About Us

dammen8 · 10-13-2003, 02:50 PM

First off you have me confused...where did you come up with 10%? And plain and simple all I am saying is that I do not feel that your calculators are very correct. Because I know what my engine makes at the crank and I know what my brothers engine makes at the crank and we both way out preform what the calculators are saying, not saying it cant work for you just saying that they are way off for my brother and I. Trust me I would be extremely happy if my engine made 818hp or what ever it was at the crank. But I have the dyno sheet saying that is is making 709hp at the crank and according to your calculators they are saying that I am making 709hp at the wheels, and I say no way. I can say this because I have had the car on the chassis dyno to prove that I only have 569 at the wheels. Can I ask what kind of slippage do you have going through the traps at 129 mph? I have a very efficient conveter and it is slipping 5% I am losing 150rpm crossing the line @137.66mph @6400rpm with my old conveter I was crossing at 134.33@6750 so you can see what the difference between just torque converters can make and maybe his 10" is locking up way harder at the top end compaired to your 8" ATI I think? Like I said before why would he lie about this? he only picked up 1 mph over his best pass before?

Chad Dammen

ND's fastest Pontiac (I think) and Minot's fastest street car (not like that means much)

Jeff Kinsler · 10-13-2003, 02:50 PM

Hi, all you guys that think I am lying then come to cecil county dragway or come to atco november 8th and put your money where your mouths are... Seems like there is a lot of jelousy out there and maybe you guys just need to learn how to tune your cars right... anyway, im not a bull****ter and am not getting into this crap, but it does not take 700 hp to go 10.40's. My motor, like I have already said is making around 610 hp at the crank but a hell of a lot of torque. Thats what makes the e.t.
Yes, the car went 10.90's in HPP, but that was with lightly ported 16's with a flat tappet small hydraulic cam (no roller). Then I had the heads ported again (butler port) and put a solid roller in it and stengthend the bottom end. I used the same intake , 1 inch spacer and carb. I dont see how that is so far fetched to see that I picked up 5 tenths and 8 mph..
Goatman, you can send any d-port you want to butler and he will do the same port job. The exhaust ports have barely been touched and there is no epoxy or anything in the heads. They look like regular d-ports with a race port job. And yes it is a street car and I will drive it anywhere.. Its only 11.8 to 1 compression not 14 to 1. Damn if I ran that much compression then I would be in the 9's, with the rpm intake!!! You need to tune that thing or let me tune it..
Ok the nitrous part. The plate is on there but im using it as a 1/2 inch spacer. The solenoids or anything isnt even on the car.. If you want it can be on by atco and then I will run you if you want and see what happens, but you will have to beat me on all motor first!!!!!!!
BUD LYONS where are you, i barely know him but he was at cecil county that nite and saw me, my car and no nitrous system on the car, he has seen it at the car cruise in maryland and knows how streetable it is.

68 Firebird 468
#16 D-Ports w RPM intake
10.41 # 130.53
3.55 Gears
Street Car

Goatman · 10-13-2003, 02:53 PM

You're welcome to come on up to NED this weekend and tune my car for me.

Matter of fact, if you can tune it better, I'll pay for your whole trip.

There you go. Come get it.

I had a set of JBP D-ports. They were #15's. No where near the performance of my RAIV's or my E-heads. And he barely touched them? LOL.

Get your car on a real scale, or fess up dude. No way you're telling the whole story.

I'm like heaven, everybody wanna get to me.........

dammen8 · 10-13-2003, 03:27 PM

http://www.jbp-pontiac.com/cars.html

I guess somebody should tell Mike Cooke and Barry Fritz that there cars can not do that? d-ports? and that much weight? cant be...things that make you go hmmmm?

Chad Dammen

I am so happy to know that my engine is making over 800hp now and All I had to do was use a calculator from a website

. And all this time I thought that a engine dyno was the only real way to get a hp reading boy was I wrong

. BTW there is a GTO from ND that is a little lighter but is running with # 62 that are home ported and he runs 9.80's @133 just about 134mph maybe I should tell him that it just cant be?

Chad Dammen

ND's fastest Pontiac (I think) and Minot's fastest street car (not like that means much)

Jeff Kinsler · 10-13-2003, 03:28 PM

You can weigh it yourself if you want, but from reading all your posts it aint even worth mt time...
one more thing ill let you tear down my motor and when its everything i said it to be then you can give me your motor, how about that?????? take it or leave it.....

68 Firebird 468
#16 D-Ports w RPM intake
10.41 # 130.53
3.55 Gears
Street Car

Goatman · 10-13-2003, 03:36 PM

So you're you're not coming up to tune a real 3400lb car without a nitrous system anywhere on the car then?

What a surprise..........

I'm like heaven, everybody wanna get to me.........

