Wow, Apparantly I wasted my $$ and the Auto factory lie's alot . . .

[cumminsdzl]

I don't think the numbers are terrible for a TBI 350. Like was said above, they only made 200 or 205 at the crank in 95, so figure in maybe 25% drivetrain loss and you are at 150hp at the wheels.

Now you have 190 at the wheels with a sloppy tranny, big axles, big tires, and heavy wheels....All those things could easily add up to a 30% drivetrain loss. If that is true, you could be making in the 280 to 290 range at the crank. Not to bad for a mildly built tbi 350....


All this is assuming the numbers you gave are at the wheels....

 

[drkelly]

I would bet 99% of the time people spout off their power numbers, they are WAY over inflated. Most people are just regurgitating what the product manufactures state.

 

[dlbrando]

when it came time for an engine swap in the cherokee, I looked at the cost of building a small block vs going with a stroker. I looked at 350's and 4.6 and 5.0 fords. Went with the stroker because a stock or lightly modified 350 just does not make that much power. In order to get the same amount of torque to the wheels I was gonna spend almost double

 

[Punkskalar]

I dunno Ricky, I've got a mostly stock 2.4 Liter 4 Cylinder engine in my Mistubishi (non-turbo) that put out 165 HP and 178 Ft. Lbs on the dyno... Plenty of torque and peppy enough to have fun with... 30 MPG Highway too...

Maybe you should reconsider your talents?

 

[lomodyj]

I would bet 99% of the time people spout off their power numbers, they are WAY over inflated. .

329/700 Right off the dino sheet. And I prolly have less in my CTD at this point than Rickey has in his 1/2 ton thing. I do know that my 3500 will pull my 5000# Jeep and trailer up Black Mountain at 60MPH. Without the Jeep and trailer...I smoke (literally ) ricers any day...Why you messing with gas?

 

[Ron]

I would bet 99% of the time people spout off their power numbers, they are WAY over inflated. Most people are just regurgitating what the product manufactures state.

BINGO!


Just like all the straight line boys.
My K&N will shave off 3 tenths
My Underdrive pulley kit saves another 2 tenths.

Me and an old friend once figured out that if you took a pick up truck and put enough of these products in the bed, you would officially finish the race before you got to the start line.

All that said, Ricky you are hearing it over and over again, driveline losses are killing you, BUT either you have another issue, or you need to look into tuning a bit more.You should be able to get close to 350 AT THE CRANK, with a 30% driveline loss youd still be around 245.

 

[35xj]

Jim your breaking my heart man.
I thought my TBI 350 ran at least 400 degrees!

fixed it for you

 

[bcammons21]

im sure the sloppy tranny aint helping.
when i dyno'd my dakota back in the day i put down like 130 hp and 200 lbs of torque.
rated at 220? hp and 300 ft. lbs factory.
So i lost 90 ft lbs throguh 33s and 3.55's, but compensated with headers and no cat.
It was still dog shit. but i say more of a 25-30% loss through drivetrain but everyone has their own opinion.

 

[Rich]

when i dyno'd my dakota back in the day i put down like 130 hp and 200 lbs of torque.
rated at 220? hp and 300 ft. lbs factory.
So i lost 90 ft lbs throguh 33s and 3.55's, but compensated with headers and no cat.
It was still dog shit. but i say more of a 25-30% loss through drivetrain but everyone has their own opinion.

My guess is based on (last time I heard):

35" tires on steelies
14b axle
geared 4.88
failing trans

is that he's got more than 30% loss..

 

[Ricky B]

Yes this is at the rear wheels with those 36" hummer tires bent steel rims (yea I can watch them all wobble ) 4.88's 14 bolt and a tranny that is bout shot runnin on lucas stop slip and the tc lockup doesn't work.

