LaFiera

277WHP @ 6000RPM & 300WTQ @ 4500RPM

-Stock 1994 Camaro block, crank and rods.
-3.4 DOHC stock pistons (10.85:1 Compression ratio)
-Supernatural Monaco Camshaft (Solid lifter camshaft)
-Stock CNC Iron heads with oversized valves (1.8int & 1.5exh) with stock stem diameter (11/32 not 7mm like the aluminum heads).
-1.6 Aluminum full roller rockers
-Supernatural Funnel Ram intake with 58mm TPI Throttle body.
-Custom headers and Short exhaust. (Flame thrower)
-Distributor ignition (Upgraded to DIS after this Dyno)





So, with stock engine parts and some ingenuity you can make power with this little engine! Turbo would be following the trend and too easy. Imagine if I decide to go turbo!
Its not just about the power, its also about how fast that power is delivered for faster acceleration!

LaFiera

This is how she sounds from the outside

This is how she shounds from the inside.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

I think your dyno is a bit optimistic...

There have been many, many NA iron head builds and most BARELY crest 200 HP, and they have a LOT more done to them than what you list here, though your intake IS unique and I bet it probably works well, but not well enough to have an extra 40 to 70 HP over other builds.

LaFiera

I completely understand you SIX, I get reactions like these from people very often. Specially when is from someone they've never heard of that has done something impossible according to common practice.

thtanner

iTrader: (1)

I have never laughed so hard at a response in my life.

OrangeBird

iTrader: (1)

...

OrangeBird

iTrader: (1)

Watching the video you posted in post #2 I could see that you were having fun and moving fast , , , Raw HP numbers be damned your engine sounds great to me !

LaFiera

Thanks mate! Sounds much better in person!

1slow8t3

What size primary's are on the headers?

LaFiera

1-1/2 OD primaries with 2-1/2 OD collectors

fasteddi

iTrader: (2)

Very cool build, but I'd like to see what some real weight to power data would show on say a 1/4 mile track. Seems a bit high considering but either way man, nice build and nice to see ppl are still tinkering with the ole gen 1 iron.

LaFiera

Thanks for the complement Fasteddi! I'm not a 1/4 mile guy but the car weights 2260 at the scales and you know the power I'm making.
Its pretty fast from a dead stop but faster from a rolling start.
I'll maybe get to the drag strip one day but then again is not my thing, I'm not into rabbit sex!
Watched the 385sbc pass, pretty impressive. Keep it up!

fasteddi

iTrader: (2)

Thanks and....Jezzz 2260 wow. Lightest I ever was is 3000 on the dot with the turbo 3.1/3100 hybrid w/o me in it. 3180 race weight. Ya you're light I bet it's a fun ride forsure!! I'm running a 509 bbc all motor low compression pump gas set up now. It's a heavy ride. 3575 race weight but manages to run 10.30s@130mph thankfully. Fun little street strip car.

Tootie Pang

iTrader: (2)

Awesome looking air moving system. That thing is made to breathe. Well done. I believe it.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

I agree with Fasteddi...

Take it to a drag strip and post the time. It's a 1320 foot long dyno that doesn't lie.

I've seen dyno charts manipulated to be anywhere from about 200 HP to about 1500 HP on the same run, just by applying different correct factors, and that was on an 1100 HP engine BTW. Once I was shown this I lost all faith in dyno charts and went back to trusting the 1320 foot long dyno only.

It's not that I don't know who are, it's that I know these engines well, and the restriction is in the heads, not the intake, not the exhaust, not the cam... but the heads and unless you've done something that you haven't mentioned, like welded up the intake ports and reshaped them extensively, or your dyno is well below sea level, then I have my doubts that it's making what you claim. People using the FWD heads that flow far, far, far better than even "race" ported iron heads struggle to make 250 HP NA, though I do believe in those cases an intake similar to yours would have helped.

We've had many, many people over the years come in here and claim some extraordinary numbers on their engine's power output and none have been able to back it up, in a way that we could accept as accurate.

