That ia ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE ..LPE ADVERTISES BOTH A TIME SLIP and a TRAP SPEED (go on their website )Nick at MPI will give a customer a minimum trap speed attainable so will Jason Heffner .ALL TOP LINE BUILDERS.GET THIS STRAIGHT ..PAL whether you like it ,want to hear it or not dyno numbers (as other have attested to on this topic )are nothing buy measuring tools =THEY OFTEN ARE MEANINGLESS AND CAN BE EASILY MANUPULATED when assessing the overall performance of a car.As far as Dan Cragen sending the motors out for machine work some do some dont NONE have their customers coming on a VCA website to ask what parts combos work best on their builds ..CHILL OUT ON THAT.
N/A Motor Build - 700 rwhp???
- Thread starter dipapa
- Start date
ps it turns out (after all this nonsense )the guys buying into a basic 521 stroker (using the stock crank )if the car can not trap in the 129 plus range on a sea level track NO MATTER WHAT THE DYNO NUMBER SAYS something is DRASTICALLY WRONG.
My car was the first Viper MPI ever did back in the mid-late 90s it was doing very well on the track ,being street driven ect so it got some attention from other VCA NJ GUYS wanting to do the same .Fellow NJ VCA member Joe S went to MPI on his 97 GTS to get a top end job done (BEAR IN MIND I HAD A COMPLETE ENGINE with a larger cam shaft ).Anyhow the job is completed off he goes to the dyno .MPI dynos at IDA Automotive (if one is into hot rods they know who Bob Ida is )The most my car ever dynoed at Ida at the time was 575 corrected .Joe dynoes that day at 605 CORRECTED to the tire. Torque was close also Guy in the club were like WOW hes over 35 more to the tire than you with just a top end his car should beat you ect.Nick (MPI )did both motors tuned them on the same DYNO-JET was adament that all the above numbers meant little.The next week the mag guys are testing at Englishtown to explore the issue further we put Evan Smith in both cars the same day at the same track.Thirty five horsepower more on a NA PUMP GAS VIPER is alot you would think .Evan made multiple runs in both Vipers his best run in Joes was 11.6 at like 125.5 .His best run in mine was 11.2 at 130 plus .Both cars had stock tires and stock suspensions.According to the dyno he should have beat me no problem dynoes dont run down racetracks though .The trap speeds offered up by both cars revealed NO MATTER WHAT THE DYNO SAID REAL LIFE PERFORMANCE WAS THE OPPOSITE.
dragon rider
Enthusiast
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2007
- Posts
- 637
- Reaction score
- 0
I would love to hear from people with positive experiences that have 600+ rwhp NA builds using gen3 motors. Many threads have discussed the downside. Is there any upside? Most people seem to like NA builds because of their reliability. I prefer NA, but like anything, it has its limits. As one stated earlier, go for the GenIV. It may be your best option. On a side note, if your current motor is in good shape wear it out first before rebuilding it. LOL Good luck with your decision.
GTS-R 001
Enthusiast
I think that at the end of the day, YOU have to realize that time slips are very important to you when it comes to assessing the quickness and power level of a car.
My point is that to fester over it, over and over again, is just too much.
Your point about trap speeds and quickness are well taken but you are extolling only one side of the equation, I believe it is better to
1) give the customer what he wants
2) the best way to assess the true performance of a car is to dyno tune, dyno measure and road test, if the road testing includes a trap speed so be it, but cars do more than go in a straight line for 10 seconds, maybe
3) I have never seen or heard of a tuner guaranteeing a trap speed and if they do I would like to see the advertisement saying 10.2 seconds in the quarter or your money back, I think it is more like, if you want 10.2 we can do it but open your wallet until it happens.
Simms
Enthusiast
Yes. In business, in Reno.
CitySnake
Enthusiast
God how I hate having to do this, but there's simply too much animosity in several posts within this thread. There's a great deal of interest, which is great, but opinions CAN be expressed without suggesting an opposing opinion (and that posted opinion's author) are entirely erroneous (i.e., "ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE, nonsense, DRASTICALLY WRONG, some teenager playing on daddys computer..." ...especially when so much of this discussion involves concepts and variables that are "gray" rather than black or white.
The dogmatism of presentation is obnoxious to read, period.
