothing else it runs south to north, so you can get any prevailing wind.

But, you have to take weather into account, I believe. In fact, I don't think its so much the actual _track_ itself as it _is_ the weather/air conditions. You will not see -2000' DA in Texas. It doesn't matter where you race. You will see this often at Englishtown and Atco.

Just like Bandimere in CO is a neat track. It's not slow b/c the track sucks. It's slow b/c its @ 5000' altitude. DA's are typically in the 5500-6500'. That's going to be possibly a second slower than HRP, no matter what.

I have witnessed DA's at Ennis in the 600 ft range and as high as 3600 ft range. I have been in New Hampshire and watched DA's in a range of 300 ft and as high as 2500 ft. This in a single weekend. Atlanta last week we had a DA of 3700 ft. on Friday and then on Sunday 400ft and everybody was breaking out. Weather is the big issue. Even on our best times list, the best numbers always seem to pop up after the Fall/Winter weather moves in.

Anybody that thinks they are going to run a half second quicker at Atco in the same weather conditions is just fooling themselves. Maybe 2-3 tenths at most.

The point I am making is that if a person goes out to Hallsville and runs in a DA of 600 ft...and then goes to the Northeast and runs in the same DA, he will find his ET's running the same. Now other factors like a tailwind or head wind may change this. But then that is related to weather again.

[WA 2 FST]

Oh, I agree completely with you there, Rocks. DA is DA... doesn't matter where you are on the map. :) I have also seen Ennis ~600' (which is close to its true elevation anyway), and I've seen HRP in the negative range. :D

[L8 APEX]

Atco = downhill ski slope + 35-40^F air + 31.00+"Hg barometric pressure = .5-6. and 4-5mph faster than anywhere in the US.
Yeah, Cartek was claiming mid to low 10's on stock cubes and head cam combos only. They never ran close at any other track and refused to travel anywhere as requested by many members and tuners around the country. The day they ran was -1600 or so DA.

[Mark #2]

Didn't feel like searching,
What is and how is DA calculated(I understand the concept not the calculation)

[WA 2 FST]

Yeah, Cartek was claiming mid to low 10's on stock cubes and head cam combos only. They never ran close at any other track and refused to travel anywhere as requested by many members and tuners around the country. The day they ran was -1600 or so DA.

Exactly. You compare the times run by a car at -1600DA vs. one at 1000-2000' DA, and you will easily see .3-.4 in ET and 4-5mph gain. The difference is huge.

[03LightningRocks]

Holy Crap!!!!!!!!! -1600 ???? Yeah, that would definitely make a huge difference over running at say 2000 or so. If I am not mistaken, I believe JL scored his and his customers best times at Atco in about 40 degree weather. I bet the density altitude was in the negatives that day too.

[WA 2 FST]

Exactly. That's the kind of stuff I'm talking about. ;)

There's a guy who is a very respected "hot foot" who races late model Vettes. He managed an 11.89/119 with a _bone stock_ C5 Z06 on stock tires. He is very honest (something most shops who are in it to make money are not) and meticulous about keeping records/books and sharing them. Well, he raced at Englishtown when he ran this time and had a DA of -750', I believe. Now, I wouldn't be able to run that time with a stock C5 Z06, b/c I'm not as accomplished with the car... but I'd have run better than 12.3 @ 116 here in Texas.

He also recently bought a C6 Z06 and has run a best of 11.2 @ 127mph on stock tires... conditions were close to that above.

When you get to practice a lot AND you have a track that is consistently showing -500 to -1000 DA's... you'll get some outrageous times.

If someone wants to pay my way up there, I'll hit 140mph in my TT Z06. :D

[StormShadow]

www.Proturbokits.com (http://www.Proturbokits.com)

Anyone have any input on the above kit? I don't think it would run close to optimum without at least a 2400-2800 stall converter, but the kit looks nice from the pics and vid.

I found these guys in Houston that offer a single turbo kit. It makes over 620 rwhp and 680 rwtq on pump gas at only 15 lbs of boost and they claim to have made 760rwhp and 825rwtq with the single turbo kit on a built motor 2000 Lightning.

http://www.psimotorsprts.com/

[WA 2 FST]

The kit looks decent enough... love the way the truck leaves nice and easy off the line and goes straight. Loading up the turbo against the converter will definitely make for a good launch.

However, did you guys hear the "box of rocks" on the first two vids. Sounded like massive detonation ... it goes away as soon as he crosses the finish line, so I don't think it was track noise.

John's truck is very sweet, though!