Dave Schiffers · 10-13-2003, 03:56 PM

Hey Bad Bird;

Congrats on the new motor. You've got the best looking bird I've ever seen...... and awesome performance to boot. Kudos to you.
Keep up the good progress, play safe.
I'm going to be in the market for my first converter. I swapping out my M22 and going TH400. With your performance, I'd LOVE to have some details and specs on the 10" converter your using. I'm shooting for 10's, within the next couple of years.

Spec. and or details would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Dave Schiffers

Tom Vaught · 10-13-2003, 04:16 PM

Jim Butler's good "d" port ported head will most
times go 275 cfm at 25" H2O (291 cfm at 28" H2O)

A 275 cfm head times 2 will always make 550 hp
over and over again on the dyno if you have not royally screwed up on the other parts.

A friend's 1966 (all steel 3600lb ) Chevelle went
10.50s at 129 mph with me driving the car and I
am a lousy driver. The horsepower was verified on
Holleys dyno. This was in 1980. Tires are much
better today than 1980 and this car had a 4 speed.

10.30s at 129/130 seems to me to be very possible
without spray. Tom V.

SupergasDil · 10-13-2003, 04:35 PM

Hey BadBird,
You really stirred the schtuff with this post.
I love D-ports so I'm with ya there. But how you are pulling that much air through the RPM has me shaking my head. The RPM is a great intake for low end and mid range torque, but I found it just fell off on the top end without squeezing. If in fact you are not squirting, then you have one hell of a combination. Care to share your cam specs?

JOE ALLAN · 10-13-2003, 04:36 PM

HEY GUYS! Whats everyone gett'n mad about? Ain't this the good ole USA? Where you got your opinion and i got mine!!!! Look at them Super Stock PONTIACS - Cars like Keri Angels -Big $$$$$$ lots of RPM - Tire - 9.98 et's barely runn'n 130's....Thats my point.....If you did what you said then good for you......I don't care what HP you got! I just said i didn't belive you! AND THATS MY RIGHT! Joe

prboylan · 10-13-2003, 04:42 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Goatman:
Since everyone likes having their hands held so much:

http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm

http://www.psienhancements.com/company.asp

http://java_script.internet.com/calc...orsepower.html
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Does anyone have derivations for these HP computations from first principles? I'm talking about starting with the laws of motion X=1/2(A)(t^2) and F=MA, distance=1320 ft, Power=(Torque)(RPM), and the trap speed and arriving at either RWHP or FWHP. Seems like a lot of these java-based horsepower calculators have hidden assumptions that may not be accurate for any one particular car.

I devoted a few minutes to this a couple of weeks ago but didn't manage a complete derivation in the time allotted (i.e., the boss walked in). Knowing this board someone already has done it so I thought I'd post the question before pulling out my classical mechanics textbook.

-Phil

Half-Inch Stud · 10-13-2003, 05:00 PM

I agree wit JOE ALLAN.......HIS

"tbdET/1xxMPH/1.xx 60foot/28"/3.54:1/10"/469 #48/Flat HYD/DualQ-Jets/Offyl/3xx0Lbs
11.00/123MPH/1.50 60foot/29.5"/4.10:1/10"/469 #48/FlatHYD/DualQuad/Wenzler/3250Lbs
12.00/112MPH/1.61 60foot/26"/3.31:1/10"/469 #48/FlatHYD/Q-Jet/Torker/3650Lbs
12.70/103MPH/1.71 60foot/28"/4.10:1/12"/469 #48/FlatHYD/Q-Jet/Torker/3950Lbs"

Torment · 10-13-2003, 05:01 PM

Chad, your signature pic shows a prostock style scoop on that 75. The dyno doesn't take into consideration the ram effect the scoop creates on the top end of the track. You ran 137mph recently right? It's pretty cold in these parts this time of year and your further north than I am

A 3-4mph increase in the cold air isn't hard to believe with your Pontiac at all - just telling you your heads are still too small

Great time of year for trophy passes and me with a couple of wasted head gaskets

The secret to happiness is not getting what you want but rather, wanting what you have.

Half-Inch Stud · 10-13-2003, 05:06 PM

However....BAdbird68's performance Is poossible relative to my 68Firebird combo: the 11.00/123MPH signature was on my 6th pass. Perhaps BadBird68 has dialed-in his combo, with the same 60'foot that I had after 6 passes,

AND I recall some MD fella was deep into the 10's at Island Dragway with a similar combo. Then there is that MD guy with the Big Yellow early GTO running low 10's...Jeff somebody..he told me the Dual Quads gave him the MPH. I agreeed.

Therin add doubt to the doubters of BadBird68 and his 830carb.