Extraordinary claims take extraordinary proof, and so far I'm not see it.

LaFiera

Yes Pang, that's exactly what it is, an "Air Moving System". I'm glad you understand the concept!

LaFiera

Well Shooter you don't have to believe me but now I understand why!
You said "I know these engines very well and the restriction is in the head"! That statement convinces me to believe you don't know these engines at all.


Now, I find this extraordinary!! More cubes than me, the almighty Aluminum P&P heads, big roller cam and ITBs and still didn't hit the 300WHP!!!
Big is better right?! It's not about throwing a bunch of big parts together and hope they work, its about an entire "Air Moving System" like Tootie Pang described in post #14

AM91Camaro_RS

I'm here to see more proof, too. I built a 3.1 several years ago for my 91 Camaro. Finally managed a 14.97 sec 1/4 mile pass, at sea level. Your car weighs considerably less so I have no doubts you'll be able to run that or faster but, I'd like to see it. Mine showed like 135hp at the wheels on the dyno. I didnt really believe my dyno numbers either.

LaFiera

Drive train failures I've had after installing this 3.4 In the 1st picture It killed the tripod in the axle. After installing 2 new axles then I cracked the case of the transmission.
And after installing an F23 trans it just sheared the long axle. As you can see parts can't take the abuse like you RWD folks can. You guys are blessed with all that RWD
beefy rear ends. Imagine if I go to a dragway with sticky asphalt, I'll brake again!!! I wouldn't mind going to a drag to see its potential but I'm afraid I'll break something else!
At least in road racing is less stressful on the drivetrain. I just talked to a local shop that makes a set of axles that I can use that can support 700hp but its $1000 bucks!
I'll have to break my piggy bank!

LaFiera

I had the day off today and took the car to the dyno for the first time on E85 but since some of you accused me of tampering with the dyno I think I will not post anything here any more.
Moderator, please ban me.

Ciao!

1slow8t3

Interesting... they look larger! Must be the silver paint! Lol

if you are making 250hp at 2500lbs you should be able to run 12.6's or trap 108mph. If you got a 13.2 I'm sure more would believe the hp. It would be interesting to see what a aluminium head engine would do with the same engine building theory applied! Most 3x00's are stock bottom ends with a decent set of ported heads.

also the track usually cost less than a dyno session too!

fasteddi

iTrader: (2)

Man, your set up with a gen 3 top end would be killer
although I do belive the gen 1 restriction is the heads and intake as well. I only say this because of my experiences, although mine are all boost related, specifically a turbo.

It just amazed me the difference from a turbo 3.1 gen 1 with ported heads...ported well to, which ran 12.80s@105mph ish to stock 3400 gen 3 top end that ran 12.20s@112mph ish right out the gate. Eventually ran mid 11s at 118-120mph all day long (15psi bw s366x) Same cam, same turbo for the 12 second passes, same boost level (10psi gt3582r), just switched to gen 3 top and dis ignition. So in the power adder area, the heads and intake are much much better flow wise. Cant even compare them But i cant speak on na set ups like what you have.

I'd love to see you make a pass at the track. If you can manage a good 60 foot. 1.80 or better, you'll be a low 13 sec car all day in would think which is damn impressive even in a light car.

I bet that lil car is like a bad *** go cart on the street!

LaFiera

And then I ran out of injector and then I called it quit. Also It didn't want to enrichen when I comanded more fuel. Like the pump was giving up or the filter was plugged.
I can work on making that torque line flatter. I can still squeeze a couple of ponys more once I upgrade the pump and injectors.
Some notes:
It gained about 60lbs/ft of torque @ 3000RPM and about 50lbs/ft of torque @ 6000RPM compared to the previous dyno!

304WHP@6000RPM
309WTQ@5000RPM



Overall I'm pretty happy with the results!

For the lovers of engine sound.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

You're doing something very wrong if you're breaking parts with an iron head 60 degree V6. People with a LOT more (known and proven) power with similar and same drivelines in FWD cars and Fieros are NOT breaking parts.

