ECS cam only LS3 makes 498rwhp/457rwtq on a DynoJet
07-31-2008, 08:29 PM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ECS cam only LS3 makes 498rwhp/457rwtq on a DynoJet Below is a video of an ECS customer who on his own brought his cammed LS3 C6 to another dyno to dispel any rumors from certain "others"
that the DynoPak dyno (where the rear wheels are removed and the hubs are attached directly to the dyno) used by ECS gives artificially high torque numbers. The car dyno'd 485rwhp/460rwtq in the spring right after the cam install on the DynoPak at ECS. If anything, the ECS dyno might be conservative, given that this video was done today in the nice cool summer air in CT.
Needless to say, I think the car's numbers are the real deal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VwDPEXkQYE
that the DynoPak dyno (where the rear wheels are removed and the hubs are attached directly to the dyno) used by ECS gives artificially high torque numbers. The car dyno'd 485rwhp/460rwtq in the spring right after the cam install on the DynoPak at ECS. If anything, the ECS dyno might be conservative, given that this video was done today in the nice cool summer air in CT.Needless to say, I think the car's numbers are the real deal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VwDPEXkQYE
07-31-2008, 08:45 PM
#4
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trending Topics
08-01-2008, 11:02 AM
#11
11 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Clifton NJ
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Below is a video of an ECS customer who on his own brought his cammed LS3 C6 to another dyno to dispel any rumors from certain "others" that the DynoPak dyno (where the rear wheels are removed and the hubs are attached directly to the dyno) used by ECS gives artificially high torque numbers. The car dyno'd 485rwhp/460rwtq in the spring right after the cam install on the DynoPak at ECS. If anything, the ECS dyno might be conservative, given that this video was done today in the nice cool summer air in CT.
Needless to say, I think the car's numbers are the real deal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VwDPEXkQYE
that the DynoPak dyno (where the rear wheels are removed and the hubs are attached directly to the dyno) used by ECS gives artificially high torque numbers. The car dyno'd 485rwhp/460rwtq in the spring right after the cam install on the DynoPak at ECS. If anything, the ECS dyno might be conservative, given that this video was done today in the nice cool summer air in CT.Needless to say, I think the car's numbers are the real deal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VwDPEXkQYE
08-01-2008, 11:11 AM
#12
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortuntely, the owner works on saturdays, so he won't be there. But the plan is to bring the car to a nice cool fall rental at Atco and let a "shoe" drive it
, as the owner is more a "street" guy who knows how to race from a roll but is not as good at the 1/4 mile thing. 
08-02-2008, 07:49 AM
#14
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, you know the boys at ECS quite well, so I know you'd expect no less. As a long time customer of theirs I've read your posts at the CF site (I'm on perma-ban there, so I can't post
) and you have been supportive of their FI work. 
This is just another example of their ability to make some awesome strides for those who want to go N/A.
) and you have been supportive of their FI work. This is just another example of their ability to make some awesome strides for those who want to go N/A.
08-02-2008, 09:24 AM
#15
Below is a video of an ECS customer who on his own brought his cammed LS3 C6 to another dyno to dispel any rumors from certain "others" that the DynoPak dyno (where the rear wheels are removed and the hubs are attached directly to the dyno) used by ECS gives artificially high torque numbers. The car dyno'd 485rwhp/460rwtq in the spring right after the cam install on the DynoPak at ECS. If anything, the ECS dyno might be conservative, given that this video was done today in the nice cool summer air in CT.
Needless to say, I think the car's numbers are the real deal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VwDPEXkQYE
that the DynoPak dyno (where the rear wheels are removed and the hubs are attached directly to the dyno) used by ECS gives artificially high torque numbers. The car dyno'd 485rwhp/460rwtq in the spring right after the cam install on the DynoPak at ECS. If anything, the ECS dyno might be conservative, given that this video was done today in the nice cool summer air in CT.Needless to say, I think the car's numbers are the real deal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VwDPEXkQYE
Just my opinion.
08-02-2008, 09:29 AM
#16
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great numbers, but it is an apples to oranges comparison, given the gear change. Meaning: it doesn't validate the earlier DynaPak dyno results. You probably should have included that info in your original post, otherwise it looks like you're hiding something.
Just my opinion.
Just my opinion.