HIS

"tbdET/1xxMPH/1.xx 60foot/28"/3.54:1/10"/469 #48/Flat HYD/DualQ-Jets/Offyl/3xx0Lbs
11.00/123MPH/1.50 60foot/29.5"/4.10:1/10"/469 #48/FlatHYD/DualQuad/Wenzler/3250Lbs
12.00/112MPH/1.61 60foot/26"/3.31:1/10"/469 #48/FlatHYD/Q-Jet/Torker/3650Lbs
12.70/103MPH/1.71 60foot/28"/4.10:1/12"/469 #48/FlatHYD/Q-Jet/Torker/3950Lbs"

Half-Inch Stud · 10-13-2003, 05:09 PM

Oh, and my combo was a Flat HYD cam, so his Roller with .630" lift ought to do the 10's, while allowing the 3.55:1 gearset to pull the 60foot.

Nuff said. He's got a fine combo.

I would suggest you-all consider the Badbird68 combo as optimal.

HIS

"tbdET/1xxMPH/1.xx 60foot/28"/3.54:1/10"/469 #48/Flat HYD/DualQ-Jets/Offyl/3xx0Lbs
11.00/123MPH/1.50 60foot/29.5"/4.10:1/10"/469 #48/FlatHYD/DualQuad/Wenzler/3250Lbs
12.00/112MPH/1.61 60foot/26"/3.31:1/10"/469 #48/FlatHYD/Q-Jet/Torker/3650Lbs
12.70/103MPH/1.71 60foot/28"/4.10:1/12"/469 #48/FlatHYD/Q-Jet/Torker/3950Lbs"

JOE ALLAN · 10-13-2003, 05:11 PM

Hey! Just one more thing to say then you all can pick on me! "THE BIGGEST FOOL OF ALL IS THE ONE THAT CAN FOOL HIS SELF".....! Hang Loose, you'll live longer.....JOE

Goatman · 10-13-2003, 05:12 PM

There are many things like torque converter slippage and drag coefficient that aren't taken into a ccount for a particular combination.

I can use all of these features in my Drag 2000 simulator.

Here is how I arrived at my initial estimate for my 474 motor that made 640 HP at the dyno.

I first entered in my vehicle type. The program has many to choose from. I chose the 69 GTO, as it was closest to my 70. You can then adjust the pre entered data, such as weight, wheelbase, frontal area, percentage of wieght, and drag coefficient (DC).

I then filled in my engine specs, using my dyno sheet and CI.

I then filled in my drivetrain data, including trans type, converter size and stall, gear ratios, and rear end ratio.

I then moved onto tire and wheel sizes. Height, width, Diameter, and traction coefficient were all included. I played with the traction coefficient to see what would happen with traction.

Then came the specs on shifting, launch RPM, etc, etc, etc.

Then I filled in the weather. I used several different situations to give me a better idea of what the car should be doing for an average ET.

As you can see, its a pretty complete program. It projected that my ET's should be in the 10.50 range and I ran a 10.62 @ 128. Pretty damned impressive.

That's how I know he's making more than 600 HP.

I'm like heaven, everybody wanna get to me.........

Half-Inch Stud · 10-13-2003, 05:13 PM

Badbird...what was the tire dia?

HIS

dammen8 · 10-13-2003, 05:27 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Torment:
Chad, your signature pic shows a prostock style scoop on that 75. The dyno doesn't take into consideration the ram effect the scoop creates on the top end of the track. You ran 137mph recently right? It's pretty cold in these parts this time of year and your further north than I am

A 3-4mph increase in the cold air isn't hard to believe with your Pontiac at all - just telling you your heads are still too small

Great time of year for trophy passes and me with a couple of wasted head gaskets

The secret to happiness is not getting what you want but rather, wanting what you have.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually I wouldn't say it is a pro stock hood scoop it is only 6" tall. And there was a post on here awhile ago about how you really do not pick up anything from a hood scoop besides a air restriction, Now dont get me wrong I am not saying that it is hurting me but I would say that if there are any performance gains they are pretty marginal from the ramming effect. I mean the hood scoop can only hold so much and once it reaches this point it just starts to overflow if you follow what I am saying. I am also having problems with my hood trying to lift off of the car at top end, it is actually lifing my hood about 3/4" so inturn it is lifting the hood scoop off of the air pan, One more thing is that the incomming air tube coming down from the ceiling at Lances is pressurized Although I am sure it does not have 130mph wind in it. What I am saying is that the calculators that Bruce posted are saying that my engine is making way over 800hp and You and I both know that is not so. I could see maybe 720-730hp with the scoop if it was staying sealed(which it is not). But there is now way in he!! that I am picking up 100hp from my scoop. The weather was 85-90 degrees that day and the DA was 2400' so by anymeans not great air but at the same time not bad. But boy you are right about my heads being to small I sure could use some more flow, did you want to by them? Later

Chad Dammen

ND's fastest Pontiac (I think) and Minot's fastest street car (not like that means much)

dammen8 · 10-13-2003, 05:28 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Nuff said. He's got a fine combo.

I would suggest you-all consider the Badbird68 combo as optimal.

HIS

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would agree

ND's fastest Pontiac (I think) and Minot's fastest street car (not like that means much)

Menu

About Us