LS1GTO Forums banner

I <3 CSP !!! CAM ONLY making 474whp

8K views 141 replies 39 participants last post by  Ben 
#1 ·
just got back from getting my GTO tuned by Andrew at CSP... i go there all the way from brooklyn NY and its very well worth it. he takes his time, makes sure the cars PERFECT and NEVER rushes... we left his shop at FOUR AM !! he tuned my GTO and a fellow Maggie GTO owner.... let get to the numbers !
mods are as follows.
-KN CAI
-FAST 102
-Kooks LT CATLESS mids
-SLP LM1
-Powerbond UD
-High flow OIL pump
-Vegeance Racing VXR5 cam
-springs
-pushrods
-rockers
-Kateck timing chain


Car made 474 whp !!!

again thats four hundred seventy four wheel horsepower. couldnt be any happier. Idles great, drives great... and got BALLS !!
 
#60 ·
As for my dyno numbers over inflated I disagree. They are what they are and compared to other local dynojets in the area they seem to be the same horsepower with the same car. Not every car dynos great by any means, but I'll tell you when people get a nice number on the dyno they tend to put it on the forum. It is what it is.

Sorry you feel that there is something overinflated about what I do. You are more than welcome to come to my dyno and make some pulls and get the CSP dyno number LOL.
 
#85 ·
As for my dyno numbers over inflated I disagree. They are what they are and compared to other local dynojets in the area they seem to be the same horsepower with the same car. Not every car dynos great by any means, but I'll tell you when people get a nice number on the dyno they tend to put it on the forum. It is what it is.

Sorry you feel that there is something overinflated about what I do. You are more than welcome to come to my dyno and make some pulls and get the CSP dyno number LOL.
4 FREE? In that case I'll come down after the 408 is finished. :)
Since the beginning days of Al Gore's internet, I changed the font color in all my posts. It separated my posts from the rest. Just a stupid habit now.

As for the thread, I was searching around Kurt's new baby thread and saw the title. After laughing for a bit, I figured I'd read it. Well, to my surprise, it was the typical dyno thread. Mind you, these are as dumb as the "cam only" and "stock short block" records all over L$1Joke but I just had to read it. Like a car accident you must stop and stare at. ;)

Maybe because I just spent four hours looking for a little more out of this MAST head and it just made me cranky. More cranky than normal because the first thing I was asked was - "What did it flow?" I lost it since I was just checking air speed at that time and didn't calculate the CFM.

Anyway - I hate "dyno" threads (and "flow number") threads because, last time I checked, I never lined up against a fking flow bench or Dynojet.Damn I need some sleep. Later -

:eek:hsnap1:
This is 100% sig worthy, and I'm taking it. Too funny. :gr_jest:
 
#65 ·
Holy fking sheit - It's another fking dyno thread - Almost as stupid as flow number threads.

If the car doesn't pick up 25-26 MPH from the 1/8 to the 1/4 the "dyno" numbers are bull crap. Simple as that.

Jeez I hate fking dyno threads. Get the fking car to the track -
 
#66 ·
Ed, I never asked this before, but why do you choose Navy as a font? I always wondered that.

--------

I think the general gist of the thread has been "no one gives a shit about the #s until the car goes to the track", but now it's just a fun argument. I want to bolt on Ed's car onto my car.
 
#69 ·
Since the beginning days of Al Gore's internet, I changed the font color in all my posts. It separated my posts from the rest. Just a stupid habit now.

As for the thread, I was searching around Kurt's new baby thread and saw the title. After laughing for a bit, I figured I'd read it. Well, to my surprise, it was the typical dyno thread. Mind you, these are as dumb as the "cam only" and "stock short block" records all over L$1Joke but I just had to read it. Like a car accident you must stop and stare at. ;)

Maybe because I just spent four hours looking for a little more out of this MAST head and it just made me cranky. More cranky than normal because the first thing I was asked was - "What did it flow?" I lost it since I was just checking air speed at that time and didn't calculate the CFM.

Anyway - I hate "dyno" threads (and "flow number") threads because, last time I checked, I never lined up against a fking flow bench or Dynojet.

Damn I need some sleep. Later -

:eek:hsnap1:
 
#73 ·
This thread fuckin wins.

-Dyno numbers are high

-Car needs to make it down the strip

-"Your opinion is stupid"

-Dyno numbers are too high

-The 1/4 mile is the only real test

-Some more lolz and bolt-ons that are bolt-ons

-Dyno numbers are too fucking high

-Run the car down the goddamned track

-Every member of LS1Tech smokes crack

Got it!
 