Cam I have is 12-402-4 from the chart below, and I have 1.6 roller rockers comes out to .473/.473 max vortec heads can take is .488 I think . . . . stock cam is 350/350 lift - very sucky

block was built/bored by some big rebuild place in SC, near Laurens I think, i put the rest of the stuff together

We dyno'd it like 7 times, the reason it was on there in the first place was to tune it, we never could get it right thou because we got what you see in the chart below everything running great but it wouldn't run like that on the road at all. I have to go Back again and try and get it tuned even they guy who does this everyday for a living can't figure out why it won't tune quite right. For some reason right at 2000 rpm's it stumbles(among other things but thats the main problem) unfortunatly 2000 rpm is right where most of the driving I do is. Plus I have no idea what the deal is with my tranny, if it were up to me I'd just throw the whole damn truck in the scrap pile, i made a guestimate from all the stuff I bought over the years pretty sure i've spent over 27,000 on this truck (6 years time)

w/e I'm just tired of messin with it, lucky me I'm stuck with it probably for the next 5 to 6 years at least I mean I wouldn't sell it anyway I'd just park it, I refuse to sell something I spent so much on for like 6 grand I'd blow it up before I did that.

Anyway as you can tell I'm still pissed, but w/e, I'll get over it, I'll just be grouchy for a while

 

[rockmafia]

Do you have a stock chip?

 

[Ricky B]

We went throu like 10 chips trying to get it right, but yea I still have my stock chip . . . why?

 

[bcammons21]

I would say you have alot of loss cause your TC doesnt lock up but thats just a guess on my part.
and whats the story with the gap in the graph?

 

[302cj]

I am one of the straight line guys. Considering what all you have and the couple of little problems that should be about right hp wise. I had a freind to dyno his DD mustang at the rock a year or so ago and he made 191 hp at 5700rpms. to the wheels with a sloppy ass AOD. Thats with basically a stock induction and heads as you have. Just my $0.02

 

[braxton357]

When I said 205hp for your caddy motor in the dyno thread, I wasn't kidding. Chassis dyno's don't lie (though, you will get different numbers from different mfr's). SAE gross hp and at the wheels hp are far different. Especially with the big-assed tires, axles, tcase and trans you have on that "z71". Expect around a 30% loss due to the drivetrain on a large truck like that...which would put your numbers right about where they should be. That's also why when you hear about a cummins making "only 450hp and 900ftlbs", you should show some respect. Because it's really making almost 600hp and 1100ftlbs. It's all in how you state the numbers. Just like the factories used SAE gross in the 60's vs. net in the early 70's+ to make the numbers larger.
No shit you can't break 36's loose with a pretty much stock sbc...it's a tow rig and dd, you don't need to...you need something that will get you from raleigh to mooresville without falling apart and tow your junk decently as well.

 

[Rich]

...and a tranny that is bout shot runnin on lucas stop slip and the tc lockup doesn't work.

That's your biggest issue... You're losing a BUNCH of power there, how much depends on how sloppy the TC's "fluid coupling" is.

So with all that, your engine probably isn't so bad.

My number for the caddy motor still stands, and do you now see why I was so skeptical about the numbers you were talking?

 

[Erik]

That's your biggest issue... You're losing a BUNCH of power there, how much depends on how sloppy the TC's "fluid coupling" is.

So with all that, your engine probably isn't so bad.

absolutely correct..... if anything i'd address the t.c. lockup issue at the very least before dynoing again....

my buddy's $10k engine only made 300whp with a slipping clutch installed a new clutch and tripled his power! you get the idea...

 

[dankeenan]

Wow your graph looks terrible. The graph should not be that rough, it should be a lot smoother ,what smoothing is the dyno graph set to? Your air/fuel looks pretty steady (except at the end of the run) so I bet the tranny issues you mentioned are causing a lot of the roughness and power loss. The gap in the curve is most likely slipping in the tranny ( the dyno has a coefficient of engine rpm / rear wheel speed if it gets too high is shows a gap since the drivetrain has slip).
It also appears they are using non corrected power numbers. If you want to compare numbers to anyone else or the factory use SAE corrected values to negate weather conditions.

dan

 

[dlbrando]

the graph looks ok, but your air fuel ratio is trash. It leans way the hell outright at 2.5-3k RPM. Get that right and you will pick up some power.