I'll await the 1320 dyno numbers, because I'm very sure that the incorrect correction factor is being used, especially after that last dyno sheet, or there's a power adder of some sort being used (nitrous, turbo...) and not being mentioned. Iron heads can simply not flow enough to support that kind of power in NA form, period. You'd have to completely rework them, meaning welding up the ports, and reshaping them very, very extensively to be more like the FWD heads with raised ports.

LaFiera

So you think CFM bench flow is the only thing that dictates how much power an engine makes? Now I understand your attitude towards my achievement.
But here, read the article below and expand your knowledge so you can stop repeating wrong information.
Mr. Reher is a REAL engine builder, not an amateur like you and me.
I thought I was the only one who didn't pay much attention to bench flow CFM numbers on heads. Then I found this article from an expert that proved me I had the right approach.
https://rehermorrison.com/tech-talk-...he-flow-bench/

34blazer

That's a mean sounding 660.

I too, am skeptical of the dyno conversion used, especially since your thread is a carryover from PFF. That was a contentious thread in which went nowhere. This thread is no different as it doesn't further your argument that 70's technology is better than more modern technology. If using raw dyno numbers your combo barely adds up to a modern LZx or LX9 with the same SCR, cam events, and intake. I still find it hilarious that you still use superdave's 260hp dyno from when he had his Camaro......ignoring the fact that it was through an unlocked converter, lower SCR, etc. We've been through this, and lying in an attempt to win a losing battle is pretty feckless. I can put together an LZ4 with 11:1 SCR, wild solid cam, and not even need a CNC program to port those heads and absolutely smoke a gen1 3.4.

With the whole argument aside, I still think it's a sweet build and sounds really nice. I think you should run with that and forget about the old iron head vs aluminum head argument.

LaFiera

Thanks Blazer and is a blast to drive and with 300+WHP pushing it is a trip!
Can wait to see how she feels when I install my 3.7 with upgraded Iron heads. I think I can break into the 350WHP! N/A

34blazer

Cool 😎

I'd be interested in some racing videos. I follow Ari Rajamaki with his 3100 circuit racer at 8k and enjoy the way that monster sings.

LaFiera

That is the plan! I built this to compete in the Time Trial events at the SCCA region that I instruct.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

HAHAHAHAHAHA

You think I'm talking about bench flow numbers only... AND are you ACTUALLY suggesting that the actual flow through a head has no bearing on what an engine can produce? HAHAHAHAHAHA

Like I said You're NOT making the power you think you are, the iron heads ON THESE ENGINES, no matter how ported, no matter how worked, other than like I already said to completely reshape them with welding them up, no matter what other parts you use in NA form, just can not support the kind of power you're claiming, period, end of story, just CAN'T happen with the way physics and fluid dynamics work. With some form of power adder yes, but not in NA form. The port shape is terrible for promoting air flow into the cylinder no matter what kind of tricks you do before the head flange or after the exhaust flange or how much you squeeze the chamber. Resonance will only do so much and I believe your intake has helped, but no where near the amount you are claiming.

Again, many people have built much more involved, and stout engines than you're claiming, and have not been able to get anywhere near your numbers.

Nothing in that article has said anything I haven't or supported any claims you've made. The only point it makes is that the port flow numbers are not the entire story, but they are a LARGE part of the story when it comes to making power. Like anything it has to be a package, but you can't magically make 25 to 40% more power than anyone else has made just because you may have a different intake or cam than someone else has used.

HP is made by getting more air crammed into the cylinder along with more fuel. The 60 degree V6 iron heads just can not support the kind of air flow needed for the horsepower you are claiming, if they could, there would have been many of these engines already making that kind of power for a long time now. Even GM knew the limitations of these heads and is why they recommended using the FWD heads, where race rules would allow (from their Engine building manuals, starting in 1987, when the FWD head was introduced).