I'm not asking for you to communicate with any eloquence (far be it ), but please try to at least be civil to the thread's author (and one another). If someone's asking for opinions, give to them...as straight up as you like. Make it interesting and "colorfull." But to expect disagreement among participants on a website forum ... remarkable! Deal with it in a civil manner where your ultimate goal is not to have have those you've engaged become adversaries who must admit their argument’s defeat before you cease your incessant badgering.
Oh and by the way, experience has 3 "e's" for God's sake!
The dogmatism of presentation is obnoxious to read, period.
I'm not asking for you to communicate with any eloquence (far be it ), but please try to at least be civil to the thread's author (and one another). If someone's asking for opinions, give to them...as straight up as you like. Make it interesting and "colorfull." But to expect disagreement among participants on a website forum ... remarkable! Deal with it in a civil manner where your ultimate goal is not to have have those you've engaged become adversaries who must admit their argument’s defeat before you cease your incessant badgering.
Oh and by the way, experience has 3 "e's" for God's sake!
GTS-R 001
Enthusiast
So to recap what we have learned in this thread:
1) 580 or so RWHP is possible with about the same cash outlay as a base paxton with heads cam tune.
2) Dyno numbers are one way to evidence your HP
3) TO VERIFY YOUR DYNO NUMBERS TAKE THE CAR TO A QUARTER MILE TRACK AS SEE WHAT YOUR TRAP SPEED IS AND THAT WILL GIVE YOU AN INDICATOR TO VERIFY YOUR HP LEVELS (based also on other variable like can you shift fast, are your tires sticky enough etc.
4) If you want 700 RWHP NA expect to pay 4 times the amount as a 580 HP NA build
5) Viper owners have a lot of testosterone and will defend their opinions to their own detriment
1) 580 or so RWHP is possible with about the same cash outlay as a base paxton with heads cam tune.
2) Dyno numbers are one way to evidence your HP
3) TO VERIFY YOUR DYNO NUMBERS TAKE THE CAR TO A QUARTER MILE TRACK AS SEE WHAT YOUR TRAP SPEED IS AND THAT WILL GIVE YOU AN INDICATOR TO VERIFY YOUR HP LEVELS (based also on other variable like can you shift fast, are your tires sticky enough etc.
4) If you want 700 RWHP NA expect to pay 4 times the amount as a 580 HP NA build
5) Viper owners have a lot of testosterone and will defend their opinions to their own detriment
CitySnake
Enthusiast
Guys we are talking about paying approx 30 grand for an engine package whose success rate is determined by the number a chasis dyno spits out am i correst.DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY IDEA HOW EASY IT IS FOR THE OPERATOR OF A CHASIS DYNO TO MANIPULATE, CHANGE IT SO IT SPITS OUT a favorable number to the customer.Lets deal in EXACT SPECIFICS The ambient air temp reading can be changed .The motor can be run ice cold.The motor can be run a quart low on oil.The car tie down straps can be loosened way up. Rear end gear ratios can be changed.ALL the above GREATLY INFLUENCE the number the dy no spits out .I have seen OVER 100 HORSEPOWER to the tire higher difference SAME CAR ON THE SAME DYNO A FEW HOURS APART .With the ambient temp adjustment the dyno operator plugs in a 35 degree higher temp than it actually is out and the correction factor corrects way up.All the above is fact
NUMBER 4 IS IMPOSSIBLE as no VIPER ON PUMP GAS EVER has optained a TRUE 700 horsepower to the tire reading ever .
On number 3 its not we can do it but open your wallet until it happens its 35 k for the package the package has attained that speed.You guys have to realize i was doing this stuff 10 years ago the most anyone has ever gotten out of a pump gas NA Viper is around 725 to the flywheel not tire .That 725 i TRUE POWER not some BS number fabricated on a chasis dyno .
GTS-R 001
Enthusiast
Serial Poster!
RapidRonnie
Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2010
- Posts
- 21
- Reaction score
- 0
Hi,
Lots of talk about dynos here. In the end they are a tuning tool. Dynojets are typically 10% higher (around here), than Mustangs or a Dyno Dynamics dyno, like we use. So regardless of what a given dyno spits out, I use the numbers to check if a mod helped or hurt.
And as mentioned, dyno numbers can be easily manipulated, just like the numbers coming from a flow bench for cylinder heads.
