khuebner250
Well-Known Member
I've seen the same all over the interwebs. Anywhere from 250-256@50. I always thought it was 252@50.
Trick Flow small block heads
- Thread starter B3422w5
- Start date
-
gzig5
Well-Known Member
Thanks, that's why I asked. Was seeing all kinds of contradictory information on that cam. That dyno graph looks pretty much exactly what I hope to achieve in my build and it sounds like you'll pick up a bit with your final configuration. Now I can start focusing my parts procurement efforts.
MOPAROFFICIAL
Oogliboogli
My 410 seemed to not be bothered by the 1 5/8 hedmans till up in the r's. However...the tti's let it pull to the moon.
Last mp557 cam i degreed in a few months ago...was 258 @ .050......
I also question the double adjustment for elevation...confusing.
but its a dyno sheet...not an ET slip...
I also question the double adjustment for elevation...confusing.
but its a dyno sheet...not an ET slip...
MOPAROFFICIAL
Oogliboogli
Sound about right.
Isnt the .528 like 248@.050? Closing @ 58 or 60? Last time I degreed the thing was 2004
khuebner250
Well-Known Member
Anyway, I wasn't looking for accolades or LOLs or eye-rolling. At the end of the day, I just wanted to keep the engines insides from going to the outsides. The fact that it made 500/500 uncorrected, is just a bonus for me and I'm okay with that. It's not a race car anyway, it's going to be driven.
It's funny, the first part of this thread people acted like the trick flows were the second coming of Christ. Then the heads were crap because Grey's didn't turn out expected numbers. So, I thought I would post my numbers and build specs just so there's more info available.
Some of this thread seems a little schizophrenic. It's like going to a cruise/carshow and some guys picking apart another guys car. Only to find out that he hasn't owned a Mopar for 35 years and then drives off in a Kia Sorento. Take it for what it is, just some random dude posting numbers on the internet.
It's funny, the first part of this thread people acted like the trick flows were the second coming of Christ. Then the heads were crap because Grey's didn't turn out expected numbers. So, I thought I would post my numbers and build specs just so there's more info available.
Some of this thread seems a little schizophrenic. It's like going to a cruise/carshow and some guys picking apart another guys car. Only to find out that he hasn't owned a Mopar for 35 years and then drives off in a Kia Sorento. Take it for what it is, just some random dude posting numbers on the internet.
khuebner250
Well-Known Member
I'm looking forward to the trick flow intake for sure. Even though it's a square bore copy of the M1 that I have. It won't have been molested by me, I think I screwed up that intake I have. I don't know why, just a feeling I have.
gzig5
Well-Known Member
I get that feeling every time I touch my car....if it's worth doing right, it's worth doing twice.
540 hp is solid. Will make a quick street car.
Where did you have it dyno'ed? Just curious....I grew up in Colorado, and I used to by parts from a small shop called US Performance in Fort Collins back in the late 90's (Scott McBroom owned it)...not sure if he is still in business or not.
Where did you have it dyno'ed? Just curious....I grew up in Colorado, and I used to by parts from a small shop called US Performance in Fort Collins back in the late 90's (Scott McBroom owned it)...not sure if he is still in business or not.
B3422w5
Well-Known Member
Just talked to Howard at Trick Flow
Gonna be fall before we see the intake
I had also asked him a while back about the HS rocker gear clearing the bigger diameter roller springs that the mechanical roller heads come with
I asked because on non Trick flow replacement heads those rockers wont clear more than a 1.50 spring
Due to the “ relocation” on these new heads the 1.56 roller spring indeed clears that they use.
That was good to know.
Gonna be fall before we see the intake
I had also asked him a while back about the HS rocker gear clearing the bigger diameter roller springs that the mechanical roller heads come with
I asked because on non Trick flow replacement heads those rockers wont clear more than a 1.50 spring
Due to the “ relocation” on these new heads the 1.56 roller spring indeed clears that they use.
That was good to know.
khuebner250
Well-Known Member
Had it Dyno'd at AMS in FTC. US is in Loveland now but I don't think Scott is affiliated anymore, know sure.
PRH
Well-Known Member
I’m sure this will be opening up a can of worms...... but.....
If the dyno is sitting at 5200’ elevation.....the observed barometric pressure at the dyno shop was not 30”........ it would have been more like 24.50-25.00”....... which is a pretty huge difference.
30” could have been the “corrected” barometric pressure........ which is what the pressure would be if you were at sea level.
But that’s not a number that's used for any of the normal SAE corrections.
“Uncorrected” tq/hp is just that........ raw data.
If the motor made over 500hp, without any correction applied, while being tested at 5200’ elevation in 91* air....... there is going to be a pretty huge correction factor to get back to “std corrected data”(29.92”, 60*, zero humidity).
That being said........ if the math showed the corrected numbers to be 670hp......... I think we all know those numbers wouldn’t be duplicated with the motor tested at a legit facility much closer to actual sea level.
Last edited:
khuebner250
Well-Known Member
LOVELAND!!....yeah, sorry (my bad), I've been gone for quite a few years now and I confused Loveland and Ft Collins, lol. I was getting my undergrad @ UNC (Greeley) when I used to frequent that shop.
PRH
Well-Known Member
Baro pressure data from “weather” sites is “corrected”, not observed.
The “standard” baro pressure at sea level is 29.92”.
You lose about 1” of baro pressure per 1000ft elevation.
5000’....... you lose about 5”.
This should clear it up:
Understanding the difference between corrected and uncorrected barometer « Air Density Online
The “standard” baro pressure at sea level is 29.92”.
You lose about 1” of baro pressure per 1000ft elevation.
5000’....... you lose about 5”.
This should clear it up:
Understanding the difference between corrected and uncorrected barometer « Air Density Online
Last edited:
PRH
Well-Known Member
For grins, I plugged in a few guesstimated data points onto one of the Wallace calculators.
I used 24.85” baro, 91*, and 25% humidity....... and it spit out a correction factor of about 23%........which would correct 500hp(obtained in those weather conditions above) to 615hp.
Frankly, if that dyno shop is using corrected baro readings........ that would explain why it has a stingy reputation.
There’s about 5” of barometric pressure loss that’s not being accounted for.
I used 24.85” baro, 91*, and 25% humidity....... and it spit out a correction factor of about 23%........which would correct 500hp(obtained in those weather conditions above) to 615hp.
Frankly, if that dyno shop is using corrected baro readings........ that would explain why it has a stingy reputation.
There’s about 5” of barometric pressure loss that’s not being accounted for.
Yes, this is where I was heading above about possibly correcting for altitude twice. The uncorrected BP at that altitude is ~24", ~30" is sea level. (see link below with both uncorrected and corrected at Bandimere).
Bandimere Speedway - Morrison, Colorado - Engine Tuning Weather
~540hp is what your motor is making at sea level, which is what I would expect from the parts you listed. In reality, at your altitude the number is probably closer to 440-460hp (ball park number). Having raced at Bandimere for years, then moving to Indiana and watching my car pick up over a second in the 1/4 mile...yeah, its amazing what a little more air will do.
Not knocking your motor at all, I think it made good power, just trying to help. That should be good for mid 11's at Bandimere in a capable chassis.
Last edited:
khuebner250
Well-Known Member
I see what you're saying. Maybe I missed it. There were tons of numbers fluctuating on that screen. I would have thought that the Dyno weather station was correct and current for altitude. All he did was make sure it was on his weather station and non corrected. He didn't play around with any data, at all actually. Maybe I can get back over there and look at the data. I didn't print out every pull.
PRH
Well-Known Member
The fact that you said you saw something on the dyno that was in the 30” range doesn’t sound promising to me.
None of the common SAE correction factors use “corrected” baro readings.
I can’t think of any reason why you’d have any use for that info on the dyno.
Here’s my guess....... he’s using the corrected baro readings, which is why he said the uncorrected numbers went from 510 to 540 corrected.
That would be about the correct amount of correction(4%)for an uncorrected baro of around 30”, 91*, and a little humidity.
The issue is....... the uncorrected baro isn’t 30”........ it’s 24.xx....... so those 540hp numbers are erroneous.
Here’s the baro pressure for Fort Collins over the last few days.
Uncorrected, in Mb. To convert to in/hg divide by 33.864.
Yesterday, from mid-day into evening....... 846mb down to 844mb....... or .....24.98 to 24.92 in/hg.
Looks like the highest pressure in the last few days was 6/29 around 11pm....... 851.8mb....... 25.15”hg.
None of the common SAE correction factors use “corrected” baro readings.
I can’t think of any reason why you’d have any use for that info on the dyno.
Here’s my guess....... he’s using the corrected baro readings, which is why he said the uncorrected numbers went from 510 to 540 corrected.
That would be about the correct amount of correction(4%)for an uncorrected baro of around 30”, 91*, and a little humidity.
The issue is....... the uncorrected baro isn’t 30”........ it’s 24.xx....... so those 540hp numbers are erroneous.
Here’s the baro pressure for Fort Collins over the last few days.
Uncorrected, in Mb. To convert to in/hg divide by 33.864.
Yesterday, from mid-day into evening....... 846mb down to 844mb....... or .....24.98 to 24.92 in/hg.
Looks like the highest pressure in the last few days was 6/29 around 11pm....... 851.8mb....... 25.15”hg.
Last edited:
Looks great my man. Being a tool, at least you have a curve to help plot a torque converter and launch RPM. And everything else that goes with it.
I have seen a few guys come up woith that number as well. At least it is in the ballpark.
khuebner250
Well-Known Member
khuebner250
Well-Known Member
You just call me a tool, LoL. Jk
yellow rose
Overnight Sensation
Uh, no, with numbers like that you didn't hurt the intake. I don't know what you think you screwed up, because when it comes to porting intakes, they are much tougher than cylinder heads. It's hard to find 12-15 HP porting the intake, but it's damn sure easy to loose 50-60 right quick, in the blink of an eye.
PRH
Well-Known Member
When you go over there, ask him to show you what the current baro pressure is in the dyno room.
If it’s anything close to 30”...... you have your answer.
It’s pretty simple really........ there’s going to be 20-25% correction for that dyno shop(for SAE J607), depending on the day.
For example, at that location...... even on what would be considered a “good day”......25.15 baro, 65*, 10% humidity........ the correction factor is still 20%(500hp uncorrected = 600hp corrected).
If he’s coming up with corrected numbers that are in the 3-10% range....... they’re wrong.
Likely because the correction inputs are wrong.
That would be a classic case of GIGO.
Corrections in the 3-7% are what we typically see here on an average day....... and this dyno is only at about 400’ elevation.
Last edited:
khuebner250
Well-Known Member
Okay here we go. Thanks for your help. This would appear to me that this is corrected. I'm editing my original post to reflect this only. I was/am confused. Idk if my 510/520 was a earlier run but 2 of the pulls aren't saved or deleted. I can find a 2-4k pull that shows 518tq but that was with a different carb and 33* of timing. I think I know where the crazy number came from. There were hold over numbers in the manual entry tab and it showed 19 inhg in the pressure column?? I thought they were correction factors, so I clicked on it and then graphed it. Hence some of my confusion. I have zero Dyno exposure and it shows. So I apologise for some of this crazyness. Hope that helps.
-