#75 ·
So what I'm thinking is I have a set of GTO rims with drag radials. Now I clearanced the center hubs because they wouldn't fit on my vette with out doing that (yes I run GTO rims on my 10 second vette), but I'd be more than happy to race Cebo's GTO if he'll allow me. I'd need probably 5 passes to get the best time, however MPH should pretty much come as soon as I get traction.

I'm a little drunk, so I hope this is in the cam thread instead of the tuner wars LOL
 
#78 ·
Now thats a plan!
 
#91 · (Edited)
100% correct - note I never said he had to hit 125mph to prove it. I gave him a range with 2 key components - his weight & DA. There are formulas to adjust for both.

If he ran in 90 degree, 70% humidity - you know he is going to trap lower then at 40 dgrees & 30% percent humidity. Of course we are in the mine shaft air time frame for the year - so big power is there.

Add in his weight and you can see where the car should be. If his car weighs 4K it will be slower then a 3.8K car - just physics, before you add in other items.

This is why Dynos are only tunning tools - they mean nothing on the street/track.

How does the car hook? How does he car react to wheel spin or bog? A dyno does not show this - yet the win slip does.

Now on my side - Kaltech, like Andrew does a street & dyno tune. But Brian also requests scans from the track, he will then adjust the tune based on what he sees. So a tune from him means that he spends a lot of time making sure the car max's its power curve. I can't tell you how many times minor adjustements are made to the tunes of both Jr's & my car. He wants it close to perfect. Not saying Andrew does not do this - but you have to admit that a simple dyno can never take into account these variables. This is why my car can run a 11.59 with only 369hp - the car is tuned to its components under real world racing conditions.

Dyno I loose - real world I kick ass. This is where tuners ability will be shown.

Steve

Edit - note the above is why I always show my DA & weight - these items are just to damn critical and why I dismiss most PB's that do not have them. A new statement for others to jump on!
 
#95 ·
I think Keith is onto something here....

I got an idea that could benefit all of us tuners and be somewhat fun for everyone.

Super Duper Dyno Day Cruise - Absolutely NO tuning.

We all meet up at one shop, dyno, and then cruise to the next shop. Same day. No tuning, no computers hooked up, and maybe even no wideband. That way we get a somewhat legitimate comparison, have a cool little cruise, and maybe even a car show and prizes at the end for each class.

We should set some ground rules though. Like runs must be made at 180 degrees (just a number, we can decide on a final one later). And like no icing or crap like that. That way things are able to be compared without controversy.

What do you penis measuring guys think about that? =P
 
#97 ·
I just ordered a fast intake for mine. Andrew I'll be seeing you in a few weeks. Maybe I can start another one of these unbelievable power threads after you're done with it. ;)
 
#98 ·
Can count me in on the Super Duper Dyno Day Cruise!
 
#104 ·
This thread is full of WIN


A fast intake is considered a bolt on just bout everywhere


This car will not trap more that 119MPH.. Witch would be BS for that power





Just want to help measure some dick. Peace out
 
#105 ·
@ Youngrushhour...

Good god, I just read this entire thread and I think every other post was from you complaining "this is not cam only". Cam only has been widely defined for YEARS in the LSX world as any car that still has the stock block and stock heads. GET OVER IT.

As for the dyno numbers, I know there was another guy, High voltage something? That made over 480 cam only with this exact cam.

I personally have never made more or less than TWO hp on Andrews dyno vs other dynojets, and I have been to four different shops, so I have quite a bit compare to.

Let the OP enjoy his car, stop getting butthurt about someone else's dyno numbers. Also, asking someone to prove their dyno numbers with track numbers is crap to begin with and is completely dependent on how he drives. Trap speed is as dependent on driver as ET. You spin halfway down the track, your trap speed will suck. You shift slow, your trap speed will suck. You shift early, your trap speed will suck. You don't keep your foot planted through the traps, your trap speed will suck. The list goes on.

As for trapping 125 mph? Cmon...there are 402 guys on here that barely trap that with way more power and a much flatter torque curve. Trapping 125 in a stock cube, full weight GTO is a tall order. I know with more seat time, my gto would have been 11.6's or so at 120-121 with 459 rwhp. I would say the OP should trap 121-122 with a perfect pass, assuming no weight reduction or skinnies.