And yes, the M.P.H. numbers at the track can quickly separate fact from fiction. It takes a certain amount of power to accelerate a given weight to a certain m.p.h. That's about it.
So regardless of the horsepower someone has, or think they have, tracks are a great place to cut to the chase, so to speak.
As for your request for results of N.A. Gen III mods: My current project was a simple one. Take a stock Gen III in an SRT-10 truck and bolt on a cat-back system, a set of Strikers (10.5:1) and a mild roller and see what happens. NO headers, cold air intake or intake manifold mods. And a mail-order tune, installed through an SCT controller. Also, the engine has never been out of the truck. I began with the cat-back system, ported throttle body and a tune and the net result was 433 wheel. On went the Strikers and in went a small roller cam.
End result through an automatic transmission: 577 wheel and 607 torque. "Add" 30 more horsepower through a manual transmission. So, "corrected", a tick over 600 wheel (in a Viper car for example). Completely streetable and reliable, with all of the stock reciprocating parts (60,000 miles later). Improved gas mileage too !! VERY wide power band and a 6050 shift point. LOTS of torque, which is what a 5600 pound vehicle needs.
Side note: Heads are where the power is actually made, so especially in a N.A. application, I would concentrate $$$ and research there.
I've heard some wild claims about flow numbers through the o.e.m. castings. There is only .200" wall to work with and the Gen IIIs are already (basically) a factory-ported Gen II casting and are pretty decent. Can improvements be made? Yes, certainly, but only to a point. Will a major porting job on Gen IIIs outperform a set of Strikers? No, it won't.
I seriously doubt claims of 320+ c.f.m. at 28" on a set of ported Gen IIIs. I would really like to see the 320+ for one thing on a bench, and then test them to see how much power those heads actually make ALL BY THEMSELVES.
Can porting Strikers increase the flow numbers? Yes, it can.
Will porting a set of Strikers produce more power than an off the shelf set? Maybe, but it's not an absolute. There again, some wild flow claims have been made. An actual A-B test is the true way to see if the porting worked well or not.
And, unfortunately big flow numbers, almost exclusively, help to sell heads. But there is more to it than that. TRUE flow numbers are one thing to consider when either purchasing or modifying your Stockers/Strikers but QUALITY of flow is quite another. That one isn't talked about very much at all... I've seen some big number claims on both the ported o.e.m.s and ported Strikers that were, in reality, terrible. The heads looked great, nice finishing work and a massive amount of port hogging, (in some cases) but the engine itself didn't really like them much.
By pulling the heads and looking at the piston top and combustion chamber burn-patterns, it can tell a lot about what is going on in there. Even an improperly shaped intake port (flattened short-turn, for example) can produce higher flow numbers than stock. But, because liquid fuel doesn't burn, and because of the improper port shape, fuel and air have separated, (in this example)the heads end up having very poor combustion efficiency on an actual working engine. So sometimes the big flow numbers can produce FAR LESS power than you would expect. And in some cases, even a power loss over a set of stock heads.
Please don't misunderstand me as there are some very good head porters out there, but the flow claims can sometimes get out of hand. So try to determine HOW MUCH POWER THE PORTED HEADS ACTUALLY MAKE over a non-ported version, rather than listening strictly to flow claims. After all, it is the increase in power you are trying to obtain.
This is a bit of a lengthy post to reinforce the issue that it is the heads in the end, (the combustion chamber) that actually produce the power. So porting decisions or head purchasing choices are important if planning to obtain a large power increase in a n.a. application.
So 600 wheel for me, in my example was relatively easy.
Can another 100 horsepower be obtained to hit your 700 wheel goal? Sure. Will some drivability sacrifices be made? Probably. 600 is one thing, 700 wheel is quite another. That extra 100 horsepower will likely come through a rather big jump in compression and a radical cam profile. Those 2 items will change the engine rules between what is considered pump gas street and what will be a strip machine.
It is far easier to pick up say, 150 wheel on a Gen III engine than a Gen IV that already have the good heads and THAT is where the lion's share of that extra 100 horsepower came from.
My 2 cents ...
Hope this helps©
Ronnie
Last edited:
dragon rider
Enthusiast
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2007
- Posts
- 637
- Reaction score
- 0
You gained 143 rwhp from a head and cam package on a gen3! I'm no expert and forgive me if I sound sceptical, but those #'s seem a little high. I can see those mods making 600 to the crank, but to the tire?
