stevegasm Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 i heard a GTP today with at least a 3.4 pulley on it damn...i missed hearing those!! how do u konw what size pulley it had?...mine is pretty loud with the 3.8 pulley...people turn around to see whats going on when i go WOT!...lol...i'm pretty sure the sound is all about the intake ur using...stock airbox=the suck for sound... and, nice to see up post over here animuL!...i want a WHIPPLE!!...what mods to i need to do to run that saftely!? There's a noticable difference in sound between a 3.8" and a 3.4". I love the look I get when I roll on someone with an open window, it scares the shit outta them Quote
mfewtrail Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 that's some excessive over-correction for drivetrain loss. even adding 20% puts you under 425 flywheel torque. He was using 20% and rounding up(438.75 ft-lbs @ the crank). You need to set it up as a proportion instead of simply tacking on 20%. Quote
animuL Posted August 6, 2006 Report Posted August 6, 2006 that's some excessive over-correction for drivetrain loss. even adding 20% puts you under 425 flywheel torque. you dont add 20% to the wheel numbers, you subtract 20% from, or take 80% of, the engine numbers to acheive the wheel numbers. 330 x .8 = 264 440 x .8 = 352 Quote
PCGUY112887 Posted August 7, 2006 Report Posted August 7, 2006 Emm yeah you'd add 20% to wheel numbers to get a good guess on the crank numbers. The drivetrain takes away remember? Quote
Euro Posted August 7, 2006 Report Posted August 7, 2006 i heard a GTP today with at least a 3.4 pulley on it damn...i missed hearing those!! how do u konw what size pulley it had?...mine is pretty loud with the 3.8 pulley...people turn around to see whats going on when i go WOT!...lol...i'm pretty sure the sound is all about the intake ur using...stock airbox=the suck for sound... im not sure.. it was at least a 3.4 cause it was loud. he hit it just a little to hear it for like a second and then once he stopped turning he punched it. heard it for a few seconds. the car was stock looking minus the pulley Quote
animuL Posted August 9, 2006 Report Posted August 9, 2006 Emm yeah you'd add 20% to wheel numbers to get a good guess on the crank numbers. The drivetrain takes away remember? What I was saying above is you don't add 20% to the wheel numbers because the wheel numbers are based off the engine numbers, not inversely. Take an engine that makes 330 horsepower on an engine dyno, put it in a car with a driveline that takes up 20% of the power, thats 66 horsepower. So 330 - 66 = 264 horsepower after the 20% driveline loss. My GTP dynoed 1 hp less than that, so it would be generally accepted to assume a 20% driveline loss and thus 329 engine horsepower. It works the same for the torque numbers of course. The reason I convert them and mension the engine hp numbers is #1 cause it sounds that much more impressive and #2 because its easier to compare to the factory advertised numbers for the L67 engine. Knowing that the factory advertises 240 hp and 280 tq and knowing that mine made 330 hp and 440 tq, you can calculate that my GTP with the only mod being the Whipple made 90 more horsepower and 160 more ft lbs of torque. Quote
adam_murphy Posted August 16, 2006 Report Posted August 16, 2006 i wouldnt mind doing a whipple if it didnt cost so damn much, but its well worth it. I'd need a built trans to handle it too. The gen V is holding the trans alright though, and sounds just as sweet but not as loud. Im sure he had an air filter, that just shows that the intake is very free flowing, running s/c w/o filter = chop suey for a mouse that may work its way in the engine bay Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.