08-03-2008, 09:08 AM
#17
Not really, as the DynoPak does have algorithms built in to compensate for the gearing used. In reality, the two different dyno's numbers, even with the car having been dyno'd on different days with different gears are well within a +/- 5% coeficient of the mean...all you can ask for with an analytical instrument.
You can compare the dyno's when using the same gears, but changing gears and changing dynos throws accurate comparisons out the window. You now are no longer assessing the accuracy of an instrument. It would be like doing your same comparison, but instead of changing gears, the exhaust set-up was changed.
Now, I don't know about the previous dyno session and people having doubts about it, and I don't care. I think the numbers posted are fantastic and congratulations are in order.
I only pointed out a problem with the comparison and attempts at validation given the change in set-ups. I think your best bet would be to take the car to the original place and dyno it again, then you would have an apples to apples comparison.
08-03-2008, 04:45 PM
#18
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't say they are comparable or even mention a coefficient of the mean when you have the number of variables you do for the comparison you're trying to make.
You can compare the dyno's when using the same gears, but changing gears and changing dynos throws accurate comparisons out the window. You now are no longer assessing the accuracy of an instrument. It would be like doing your same comparison, but instead of changing gears, the exhaust set-up was changed.
Now, I don't know about the previous dyno session and people having doubts about it, and I don't care. I think the numbers posted are fantastic and congratulations are in order.
I only pointed out a problem with the comparison and attempts at validation given the change in set-ups. I think your best bet would be to take the car to the original place and dyno it again, then you would have an apples to apples comparison.
You can compare the dyno's when using the same gears, but changing gears and changing dynos throws accurate comparisons out the window. You now are no longer assessing the accuracy of an instrument. It would be like doing your same comparison, but instead of changing gears, the exhaust set-up was changed.
Now, I don't know about the previous dyno session and people having doubts about it, and I don't care. I think the numbers posted are fantastic and congratulations are in order.
I only pointed out a problem with the comparison and attempts at validation given the change in set-ups. I think your best bet would be to take the car to the original place and dyno it again, then you would have an apples to apples comparison.
Fair enough...it is likely that the car will be re-dyno'd on the DynoPak sometime soon. Also, this is not my car. It belongs to a friend of mine. The reason for posting this as well as posting the numbers from the first dyno was to dispel rumors that the DynoPak gives skewed numbers due to the wheels being taken off and the hubs being directly attached to the dynonometer. Another shop in the area has done some "cam only" LS3's and while their rwhp numbers have been similar their rwtq numbers are 30-40 less than this shop (ECS). The other shop has a Dynojet so their comments (as well as their clients comments) have been aimed at taking shots at ECS's DynoPak as being flawed to the effect that if they removed their wheels they would see " big" numbers
...something that has now been proven to be BS as the new numbers on the DynoJet are still higher by 30-40 rwtq than the "other" shop's cars.I know it's petty, and at the end of the day track numbers are what counts.This car has put up a pretty decent track number and will likely put an even better number up this fall when we let the "shoe" drive it.
08-04-2008, 01:06 AM
#20
Fair enough...it is likely that the car will be re-dyno'd on the DynoPak sometime soon. Also, this is not my car. It belongs to a friend of mine. The reason for posting this as well as posting the numbers from the first dyno was to dispel rumors that the DynoPak gives skewed numbers due to the wheels being taken off and the hubs being directly attached to the dynonometer. Another shop in the area has done some "cam only" LS3's and while their rwhp numbers have been similar their rwtq numbers are 30-40 less than this shop (ECS). The other shop has a Dynojet so their comments (as well as their clients comments) have been aimed at taking shots at ECS's DynoPak as being flawed to the effect that if they removed their wheels they would see " big" numbers...something that has now been proven to be BS as the new numbers on the DynoJet are still higher by 30-40 rwtq than the "other" shop's cars.
I know it's petty, and at the end of the day track numbers are what counts.This car has put up a pretty decent track number and will likely put an even better number up this fall when we let the "shoe" drive it.
...something that has now been proven to be BS as the new numbers on the DynoJet are still higher by 30-40 rwtq than the "other" shop's cars.I know it's petty, and at the end of the day track numbers are what counts.This car has put up a pretty decent track number and will likely put an even better number up this fall when we let the "shoe" drive it.
I think the numbers are great no matter the dyno. I'd love to see it in action.