There is a lot of technolgy in a gen IV motor and it 's capable of making those #'s with some bolt ons. A heck of a lot of people will follow suit if others could net similar gains.
There is a lot of technolgy in a gen IV motor and it 's capable of making those #'s with some bolt ons. A heck of a lot of people will follow suit if others could net similar gains.
Hell yea it is possible..
I gained 60 rwhp on my ls1 vette with just stock ls6 heads and a mils 224/224 cam..
The guys doinf AFR heads and agressive cams were picking up 100 plus rwhp..
Gen3 8.3 litre could defiently pick up that kind of power
I gained 60 rwhp on my ls1 vette with just stock ls6 heads and a mils 224/224 cam..
The guys doinf AFR heads and agressive cams were picking up 100 plus rwhp..
Gen3 8.3 litre could defiently pick up that kind of power
+1 from experience.
RapidRonnie
Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2010
- Posts
- 21
- Reaction score
- 0
Yes, that is correct sir and I am not really surprised that you question the results. It's all good...
Engine power is all about breathing and primarily the heads/induction systems.
The problem here is that often MANY components are changed all at the same time during a build and it becomes difficult to determine what worked and what didn't. So, I wanted to see what a Striker head and cam package would provide on it's own. On that note, you can expect a gain of around 95 wheel just bolting on some properly ported Gen IIIs and installing a matching cam, from results I have seen here.
The Strikers are another story. Regardless of what you may have done to a set of Gen IIIs, you wont have the revised plug angle, revised combustion chamber, thick decks (rigid), revised guide location (much straighter intake port) nor the more efficient coolant passages. Plus you are upgrading to a shaft-mounted roller rocker system.
A few more project details...
The cam was installed straight-up and the rockers were pre-loaded quite a bit in an effort to smarten up those o.e.m. high bleed-down hydraulic roller lifters.
Final compression ratio was 10.5:1 with the o.e.m. gaskets. So, i.o.w a pump gas engine (as Strikers also have a fast-burn combustion chamber) with zero drivability issues.
I went with B&B Hi-Flow cats and a B&B catback which got rid of the UPS delivery van sound the factory exhaust system has. I'm not a fan of a catless system because they stink.
I left the intake unported as I wanted to keep the velocity up at our dismal altitude and the port mismatch creates a bit of a reversion dam, which doesn't hurt either. Extrude honing the Gen III Intake and the addition of a splitter behind the throttle body will give you gain of 10 and 10 @ 5000 but a corresponding power drop at lower r.p.m. levels.
I'll do it in a Viper Car application though..
As mentioned in a previous post, this was a bolt-on project and the engine has never been out of the truck. So there was no opportunity to zero-deck the block for even greater detonation resistance.
I had the DC tune tweaked (over the internet) and installed the new one with an SCT controller. Factory shift points are now at 6,050 rpm.
The end result was 566 wheel. I installed a ported throttle body which gave me 11 and 11. Final numbers: 577 wheel and a whopping 607 torque.
Track results: Full weight: 5,610 pounds, with driver. 12.53 at 108.66 m.p.h.(video available) with drag radials. This was at a 3000 foot D.A. and is the current record for a N.A. Quad Cab, without power adders. So high 11s at 113 or so at a sea-level track with the current combination is quite feasible.
So, is there more power in it? Sure there is. This was a pretty straight forward test of the head and cam package though.
Stick the engine in a Viper car (1900 pounds lighter) and it would be pretty fast..Plus the trucks are dealing with a 32 square foot frontal area. So it would be like running down the track at over 100 m.p.h. holding up a 4x8 sheet of plywood. Not really a small item to overcome...
There are several s/w programs out there that will show how much power is required to (in this case) move 5610 pounds through a 1/4 mile.
The torqueflite failed in a VERY short time after the Strikers went on. It was rebuilt with tougher parts, shift-kit and a rigid band from a 1970 Chrysler New Yorker.
That's about it.
If you have any more questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them.
Ronnie
Last edited:
AWESOME RESULTS RONNIE.Question for you,didnt the guy who designed the STRIKERS design the GEN 4 head because i had heard that it was the same fellow and he was one of the best out there (if not the best ))at this type of thing.
