Corvette Z06 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
204 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have the current setup on my z06 and don't seem to have the power I expected. Cam only I made 433. I now make 462. I was expecting 480+. I found out that the company I ordered the heads from screwed up and didn't mill them to 59cc. They are 66cc. Would this cause me to lose the power that I was expecting? People with this setup and 66cc heads only what are you making. I have seen many posts, but most are related to the 59cc heads.
Thanks!
-matt
__________________
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,957 Posts
You'll be glad down the road when the highest quality gas isn't around...With your compression at or slightly below stock LS6 heads you won't have an issue with oil consumption. (so someone who I respect with regards to corvettes suggested to me when I was discussing compression on a set of AFR heads...)

Dyno tunes have an error factor of at least 1 or 2 % so I wouldn't sweat the peak numbers..

How is the power throughout the powerband and hows your torque...?

Torque numbers and power throughout the power band would be more important to me if I was looking for the improvement from a set of heads...

The 66cc vs 59 should if I remember only be worth a few hp...maybe 10 peak but talk to a few guys who couldn't get the car to run on local high test after their great dyno tune and you might not be as concerned.

If it were me? I'd be very pleased with the results.

Congratulations and often times there is the intricacies (sp) of the ls1edit that can lead to a few peak hp as well...

Talk with Lou and I bet he would tell you its the average hp and torque made throughout the powerband that matters most...(especially on the road or DE events) Peaks over overrated..

JMO

HTH
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,514 Posts
ss2z06 said:
I have the current setup on my z06 and don't seem to have the power I expected. Cam only I made 433. I now make 462. I was expecting 480+. I found out that the company I ordered the heads from screwed up and didn't mill them to 59cc. They are 66cc. Would this cause me to lose the power that I was expecting? People with this setup and 66cc heads only what are you making. I have seen many posts, but most are related to the 59cc heads.
Thanks!
-matt
__________________

462 sounds like a good number. I had the 66cc 205 afr's and 228-232xer cam, L.G. longtubes and got 438rwhp.... So sounds like you are doing good at 462. I got rid of that set up and switch to a 427 to get over that 500 mark.


Chris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
204 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I am in the process of checking my map sensor because we are getting some weird readings from it. I had to run a tube from the intake to the map and it may be collapsing. If this is a problem will this account for any loss of hp?
-matt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,851 Posts
You might have lost a bit with the larger chambers. But being that you are in Cali, and you basically have access to only 91 octane fuel, you are probably better off with being at or near stock compression.

I have the same set-up as you (except I have Kooks, not LG's...I might be giving up some torque) with the 59cc chambers (CR ~ 11.2) and my car dyno'd at 470rwhp. Considering this was done with 4.10 gears and most people tell me that with the 3.42's I'd have gotten an extra 10 or so rwhp (but the 4.10's are oh so nice :thumb: ) then your expectation of 480 would be about right. Of course, this was done on 93 octane fuel.

Don
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Cam only 433.Wow.I did head,cam(228/588/112)Kooks headers,etc.etc.etc. from 21st. Century and got 441.Must be some cam.Don't get me wrong,I am not doubting you,nor griping about mine.Just seems high.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,851 Posts
nitro said:
Cam only 433. .Just seems high.

Actually, this is a pretty typical result for the G5x3 coupled with the LG headers sans cats. :yeadog: Most of the Z's I've seen with this combo dyno between 425-435 rwhp. :cheers:

Don
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Don,thanks.Now that its cooler I would like to have mine dynoed again.It was 114 degees when it was done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,851 Posts
nitro said:
Don,thanks.Now that its cooler I would like to have mine dynoed again.It was 114 degees when it was done.
114 degrees! :jawdrop: I'd say it would be a great idea to have that puppy re-dyno'd. SAE correction or not, I got to believe your numbers will be much better in some cooler, drier weather. :yeadog:
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
21,354 Posts
Like everyone has been saying, having the 66cc chambers might be a blessing in disguise. There will be a lot less problems with KR and P to V issues. Your HP figures are respectable, to me anyways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
jub jub said:
Like everyone has been saying, having the 66cc chambers might be a blessing in disguise. There will be a lot less problems with KR and P to V issues. Your HP figures are respectable, to me anyways.

I agree..it was meant to be from the "big guy" above!:thumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,152 Posts
Those are good numbers. I would be happy with those. :cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
i think those are very good numbers with 66cc heads you will gain more with 59cc heads but with 91 octane gas it will be knocking....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
109 Posts
Those are good #'s......

Compression would probably get you 7-10rwhp....

Its better where it is, because like stated above, thats gonna be easier on those pistons....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
those seem to be healthy numbers, some dynos are with 100-octane, no belts etc etc...if you got above 400rwtq that is very good also....what I would really love to see is some track numbers from the G5X-3 and AFR heads...how that hp gets down the track is key ... I have seen C5s with 75 less rwhp pull 450rwhp C5s (not just a better launch)...regardless 462 is a very respectable number, congratulations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
What were your TQ numbers...Peak HP is not the end-all "judge" when it comes to a car's performance - compare the cam only and AFR cures and look at the power at different RPM bands.

LS6 heads are great flowing heads and when done correct will flow more than AFRs..problem is you gain alot of port volume and lose air velocity which creates low TQ numbers. The AFRs are an amazing head.

Be happy with 462 on 91 octane...these numbers are great.

BTW - You can always open up for FAST 90 for 5-7 more HP with some porting.

Bill
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,014 Posts
ss2z06 said:
I have the current setup on my z06 and don't seem to have the power I expected. Cam only I made 433. I now make 462. I was expecting 480+. I found out that the company I ordered the heads from screwed up and didn't mill them to 59cc. They are 66cc. Would this cause me to lose the power that I was expecting? People with this setup and 66cc heads only what are you making. I have seen many posts, but most are related to the 59cc heads.
Thanks!
-matt
__________________
Matt, everyone is making great points and your current setup sounds great. I always tell people not to get too caught up in the dyno numbers. But, I completely understand your point. I have 433 rwhp cam only right now and would be dissapointed as well with 462. I'm hoping for 50rwhp from the heads and tweaks. For peace of mind I would get it redynoed on a better day and see if they can tweak things a bit. Or run it at the track and let us know how it goes. I'm sure the car's a beast the way it is but for the money we spend we want to be sure there's nothing wrong. Do some investigating and good luck
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
971 Posts
W/ good LS6 heads and that cam, you would be at 480-510 r.w.h.p. with all the goods you have on that car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
204 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
It made 423 tq. We are still tuning it currently and hope to get more out of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
423rwtq is darn respectable...stop tuning and drive it.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top