Has anyone on here ever dynoed there Ecotec engine stock? A strange question I know, reason I ask: In 03 I purchased a new Cavalier, my friend ownes a dynamometer shop. We ran mine with only 35 miles on it new and cam up with some strange results. 162 hp to the wheels, and 159 lb/tq.
Now nearly 75,000 miles, 2 cluches, and 1 new transmission, simple exhaust and intake later. 167hp to the front wheels, and 156 lb/tq.
This is my first post on here, and look forward to learning from all of you more about my car.
They aren't putting the correct information or they aren't getting a proper reading for your ignition. Where are they picking up your RPMs or are they just going off the rollers?
Your cars ENGINE is rated at 140 HP, there is no way humanly possible if your car is stock that you're putting down more power than your engines rating because your wheel horsepower is reflected from your engines power minus drivetrain loss.
www.kronosperformance.com / 732-742-8837
you should have put down numbers like I did 115.29hp and 129.93 Lb/ft both at 5250rpm
"Racing is life Everything else is just waiting"
Phil
I did a stock dyno on my 04... I have to look find it as I do not recall, I don't recall... I do recall that it worked out to be 145crank HP and 160Ft.Lbs crank TQ... stock besides the most signigicant mod ever of removing the intake resonator. LOL!
Well before I say any more I understand the disbelief. I too, for a long time, did not believe. Most say BS until they drive my car. I work at a dealership in
Alpharetta Ga. I drive cars all day, of a horse powers, in know what 100 feels like as do know know what 400 feels like. To me, more importantly I know what torque feels like, my second car is a Mitsubishi 95' 3000 vr4. As for the dyno-friend, he is not a close friend but an acquaintance, I delivered racing fuel to his shop as part of a second job. The dyno is an Dynojet Automotive Dynamometer, the rpm's were read from two sources. One from a clip reading the tach line and one reading a magnetic pick up.
I only wanted to know if any one else out there has had a similar experience with the ownership of there car.
Tim Henderson wrote:Well before I say any more I understand the disbelief. I too, for a long time, did not believe. Most say BS until they drive my car. I work at a dealership in
Alpharetta Ga. I drive cars all day, of a horse powers, in know what 100 feels like as do know know what 400 feels like. To me, more importantly I know what torque feels like, my second car is a Mitsubishi 95' 3000 vr4. As for the dyno-friend, he is not a close friend but an acquaintance, I delivered racing fuel to his shop as part of a second job. The dyno is an Dynojet Automotive Dynamometer, the rpm's were read from two sources. One from a clip reading the tach line and one reading a magnetic pick up.
I only wanted to know if any one else out there has had a similar experience with the ownership of there car.
I understand what you're saying but you can't base stuff on "feel". There are plenty of things that come into play when you have that "feel" effect.
The readings, like I said before, should be lower. Your whp is in relation crank horsepower...it will ALWAYS be lower. Your engine is rated at 140 crank HP. Even if GM is lying and it's 145 HP, you're still going to see lower than 145 HP to the wheels.
Sorry but the dyno reading is not accurate IF your car is 100% stock.
www.kronosperformance.com / 732-742-8837
BS? I see... Thank you for your time guys, have a great day everyone.
3.63:1 axle + 3000RPM stall converter on a 2600lb car with 140-150HP and 150-160Ft.Lbs of torque (stock auto 03-05 J body) with a relativley broad torqueband can make the car accelerate better than just it's HP and TQ numbers would lead you to believe, I thought I had a "factory freak" too, that is why I dynoed the car at a Grand Prix club dyno day (RMCGP). I am happy with 5HP and 10Ft.Lbs more than advertised but it does not denote a freak car, probbably 100% average. My 03 "feels" EXACTLY the same as the 04.
There is no way you are putting down 160HP at the wheels.
You would be talking of close to 190 crank hp with those figures. Let say you had a monster freek stock ecotec engine 2.2 of course you could see maybe 130-135 whp. I have a 2003 Z24 myself and I trap 90.8 mph at the end of the 1/4 mile with full interior and a 220 lbs driver. So I think it's possible to have more than the 145 hp and 150 tq advertised by the manufacturer.
2003 Ecotec Z24
14.88 @ 93.92 mph
thats a joke. dyno is messed up... whats your 1/4 et? trap? kill list?
|Forged 8.9:1 Wiseco Pistons|Forged Eagle Rods|HPTuners|60trim|Tial Wastegate|
|Precision Intercooler|2.5" Exhaust|2.5" Charge Pipes|630CC Mototron Injectors|
|Stock: Fuel Pump, Transmission, Manifold, TB, Head, Head Gasket, Ignition, Suspension...|
Big Dan wrote:You would be talking of close to 190 crank hp with those figures. Let say you had a monster freek stock ecotec engine 2.2 of course you could see maybe 130-135 whp. I have a 2003 Z24 myself and I trap 90.8 mph at the end of the 1/4 mile with full interior and a 220 lbs driver. So I think it's possible to have more than the 145 hp and 150 tq advertised by the manufacturer.
Sure it is possible to have more than advertised stock numbers, but almost 20 hp above rated hp? It sounds like a dyno error to me.
GM Racing began the tuning process on a Heinen-Freud water-brake dyno using the stock intake and exhaust manifolds and a modified stock downpipe plumbed without muffler directly into the dyno cell's exhaust removal system. It turns out a well-tuned stock 10:1 2.2-liter Ecotec in the above configuration actually develops 168 crankshaft hp (which is above the factory rating of 140-150 as installed in various vehicles in the United States and Europe).
Found this info wondering if anyone has read it............In the Quest For Failure section...........
http://www.year2032.com/ecotec.htm
Mike Baynton wrote:No comments??
Seen it...
Also understand that they were using a Standalone which is much more versatile to tune.
www.kronosperformance.com / 732-742-8837