RapidRonnie
Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2010
- Posts
- 21
- Reaction score
- 0
Yes, that is correct; it is the same individual who designed the Strikers and the Gen IV heads. So basically he saw limitations with the Gen IIIs, and came up with the Strikers. And when the Vipers were no longer competitive with the new Vettes, the Gen IV heads were created (which are very close in performance to the Strikers), to give the engines another 100 h.p.
Ronnie
Last edited:
Wow, i wish this type of technology was available back when i was running.Since the STRIKER is a bolt on and will out perform ANY ported Gen 3 head its much more prudent to go the STRIKER that way you dont have to worry about someone making a mistake with the hand porting ect (besides the fact of buying larger valves valve jobs ,springs keepers retainers ,porting flowing ect )
Something to EXPLORE a guy told me he paid 6200 for the STRIKERS COMPLETE with rockers.iN 2000 I BOUGHT a set of MOPAR-STREET Strip heads for my GEN 2 (complete waste of money )Buhlers dead cost on the casting was 1800.Oversized Manley Valves were over 1000 .The heads were flowed ported polished by Crower motorsport for 1500 I had another 1200 plus in seats guides seals keepers retainers valve job .The T&DS were over 1200 Crower hardeded pushrods wetre like 200 (Keep in mind thats 10 years ago and i get jobber prices )so the total was over 7 grand easily
I fdont know PLUM the guy who designed them Jeff Morey is supposed to be the ABSOLUTE BEST there is.
A head porter who knows what he is doing can get good results with the Gen III heads (not as good as the Strikers though).
Contrast my Ram SRT regular cab build with Ronnies. Joe Donovan at PBJ did my Gen III heads and cam on my truck. Port matched intake runners and ported throttle body. I ran Gen II T&D roller rockers and GM bee hive springs. My cam was ground for torque, not peak hp (to help get the big truck moving).
My truck made 535 rwhp and 567 rwtrq (corrected with a smoothing factor of 5). I only did a few runs at 2500 ft DA (hot day) and went 12.57 @ 111.8mph. That's with me shifting the manual (I'm no pro) and drag radials. Ronnie went 12.53 @ 108.66.
Ronnie had an advantage using the auto trans which is reflected in the ETs. I had a bit lighter truck which reflects in the mph. The DA was close (3000 him and 2500 me).
The Striker heads cost more than my entire build.
Contrast my Ram SRT regular cab build with Ronnies. Joe Donovan at PBJ did my Gen III heads and cam on my truck. Port matched intake runners and ported throttle body. I ran Gen II T&D roller rockers and GM bee hive springs. My cam was ground for torque, not peak hp (to help get the big truck moving).
My truck made 535 rwhp and 567 rwtrq (corrected with a smoothing factor of 5). I only did a few runs at 2500 ft DA (hot day) and went 12.57 @ 111.8mph. That's with me shifting the manual (I'm no pro) and drag radials. Ronnie went 12.53 @ 108.66.
Ronnie had an advantage using the auto trans which is reflected in the ETs. I had a bit lighter truck which reflects in the mph. The DA was close (3000 him and 2500 me).
The Striker heads cost more than my entire build.
Last edited:
RapidRonnie
Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2010
- Posts
- 21
- Reaction score
- 0
Factoring in the minimum 400 pound difference between the 2 trucks (Reg. Cab vs. a Quad Cab), your numbers are correct based on both trap speeds and on r.w.h.p. comparisons, and equate to a 50 horsepower difference. As in Post # 111 above- there is an approx. 50 horsepower difference between properly ported Gen IIIs and a cam and a stock set of Strikers and a cam.
FIFTY horsepower is quite significant.
After a Gen III N.A. build is complete (with well ported Gen III heads), where would you find an additional 50 horsepower; and at what cost (either monetary and/or drivability sacrifices)?
I asked myself that, and for me it was an easy decision.
Ronnie
Last edited:
Not to mention SOMETIMES problems occur when hand porting that dont surface untill later on after the head has been heat cycled (GOING THRU THE WATER JACKET) Years ago i remember Nick having to go thru a motor (TEXAS VIPER TUNER )that the hand porter hit a water jacket and it did not surface untill later on )with ther Strikers one would not have to wory about such a thing.