Either way, if he "proves" it or not by track numbers, WHO GIVES A FLYING FUCK. It is his car, not yours. Get over it and yourself and stop worrying about it. Jesus H Christ, the things people get their panties in a bunch over on the fucking internet these days.

What is the deal with all the serial killer references too? That is creepy as fuck.
 
#107 ·
Congrats. Post up and let us know how it goes at the track.

Too bad that's not cam only. That's cam and intake.
I think if I used my bicycle on that dyno it'd put down 80rwhp.
You should get rid of those piece of crap heads, then.
You need to change your title. The car is not cam only.
Someone needs to change the tread title plz. Cam only this car is not.
It is slightly more realistic when you realize its not cam only. It is still high, but makes a bit more sense. Big cam, the FAST is probably adding a good 15 hp up top. Bigger the cam, bigger the FAST power added.
There is no "best tuner". Only your preferred tuner.
Your opinion is stupid because there really is no "best" tuner. There is always someone who can make a certain car run better; you can only really have a preferred tuner who you trust and go to.

I'm not really crapping on the thread all that much other than the fact that the car is not cam only (also, Andrew's dyno numbers are always slightly high; he has a high reading DynoJet). I actually think the numbers are a bit more realistic when you take the fact that the OP does not know what cam only means and has a FAST 102 on the car helping it to breathe quite a bit.

I agree with my father, though. Bring the car to the track. Only way to make sense of the dyno number to begin with.
And while I disagree with you on a LOT of things (and think your numbers are always overinflated, but that is a constant and something that just exists at this point), this is one of the reasons I can never say anything overly negative. You are not too full of yourself where you want to label yourself the best, etc.

I always recommend Brian at Kaltech, but there are a number of tuners throughout the country who are up there (along with Virginia Speed in... well... VA) for LS engines. But I'd be hard pressed to ever call one of them "the best", since there are far too many variables to ever actually have a "best" tuner.

So while I will always be skeptical of the numbers on some of your cars, at least you aren't as ****y as some of the guys out there who like to get their dicks sucked all over the place. Props for not being "that guy".
No, it makes it sound like you are equating Andrew with Walmart. :ninja:
Cam only is a cam with supporting bolt-ons (minus heads or intake).

My car has some very, very minor head clean-up. I cannot call my car cam only even though what is done with my heads likely added less HP to the car than the OP's FAST intake.
Why isn't a supercharger a bolt-on? Why isn't nitrous a bolt-on? Why isn't a crate engine a bolt-on? Why isn't an intake a bolt-on? They all bolt-on.

It's not a bolt-on because it's not a bolt-on.
You completely missed my point. You need me to hold your hand and walk you through it?

What a bolt-on is, no one really knows. The definition is retarded, as nearly anything on a car is a bolt-on, including power adders. What a bolt-on is remains purely subjective, rather than objective. Unfortunate, but it is what it is.

An intake manifold is not considered a bolt-on. Neither are heads. Neither are power-adders. Neither is nitrous. Neither is a crate engine. Neither is a new car. All of these things generally "bolt-on" to the outside of an engine (other than heads). You can physically bolt-on a brand new car around an engine if you wished.

With how stupidly subjective the term is, a bolt-on does not include an intake manifold. Do I agree with it? I don't really, no. Because I prefer an objective standard rather than subjective. But the general, accepted list of bolt-ons includes such parts as:

Cold air intake
Headers
Cat-back
UDP
Rockers
Stall converter (some people get bitchy, but it is generally included in the group even though it's really not a bolt-on since the engine is not opened up to install it)
Gears (same argument for/against as the stall)
Suspension

Probably some other things I am forgetting.

I made my prior post as I did simply to show the idiocy of the phrase itself. If you'd like to equate that to something, go right ahead. But I meant what I said. This is an entire argument over semantics and what is included or not in the category.
Some people don't think a ported intake puts you in the bolt-on category anymore. I don't care much about that since I think they are generally worthless (which you know my opinion on). If it makes someone feel better, by all means.

You are missing the point about my post, though. The simple fact that the term "bolt-on" is retarded. As mentioned, a supercharger bolts on. You need a screwdriver to install a Maggie (over simplified, but you get the point).
Ed, I never asked this before, but why do you choose Navy as a font? I always wondered that.

