Not hardly. I can't keep the one we have running.Originally Posted by Sook
JJ
Not hardly. I can't keep the one we have running.
JJ
Last edited by ShadowBolt; 02-07-2020 at 04:14 PM.
Wirtz car is still in Wirtz's hands. I have a buddy who knows Wirtz that has gone back and forth about getting it, but it is still a CMC1 spec so it needs everything except the tub and cage. He says that is a lot of money to drop to "only" have 260 HP. He'd be better suited to AI or AIX, but the fields are too small.
Jerry, are you talking about Nick Runyon's old car? If I recall, it made a couple of track appearances around 2013 and then disappeared?
Or...I have been out of the loop for a Looong time, didn't someone recently pick up Kellam's car?
'86 Mustang Coupe - CMC2 34
Jeff's car would only have 230hp.
JJ
Urbanski bought both of those cars. He sold Runyons car I believe going to Kansas and now he is running Kellams.
Man the dyno on Steve's LT1 looks awesome so I'll be questioning whether I swap it in the fall. Anyone want to buy a white LS1 CMC Camaro?
Bryan Leinart
CMC #24
Since when does any LT1 dyno look awesome? All of them I have seen peak out the torque long before getting good horsepower. I completely opened the exhaust and it had no effect. The OEM CAM is just wrong for 260/310. If it does have a good ratio I'd bet it has a cheater CAM in it.
Craig W.
If you could lower the total output somehow other than a restrictor it'd be spot on. Mine peaks on the Dyno as soon as I crack the gas. Unrestricted torque peaks a in the 4000 range.
RM CMC Director
Mine peaks at 3000, torque down there is only usable on the standing starts. If I restrict to keep torque at 310 I only get 253 HP. If I let the torque go to 315 it will get near 260, but then we have to pile on the ballast and tear up the tires even faster. Kinda defeats the tiny driver advantage. Currently using a 36mm restrictor. unrestricted it is like 289 HP. Now if we could run Mustang weights I'd have no issue with 253/310.
I do think the LS 5.3 iron block is the only good setup for the Camaros. The aluminum block LS cars lap times drop off at the end of the races lots more than the Mustangs. To beat the mustangs you have to start up front, put down qualifying times and then block. Perfect example is Hallett. Michael Mostey is great there and if he is behind a Camaro at the end he will usually win. The Camaro will be sliding all over the place, and Michael will still have enough tires to dance that little Mustang around the final curves.
I see the tires from Dan's and Josh's cars. Dan's are used up after a weekend and only good for practice, Josh can run his two sometimes three weekends. Heather puts lots of heat cycles on mine, but doesn't scrub the rubber off like Dan does. Josh can use Heather's tires on the Mustang and still get some good times out of them, after he knocks the hard layer off the top.
Bryan has won Hallett. It can be done. Hell, an LT1 car is the current national champ. Granted that race was mostly MW/GL, but still. TX is the only place where the GMs have so much trouble winning. I think a lot of it comes down to who's driving. I'm curious to see how Josh's season goes now that he's back in a Camaro.
RM CMC Director
And your betting Steve's has a cheater cam in it? It's comments like these that give people the false illusion that the LT doesn't have excellent (or better) numbers than the LS. I too have fallen into believing this folklore until only after I bought Steve's car and started looking at the dyno graph. Then I started remembering some other data that I pulled up which surprised me.
I'll start way back from the beginning as my car was the test bed for restricting the LS down at the start of CMC2 running against two LT1's. I was the one who showed it could be restricted down even further without any issues. Al Fernandez then took my LS dyno and chart plotted it against LT1's at Eagles Canyon in his motor home and showed they were virtually identical throughout the entire rpm range.
I have also seen the data used to allow the 5.3 which took three cars to the dyno on the same day to compare a 5.7 LS, 5.3 LS, and 5.7 LT1. There was generally less than a 1% difference between all three all the way across the dyno run and guess which one had the best HP and tq along with the best avg hp and tq from 3,000-5,700????
The LT1 yes T as in Tom as it did 259.82/307.03. The only place the LS had better torque was from 2,300 -3,000 rpm which isn't really use able but oh do we hear how the LT peaks so low. Then again at 5,100 the LS started having a 1 hp and tq advantage which was still only a 3 hp/2 tq advantage at 5,600. But keep in mind the LT had areas under the curve where it was beating them by 3-5 on both hp and tq yet all we hear is how the LT dies at 5,000. I just wonder how many of them have driven a restricted LS?
From 3,000 - 5,700 the LT averaged 241.87/296.24 to 239.74/292.76 for the LS.
So the next time someone says the LT doesn't have good numbers please refer them to this data. There are other LT cars out there with good numbers as well.
Now I'm very curious if anyone has put on the Torquehead ignition system on an LT1 as it wouldn't surprise me if the better ignition system doesn't help the numbers above 5,500. Still keeping in mind it's only a few better but doesn't make up for the better numbers the LT puts down between 3,000-5,500 as the LS falls on it's face in restricted form above 5,500 as well.
And everyone knows races aren't won and lost based on a couple of hp/tq differences.
The LT1 is Dead, Long Live the LT1. (the reason the LT is being replaced is the problems with it not running perfect all the time due to the opti which some have figured out how to seal it off from moisture or now you can add the Torquehead system. Plus the fact that if you blow up a LS for $750 at any salvage yard in America you have a complete engine. Much different than the $4,000 spent on the LT1 I now own)
Bryan Leinart
CMC #24
below
“A man with no enemies is a man with no character.”
― Paul Newman
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks