# Latest Mods



## PDQ GTO (Jun 21, 2007)

Hello Folks,
Just got the Goat back after installation of SLP LT's, ported-polished intake- throttle body, 228/232 cam and tune, baseline and after. What a forking monster. I had no idea how mean she would be & sound. Around 500hp at the crank and 412hp at the rear, 388 RWT. Robert at Adanced Dyno did a super job. Total paid for parts and labor $3,725. She is a totally new and better GTO. Please excuse the crappy Pics. old camera...


----------



## 04YJ-GTO (Nov 7, 2007)

Very nice


----------



## Devils3023 (May 21, 2007)

You gained 100 hp at the crank from those mods only? Slp has a 490hp pac that costs $5k and has alot more upgrades/parts than what you got. SLP Performance Parts - VIEW P/N: 29053
:confused Why would the slp pac only add 90hp with so many mods when you were able to achieve the same results with less parts and money.


----------



## PDQ GTO (Jun 21, 2007)

Vaild question...

SLP has one interest only and that is selling stuff. Re-read my post. Porting & polishing are a big factor and offer zero money for after market company's. No money in it for them to upgrade stock compoents. Also, I had a few light Mods. in place before the latest work, so it's not a stock to 100-HP jump. SLP packages are not the necessarily the best way to go. The best route is a good local tuner with LS1-LS2-F-Body know-how. The preditor-tuner just does not cut it when it comes to gaining the Max HP. 
My numbers are real, like it or not...




Devils3023 said:


> You gained 100 hp at the crank from those mods only? Slp has a 490hp pac that costs $5k and has alot more upgrades/parts than what you got. SLP Performance Parts - VIEW P/N: 29053
> :confused Why would the slp pac only add 90hp with so many mods when you were able to achieve the same results with less parts and money.


----------



## AlaGreyGoat (Jul 6, 2006)

Hi,
Those torque numbers actually seem a little low.
I have an 05 with basic mods;
Pacesetter LTs with catless mids
X-pipe with glasspack muflers
K&N Drop-in filter
Dyno tune
I got 369RWHP and 367RWT

Larry


----------



## raspantienator (Nov 20, 2007)

I am unable to split hairs over the packages offered and what is best. To new to this stuff. I'm learning much from you all though!
The pipes look awesome and with a cam to boot, it must sound awfully sweet.
Power I'm sure you can feel!
Very nice!


----------



## Devils3023 (May 21, 2007)

PDQ GTO said:


> Vaild question...
> 
> SLP has one interest only and that is selling stuff. Re-read my post. Porting & polishing are a big factor and offer zero money for after market company's. No money in it for them to upgrade stock compoents. Also, I had a few light Mods. in place before the latest work, so it's not a stock to 100-HP jump. SLP packages are not the necessarily the best way to go. The best route is a good local tuner with LS1-LS2-F-Body know-how. The preditor-tuner just does not cut it when it comes to gaining the Max HP.
> My numbers are real, like it or not...


I wasn't doubting your numbers man. It was more like wondering why the slp pac cost so much more, adds more parts but nets the same gains as you did. Your mods def seem like a better option and value. :cheers


----------



## PDQ GTO (Jun 21, 2007)

No worries...:cheers



Devils3023 said:


> I wasn't doubting your numbers man. It was more like wondering why the slp pac cost so much more, adds more parts but nets the same gains as you did. Your mods def seem like a better option and value. :cheers


----------



## PDQ GTO (Jun 21, 2007)

Hmm... Every motor is Dif. Maybe you have a stronger beast? The numbers are what they are... Nice #'s for your Mods. :cheers



AlaGreyGoat said:


> Hi,
> Those torque numbers actually seem a little low.
> I have an 05 with basic mods;
> Pacesetter LTs with catless mids
> ...


----------



## LOWET (Oct 21, 2007)

PDQ GTO said:


> Hello Folks,
> Just got the Goat back after installation of SLP LT's, ported-polished intake- throttle body, 228/232 cam and tune, baseline and after. What a forking monster. I had no idea how mean she would be & sound. Around 500hp at the crank and 412hp at the rear, 388 RWT. Robert at Adanced Dyno did a super job. Total paid for parts and labor $3,725. She is a totally new and better GTO. Please excuse the crappy Pics. old camera...


Nice numbers [ are they corrected numbers ] but too bad it was on a DYNO JET, put it on a Mustang Dyno and get real world numbers. On a Mustang Dyno you will be more like 375 RWHP. The Dyno Jet always give higher reading because it is nothing more then a free wheeling system. It is a good tuning tool just not very accurate for HP & TQ readings.


----------



## PDQ GTO (Jun 21, 2007)

I did not know that. Not sure I want to fork-over more $ for another tune, but I will keep it in mind... What do you mean by connected numbers? 



LOWET said:


> Nice numbers [ are they corrected numbers ] but too bad it was on a DYNO JET, put it on a Mustang Dyno and get real world numbers. On a Mustang Dyno you will be more like 375 RWHP. The Dyno Jet always give higher reading because it is nothing more then a free wheeling system. It is a good tuning tool just not very accurate for HP & TQ readings.


----------



## AlaGreyGoat (Jul 6, 2006)

*Dynojet??*

Hi,
Don't want to hyjack the thread but::

I have a question about the Mustang-Dynojet readings.
Most auto engineers list parasitic loses about 15-20%, and the Dynojet
readings are within the 15-20%% numbers, how can you call this wrong?
Seems to me, the Mustang is using about a 25% loss.
Dynojet numbers for a stock LS2 is in the range of 340hp, which is exactly 15% loss.

Larry


----------



## LOWET (Oct 21, 2007)

PDQ GTO said:


> I did not know that. Not sure I want to fork-over more $ for another tune, but I will keep it in mind... What do you mean by connected numbers?


CORRECTED NUMBERS, corrected number are HP and TQ Numbers that are adjusted for items like car weight, power train loss, air temp and other item. You don't have to get another tune , save your cash. A Mustang Dyno allows your car to be tuned and will give you HP and TQ numbers that are as close to real street / track conditions as possible. you can even do a 1/4 Mile simulation run on it to give you a basic Idea as to what you car can do in a 1/4 mile race. The tune you get from both machines are quality tunes so another one is not needed. I did not know about the differance in the 2 Dynos till about a year ago. You learn a lot being on here


----------



## LOWET (Oct 21, 2007)

AlaGreyGoat said:


> Hi,
> Don't want to hyjack the thread but::
> 
> I have a question about the Mustang-Dynojet readings.
> ...


PARASITIC LOSES, what about AERO DRAG, car weight, real world load forces. AFR temps
I did not say a Dyno Jet is wrong, I said the Mustang is closer to real world street numbers. the Mustang allows for a lot of items the Dyno Jet can't do. But both of them will give you a good quality tune. If the Parasitic loses on a Dyno Jet were 15-20 percent. The LS2 GTO stocker would be lucky to break 320 RWHP . Which is about what it gets on a Mustang Dyno campaired to the 335 or so it gets on a DYNO JET, I have seen cars break 420 RWHP on a Dyno Jet and end up with about 385 on a MUSTANG. DYNO JET FOR SHOW, MUSTANG MD FOR GO. But again both are good tuning tools. NUMBERS don't mean much till you back them up at the track. When someone asks me what my car has for HP. I just tell them it has more then a stocker and leave it at that. If you are just looking for a HP number, any Dyno will do, But if you want a car tuned for the street or track then only a LOADING Dyno will give you truer numbers.


----------



## AlaGreyGoat (Jul 6, 2006)

Hi,
About the Dynojet numbers....


Parasitic losses are the ONLY losses. The other forces you list:
AERO DRAG, car weight, real world load forces. AFR temps(??),
and inertia, etc... are all forces acting against the rear wheel HP.
No matter what a vehicle's coefficient of drag or weight is, it has
no bearing on the amount of torque the engine make to the rear wheels.
It just take MORE torque to get the same performance in a heavier or
poor aerodynamic vehicle.

400hp crank (LS2)-15% loss= 340hp, about what most stock LS2's dyno
on a Dynojet.
I'm not saying any dyno is absolute, because most have a deviation factor of about +- 8 to 10 hp.

Larry


----------



## LOWET (Oct 21, 2007)

AlaGreyGoat said:


> Hi,
> About the Dynojet numbers....
> 
> 
> ...


Not all VEHICLES are subjet to a 15-20 percent parasitic loss. And there are a lot of other factors that will impead HP and TQ loss to the rear, AIR Temps which pull timing and HP,AERO DRAG, car weight and a host of other items contributute to RWHP loss or gain. I had a 71 240 Z which made [ 350 small block ] 415 Crank HP and 390 RWHP. no power steering or air conditioning. less then a 10 percent loss. so besides DRIVE TRAIN power loss you have to allow for several other factors . And the Dyno Jet just can't do that


----------

