My R/t was finally put on a Mustang chassis dyno last week after the engine was rebuilt with a stroker kit (500 cid) almost a year ago. I was hoping it would be closer to 650 HP, but I am happy with the torque.
1969 Coronet R/T 500" stroker dyno numbers
- Thread starter 1969CoronetR/T
- Start date
bigbluedodge
Well-Known Member
That motor will be fun. What's in it? (heads, cam, carb, etc)
Eagle rotating assembly, .040 Wiseco pistons, roller camshaft (do not know brand, maybe Comp Cams) Harland Sharp roller hydraulic lifters, high volume Melling oil pump, Moroso Perm-Align valve cover gaskets, 3000 stall converter with ported Indy EZ-1 heads and port matched Indy intake. The cam is 545 lift with a 235/241 duration and 110 lobe separator / 106 centerline. The compression is 9.6 to 1. Holley 750 carburetor or it may be a 850. The heads were ported by Nick Wilson at Compu-Flow who died shortly so I do not know the flow numbers. The horsepower seems low to me at 589 instead of over 600.
Did you just slap it on the dyno with no carb tuning? Do some carb tuning to see what the motor likes along with different timing settings and numbers will probably improve.
He did tune it and after multiple runs.
Hopefully these come through.
Mopars & Missiles
Well-Known Member
- Local time
- 10:03 PM
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2010
- Messages
- 2,074
- Reaction score
- 3,294
- Location
- Northern Indiana
Mark, I'm confused by your numbers. You put the car on a chassis dyno, so the numbers on the printout would be what was seen at the rear wheels? Correct?? Then the handwritten numbers evidently are supposed to be calculated for actual "engine flywheel" HP & torque? Correct??
If I'm interpreting these numbers correctly, that would mean you have a 30% driveline loss. That just seems like a really high amount of loss to me. Can anyone explain this to me? Is 30% realistic?
If I'm interpreting these numbers correctly, that would mean you have a 30% driveline loss. That just seems like a really high amount of loss to me. Can anyone explain this to me? Is 30% realistic?
67convertible
Well-Known Member
One of my BB engines on the dyno came in at 505 HP. and 550 ft.lbs. or torque.. after tuning . Street only engine/car. Then after 300 miles on the engine, placed it on a chassis dyno and the HP came is at 375. equates to a 25.7% loss. Supports the theory that the HP at the rear wheel will be 25-30% less than at the fly wheel.
Mopars & Missiles
Well-Known Member
- Local time
- 10:03 PM
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2010
- Messages
- 2,074
- Reaction score
- 3,294
- Location
- Northern Indiana
OK, I always thought transmission losses were more in the 15 to 20% range. Thanks for the info.
lewtot184
Well-Known Member
i can't read the attachments, but a stock converter set-up will loose around 20% at the wheels. more converter=more loss. i don't think loose converters on these high torque are a good fit. thats really not much cam or carb for the cubes and heads.
Fisher
Active Member
Just an observation, but you have no real parts in that 500 inch motor? Cam is way too small, i have a bigger cam in my 426 low deck. And you have no compression. Cam should be like a .585 lift with .254/.260 @.050. Add 10.0-1 up to 10.5-1 compression still run on pump gas, and put some cylinder head on that motor. like a victor jr or the new trick flow heads, with an 850 holley and you will see some better numbers. should be a 240-280 CC intake runner on the cylinder heads.
He said a there is an approximate loss of 30% with the 3000 stall converter. I have Indy EZ-1 ported heads on it and I am thinking about going with a different cam shaft. I questioned him last year about the low compression and he said the machinist and he played it safe for pump gas so it would not detonate. I have to pick it up later this week.
lewtot184
Well-Known Member
i don't think i'd get too lost in the compression ratio with that small cam. after a carbon build-up the ratio will be well over 10:1. if it were me i'd ditch the converter and find something tighter to pick up more at the rear wheels. with that much torque, a good tune-up, the shouldn't need much gear either.
i have a stock stroke 440 with 9.75:1 compression with clean chambers ,edelbrock heads and icon 836 pistons, small mech cam ([email protected]"), and it's very pump gas friendly, makes plenty of torque with a 3.23 gear.
i have a stock stroke 440 with 9.75:1 compression with clean chambers ,edelbrock heads and icon 836 pistons, small mech cam ([email protected]"), and it's very pump gas friendly, makes plenty of torque with a 3.23 gear.
It also has TTI headers with a 3" X pipe exhaust with Dynomax Turbo mufflers and 3:55 gears in the rear. They numbers are at the flywheel as he wrote on the sheet and the RWHP is 412 if I read the sheet correctly.
MOPOWER871
Well-Known Member
ya I can testify to the converter issue,tried a 3,400 stall behind my 9.70:1 comp. 493 motor mild hyd/roller.did not need that much stall put a 2,800 stall in it man big difference no idle issue's pulls good vacuum. motor dynoed 536hp@5,400 588tq @3,400 with no real tuning. out of the box rpm eddys with rpm intake manifold ,850 demon carb.
3:23 gears. cars pulls real hard with 255/60/15 mickey thompson drag radials and keeps on pulling.fun street car can drive it anywhere
3:23 gears. cars pulls real hard with 255/60/15 mickey thompson drag radials and keeps on pulling.fun street car can drive it anywhere
I imagine it was standard ported. Nick Wilson did the work before he died. He was to email me the flow numbers but died before he could send them to me. The mechanic had a hard time getting the rear tires to make contact on the dyno rollers as the torque would make them slip. No slicks, yet.
Similar threads
