Brian Crower 280's Dyno #'s!
#1
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SlowmotionMotorsports.com
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brian Crower 280's Dyno #'s!
Recently I installed Brian Crower 280's with his titanium retainer and valve spring kit. All the mods on the car are in my sig. I am very happy with the power these cams put out!! Temperature in the building was 77* with 55% humidity. The first dyno graph pictured is where I had just EcuFlash, 880's, BR 3" Turboback & O2 Housing, AEM Intake, and a Ported 10.5 Hotside and I made 331awhp and 360awtq on 25psi. The second dyno graph is from today with the BC 280'added on stock cam gears. Today the #'s were 356awhp and 328awtq on 25psi!! Wow am I impressed with the new found power. I lost some low end torque but the new power up top is insane! Also to add I made 313awhp 310 awtq on pump before the cams and then it made 336awhp 327awtq on pump today. Thats a 23whp gain on pump and 25whp gain on race on stock turbo. I cant wait to get a bigger turbo now! I CHANGED NOTHING IN THE TUNE just to let you guys know, not on pump and not on race gas!!! Does anyone know what my car would make on Buschur's Dyno now???
Heres the graphs:
Graph before the cams...331awhp and 360awtq
Graph after the cams...357awhp and 328awtq
Feel free to discuss as this is one of the first true tests of the BC 280's!
Thanks,
Anthony
Heres the graphs:
Graph before the cams...331awhp and 360awtq
Graph after the cams...357awhp and 328awtq
Feel free to discuss as this is one of the first true tests of the BC 280's!
Thanks,
Anthony
Last edited by EvoAnthony; May 5, 2007 at 01:59 PM.
#2
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
nice numbers! Although, it seems like you are running a bit lean...... If that was a sniffer o2s.....it will typically read about .5 leaner than actual.....but even then, that puts you in the 12.0:1 range, which is a little lean.
I am looking at the BC 280's...... i have the HKS 280's, yet to be installed.
Thanks for posting up the numbers!
CJ
EDIT: i just re-read your post.....so, you made a basline on pump, then installed the cams and made a run on 110 race gas? Thats not a very good comparison. Your post is a little confusing.....please clarify what was pump and what was 110 race gas.
I am looking at the BC 280's...... i have the HKS 280's, yet to be installed.
Thanks for posting up the numbers!
CJ
EDIT: i just re-read your post.....so, you made a basline on pump, then installed the cams and made a run on 110 race gas? Thats not a very good comparison. Your post is a little confusing.....please clarify what was pump and what was 110 race gas.
Last edited by iTune; May 5, 2007 at 02:54 PM.
#4
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SlowmotionMotorsports.com
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nice numbers! Although, it seems like you are running a bit lean...... If that was a sniffer o2s.....it will typically read about .5 leaner than actual.....but even then, that puts you in the 12.0:1 range, which is a little lean.
I am looking at the BC 280's...... i have the HKS 280's, yet to be installed.
Thanks for posting up the numbers!
CJ
EDIT: i just re-read your post.....so, you made a basline on pump, then installed the cams and made a run on 110 race gas? Thats not a very good comparison. Your post is a little confusing.....please clarify what was pump and what was 110 race gas.
I am looking at the BC 280's...... i have the HKS 280's, yet to be installed.
Thanks for posting up the numbers!
CJ
EDIT: i just re-read your post.....so, you made a basline on pump, then installed the cams and made a run on 110 race gas? Thats not a very good comparison. Your post is a little confusing.....please clarify what was pump and what was 110 race gas.
Hope that clears things up!
Anthony
edit: The AEM wideband in the car was reading 11.0-11.3's the whole entire pulls. Oh and 12.0's on 110 isnt that lean at all just to clarify....
Last edited by EvoAnthony; May 5, 2007 at 03:42 PM.
Trending Topics
#9
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
It's obvious by looking at the graphs that these cams shifted your power band more towards mid range and peak power.......this would be the reason for the loss of torque, which comes in at low RPMs on the stock set-up. What you also must look at, is that he gained alot of torque after peak boost until revlimiter.....so, because horepower is torque*rpm/5252..... he picked up more peak power as well.
CJ
CJ
#12
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
seems like a trade-off between low-end torque for topend whp to me. I guess it just comes down to personal preference.
I'm still trying to figure out how you lost so much torque with the 280's on 110 gas; but you managed to gain some torque with the 280's on the pump gas map?
Does that make any sense?
I'm still trying to figure out how you lost so much torque with the 280's on 110 gas; but you managed to gain some torque with the 280's on the pump gas map?
Does that make any sense?
#13
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SlowmotionMotorsports.com
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 280's move the ENTIRE powerband to the right a lot and also to mention I lost a lot of spool time. It doesn't spool up so fast now its more gradual...thats why there basically isn't any tq spike so the tq #'s are lower but more stable across the rpm band.