 

[rran64]

to answer your rpm QS 6800 & no i dont hall nothin but ass with it its a pro steet truck iv got a 2000 for hallin i mad the coment to chevys haveing no hp thats not true and i do have time slips:

 

[rran64]

to answer your rpm QS 6800 & no i dont hall nothin but ass with it its a pro steet truck iv got a 2000 for hallin i mad the coment to chevys haveing no hp thats not true and i do have time slips:

 

[rran64]

he realy needs to try a difrent set up

 

[Ricky B]

I would say you have alot of loss cause your TC doesnt lock up but thats just a guess on my part.
and whats the story with the gap in the graph?

IDK, the lockup used to be bad was locking/unlocking all the time so I replaced the Lockup solenoid and now it doesn't work at all.

The gap was random, it didn't happen on the last 6 pulls

When I said 205hp for your caddy motor in the dyno thread, I wasn't kidding. Chassis dyno's don't lie (though, you will get different numbers from different mfr's). SAE gross hp and at the wheels hp are far different. Especially with the big-assed tires, axles, tcase and trans you have on that "z71". Expect around a 30% loss due to the drivetrain on a large truck like that...which would put your numbers right about where they should be. That's also why when you hear about a cummins making "only 450hp and 900ftlbs", you should show some respect. Because it's really making almost 600hp and 1100ftlbs. It's all in how you state the numbers. Just like the factories used SAE gross in the 60's vs. net in the early 70's+ to make the numbers larger.
No shit you can't break 36's loose with a pretty much stock sbc...it's a tow rig and dd, you don't need to...you need something that will get you from raleigh to mooresville without falling apart and tow your junk decently as well.

Well see thats why I am really mad from all the false information, and mis-advertisement of products that is out there on what I bought, because I did alot of research, apparently everyone lies, If Id'a known the real story I would not have spent $1500 on a damn smallblock when I coulda swapped something else in

That's your biggest issue... You're losing a BUNCH of power there, how much depends on how sloppy the TC's "fluid coupling" is.

So with all that, your engine probably isn't so bad.

My number for the caddy motor still stands, and do you now see why I was so skeptical about the numbers you were talking?

Yea I mean the tranny i shot, when I dropped the pan to change the lockup solenoid the fluid was black and burnt smelling, but it still drives and I just completely wasted every last cent I had In the misguided hope of building a decent towing engine, so until may when I graduate and get a real job I gotta make do with this tranny.

Wow your graph looks terrible. The graph should not be that rough, it should be a lot smoother ,what smoothing is the dyno graph set to? Your air/fuel looks pretty steady (except at the end of the run) so I bet the tranny issues you mentioned are causing a lot of the roughness and power loss. The gap in the curve is most likely slipping in the tranny ( the dyno has a coefficient of engine rpm / rear wheel speed if it gets too high is shows a gap since the drivetrain has slip).
It also appears they are using non corrected power numbers. If you want to compare numbers to anyone else or the factory use SAE corrected values to negate weather conditions.
dan

smoothing was turned off, it was set to standard

absolutely correct..... if anything i'd address the t.c. lockup issue at the very least before dynoing again....
my buddy's $10k engine only made 300whp with a slipping clutch installed a new clutch and tripled his power! you get the idea...

yea tried to address the lockup issue and it stopped working all together

the graph looks ok, but your air fuel ratio is trash. It leans way the hell outright at 2.5-3k RPM. Get that right and you will pick up some power.

haha, you should have seen it before, it was a huge hill lookin thing right there, then he turned the fuel spray all the way up to get it where it was, unfortunately it won't run on the road like that, at all.

 

[Ron]

, but your air fuel ratio is trash. It leans way the hell outright at 2.5-3k RPM.

Looks to me like it falls right on stoich at that range

Ricky, no one is lieing. You are taking there numbers (flywheel gross) and wanting them to equal your test (RWHP net)

Thats akin to taking a job making 60k/year and quitting because you dont bring home 5k your first month, and saying you were lied to...

 

[Ricky B]

Looks to me like it falls right on stoich at that range
Ricky, no one is lieing. You are taking there numbers (flywheel gross) and wanting them to equal your test (RWHP net)
Thats akin to taking a job making 60k/year and quitting because you dont bring home 5k your first month, and saying you were lied to...

Well maybe not directly lieing but def a misrepresentation, like i said I was expecting way more "butt dyno" results for the amount of $$ I spent, and the way everyone raves about how putting on vortec heads is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Def would not have gone this route if Ida known . . .