--------

I think the general gist of the thread has been "no one gives a shit about the #s until the car goes to the track", but now it's just a fun argument. I want to bolt on Ed's car onto my car.
That was kind of my point with that post; the silliness of the category is just that. Though saying "cam only" is definitely not an accurate representation of the car itself since it is not cam only. Which is now a complete circle and back to my original post.

LS1GTO is circular.
I thought you were just being a hipster ;)

Also, Ed, I believe the correct phrase for Tech is Toke. I prefer that one, anyway. Since I think everyone on that board has smoked themselves retarded and all.

Ed, what did the MAST heads flow? I think that's your problem, right there. Your flow is backed up. Is the stream solid or is it more of a dribble?
The more you know! I never realized you created that masterpiece of a name.
Responses in bold
Jesus. You must love to read your posts because no one else gives a shit.
 
#108 · (Edited)
lets think about something here.
Car that makes 637rwhp on ECS dyno traps 128mph

This car at 470+ should trap 125 ?

Just using Gary's car for an example here

I get kinda upset too when i think about a car w/ relatively no work done that makes this kinda power. Especially when I consider how much I have done to mine and it falls short by a bunch.
I bet upon disassembly of the OP's engine a few things would emerge:
pistons are out of the hole a good bit, .012 to maybe .015. With the stock gaskets this sets up more CR and almost perfect quench distance
Head cc's are on the small side possibly
line bore is straight for once on a GM factory short block and the motor spins nice and free.
It all adds up to = factory freak
 
#111 · (Edited)
lets think about something here.
Car that makes 637rwhp on ECS dyno traps 128mph

This car at 470+ should trap 125 ?

Just using Gary's car for an example here

I get kinda upset too when i think about a car w/ relatively no work done that makes this kinda power. Especially when I consider how much I have done to mine and it falls short by a bunch.
I bet upon disassembly a few things would emerge:
pistons are out of the hole a good bit, .012 to maybe .015. With the stock gaskets this sets up more CR and almost perfect quench distance
Head cc's are on the small side possibly
line bore is straight for once on a GM factory short block and the motor spins nice and free.
It all adds up to = factory freak
First off my car has everything stock from gm in the rotating assembly. The stock 243 heads are still on the car. There may be a 3 angle valve job done to them but not ported. I have an overdrive crank pulley, 2.8 snout pulley, and 1:1 rear pulleys. I have an ECS cam and maf tune from them. I am spraying Meth and running 100 octane. Ported LS2 throttle body and stainless works 1 3/4 lt headers with no cats. There is nothing crazy to my setup and anyone with a 112HH can have about the same numbers. Now my car has never trapped well. I could probably get it to trap better if I wasn't running a th400 and ran more then 14psi in the slicks. Now I also have to admit those numbers haven't been updated since the th400 went in. Those numbers were from when the car was tuned with the t56 in it, so forsure the numbers will be lower. If anyone believes my car isnt what I say it is they can come look for themselves and if they think the rotating assembly has been messed with they can either pay Doug at ECS or Walt to take it apart and prove you worng.
 
#109 ·
LS2-GTO I have one thing to say to you! Nice VB3s they look good. and as for the cam only... Congrats man I'd post it up too! hopefully some kills/ time slips to come. Be positive people, at least its not a mustang he's talking about...
 
#110 ·
Ok. The guy posted his results on a public forum. He is going to get all kinds of responses from different people. Especially with controversial dyno numbers.

I think the people that are getting their panties in a bunch are the people that feel that every response to the OP should be a pat on the back congratulations post.

If every post in every thread was a congratulations or an agreement response to the OP's, nobody would log on. Booorrrrinngggg. So, let people express their opinions, and then you can either agree with them, or disagree and express your own opinion.

"This guy is an asshole because he didn't suck the OP," is stupid.
 
#112 ·
LOL, LS2-GTO sums it up.
 
#113 ·
I'm leaving key west now, tethering with my phone so I don't have much time until the ship is out of reach...

Anyway, Gary, I don't think Andy is questioning your power, just the idea that trap speed should be x with x amount of power and is a perfect equation. So nothing against your car by any means.

I'm hoping when I come back and read these threads to see that we've got a peaceful discussion going on. I'd hate to come back and they be LOCKED hahaha.

Andrew
 
#115 · (Edited)
Not sure Giants did that much better - though for once I didn't yell at the tv.

Now if I was a Vick fan - well that is a whole "other" issue. Reid must be ready to have a heart attack.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top