Take your car to the 1320 foot long dyno, post your slip and vehicle weight and that will be a MUCh more real indication of the power you're making. A video of the run will a good idea too. It's very easy to use the wrong correction factor, and you or the dyno operator may not be doing it intentionally, but I very much see that as being the case here.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

Wait... I see how you're getting such high dyno numbers... you're doing pulls in 3rd gear... Try using 4th, which is almost 1:1 (0.94 for the HM282, which is what I assume you're using, I didn't see any mention of the trans you're using), and that will give a better indication of the power you're making.

Also trying to use Superdave's car as a "wrong parts" bench mark is only hurting your story. His combination was never fully optimized and I do believe a better intake that was designed from the ground up for ITBs would work far better than the setup he had (it used a stock LIM, which has poor runner designed for ITBs IMO), and a better exhaust system that used tuned length headers for his desired RPM range would have helped as well. Those runs he made with the air filter housing in place, which he said really choked the engine, but didn't want to drive around without a filter. That was also wheel horsepower through an automatic trans, so he was very likely over 300HP.

fasteddi

iTrader: (2)

Hes using 3rd gear on a manual to dyno??? Well thats strange... what's the ratio...1.38?

QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

It's not uncommon for people with manual trans to dyno tune in 3rd gear because it's easier on the clutch. Ram clutches actually recommends that for my dual disc clutch. But if you're going to post numbers on the fridge for mom and brag to your buddies, then you better get in the right gear (1:1).

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

I've never heard of anyone using other than the 1:1 gear or as close to with any transmission, especially since using a lower gear is going to multiply torque which will skew numbers, increasing them beyond actual. If any manufacturer recommended to me to use any but the 1:1 gear (or as close as there is), I wouldn't use that clutch, sounds like a shitty clutch to me, if it can't handle a dyno pull in the 1:1 gear.

Yes, 3rd gear is 1.38:1.

QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

Well, good news is from today forward you can no longer say you've never heard it.

You can tune the engine in Horsepower or Goatpower. Doesn't matter whether you're in 3rd or 4th as long as the engine is adequately loaded and doesn't spin up too fast. Comparing your results to other people means you need to be in 4th gear though.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

I've looked on the Ram Clutches website and any mention of chassis dyno there seems to be no mention of using 3rd gear for pulls, just that a chassis dyno will cause one of the highest loads on the clutch, which is a given.

Like I said, using any other gear than 1:1 (or as close to as in the trans you are using), skews the numbers, so they become meaningless and using a lower gear the engine WILL rev quicker than in a higher gear, hell might as well use first then, take all of the load off the engine/clutch... if the gear doesn't matter...

So in short it absolutely DOES matter what gear is being used, beyond just comparing to other people... but since the OP wants to compare to other people, it matters just from that standpoint, let alone being completely wrong way to test for power using a chassis dyno.

Tootie Pang

iTrader: (2)

I'd like to see some trap speeds... easy enough...

and from engineers themselves (informally) https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=91122

QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

Look, all I did was share a tidbit of info for people that might be interested. I actually use Ram's top dog street clutch and have more info than you can find on the website. I've had conversations with Mike Norcia about this too when I had my clutch rebuilt. It appears your first instinct is to argue, and thinking is secondary to keeping an argument alive.

As far as the dyno tuning, the problem again is your instinct to argue instead of think. You can't even recognize when we're on the same page for gosh sakes! And if that's the case, then how can I possibly discuss with you other details? So I'm checking out of this conversation because it's not profitable.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

Good for you, but I like to put an end to BS information before it gains any traction, and that's why I am replying to what you said (clutch manufacturers recommending using 3rd gear), it's not arguing, it's just pointing out errors of what you said. If you see that as arguing than most things people say are arguing. *shrug* I tried to find information to verify what you are saying and found nothing that would confirm that. I've not once ever read that, or been told that by anyone (except you), including clutch manufacturers or dyno operators, because it will skew the numbers, I've always heard, read, discussed, watched, etc that the 1:1 gear is the one to use for power testing, and have done so in my own vehicles.

I don't see us being on the same page other than to compare one engine to another to be in 4th, which agreed with you on..., maybe I should have said at the end "I agree", but I didn't think it was necessary... *shrug*