View Full Version : 331 dyno results


vee
Mar 7th, 06, 07:48 PM
I have been reading post about building a good 327 street motor, and put together what I thought would be a good combo:
327 .030 over
flat top pistons
edelbrock performer heads 64cc, 2.02/1.60
crane energizer 216/216 @ .050. .454/.454 cam
edelbrock air gap intake
1.5 alum roller rockers
speed demon 650 carb
hooker headers
2004r trans with 2000 lockup
10 bolt 3.08 open rear end, ( have a 12 bolt 3.73 stored)

Today took the 69 camaro for dyno tuning, first the afr was 10.0:1 at idle, got it to 13.7, and started the dyno run. the car made 236 rwhp and 289 ft/lbs, but was at 14.7:1 afr at WOT, so we aborted , time to change jets I guess on next trip, I was thinking the car would make 300rwhp. What do you guys think is missing?

bmax
Mar 7th, 06, 08:33 PM
first guess would be too small a cam.
what rpms were the numbers generated?

these smaller motors like rpm's.

Brad

JOHN WILSON
Mar 7th, 06, 08:42 PM
What do you guys think is missing?

Proper tuning.

If that combo made 265-270hp on the chassis dyno I use I'd be happy.

Granny's 69
Mar 7th, 06, 08:43 PM
Assuming you are loosing about 25% of your power in the drivetrain, you are probably making about 300HP at the flywheel. There may be more gains to be be had with tuning, but not enough to get 300RWHP. Like was mentioned, maybe a little more cam. BTW, how does your combo run on the street and does that 216/216 cam have any lope to it?

onovakind67
Mar 7th, 06, 09:18 PM
It looks way lean if you're at 14.7:1 a/f ratio at WOT. Were these tests done with the converter locked or unlocked?

vee
Mar 7th, 06, 11:16 PM
Thanx for the replys, the numbers were generated between 5000-5800rpm, I had a bigger cam in the car and it was a dog at low rpms on the street, the crane 216/216 cam has a slight lope, but the low end torque is much better than the big cam that was in the car, I dont know if the converter was locked up, i would think so, but not sure. The car runs pretty good now for being out of tune, I would say a nice street cruiser, but much slower than my gen 1 viper. I should have had a better plan motor wise before the car was finished, it looks better than it runs. I see a motor change or supercharger on the horizon. I kept telling myself just a nice cruiser, because i have other go fast stuff, but I am not satisfied with the small motor so far.

pdq67
Mar 8th, 06, 06:21 AM
My mildly hopped up 300hp/327 ran like a "scalded-dog" with that cam!

But with an M-20 and 3.31's is all.

Only thing that would make it better would be a small solid lifter cam so she can rpm up to at least 7,000 rpm easy with good valve springs.

Like a an old Duntov -097 and CC 270S and several other little ones will..

pdq67

Granny's 69
Mar 8th, 06, 10:12 AM
The 216/216@.050 cam should be a good street cam. You mentioned that you had a bigger cam in your 327 at one time and it didn't run well. How big was the "bigger cam"? BTW,What's your ignition curve like?

John65nova
Mar 9th, 06, 06:40 AM
I really would not expect much more than 300-325 FLYWHEEL HP from that combo. I think RWHP in the 250-260 range is probably about right.