Hi guys!

Here are some pictures and dyno graphs of the car, I did not print out the 58X run. Sorry! These will have to do for now.

The customer was from Alabama but the car was put together by Walker Morgan from Morgan Performance Fabrication

He has some of the best fab/welding skills I have seen. Super clean work!

I tuned the car with HP Tuners Software.


I will try to get a video of one of the pulls up later!











Horse Power and Torque




The same run showing the boost pressure.




An estimated Flywheel output of the car done in the Dyno Dynamics Shoot out mode








Chris Macellaro

 

god i love that car, the owner is actually from florida, walker is right down the street from me in pelham, thats him standing there in the black shirt. and youre right, he does the best fab work ive seen.

 

Great numbers but at that rate it the motor will be toast soon...

 

How much does a set up like that cost?

 

it was "around" 15k.

 

Are those dyno dynamics pulls "dynojet" corrected? If so what is the correction on the dyno? If not I'll assume the 1.00 correction was used...

 

Based I those dyno graphs, I'd say the turbos are too small for that setup. That car has a stock redline of 7000 iirc and the power starts falling off BAD @ 5500 and is already down over 100whp by 6500 when the dyno was stopped. Sick car though...

 

Im sure tuning has something to do with the power dropping off also. I would like to see its A/F ratio graph as well. He also said that timing was conservative also.

Im sure this car moves now, and will make awesome numbers with not a lot of boost, but I also agree that the motor wont last. It is a awesome N/A motor as is, and responds great to N/A mods, but is not built for FI. I cant wait till I can afford one none-the-less.

 

Hello Alberto!

I do not add correction factors to any of the cars that I tune. These are all Dyno Dynamics numbers 1.000.


thank you
Chris Macellaro

 

Hello Guys!


The car was pulled to 7000 RPM.

The end of the graph actually falls off a bit more than it should in the graph. There is an RPM discrepancy at the very end of the graph due to the tires slipping from about 150 mph to redline at 157 mph. I used the dyno's roller speed to get the RPM. If I had used an inductive pick-up on the car we would not have had that problem. All the other RPM points look to be correct; just not the end of the run. That was a little to fast for me anyway... even sitting still on a dyno.



thank you
Chris Macellaro

 

Car was spinning the tires and throwing off the RPM graph since it was based on gear ratio and not inductive pickup. There was rubber all over the place. All runs car was pulled to 7000 but the graph shows only 6500. Peak on the dyno graph in effect is shifted to the left when in all actuallity it was 6000. Of course spinning the tires on the dyno is never good for power numbers hence the sudden drop in power. Soon it will go to the local Dyno Jet and we can see how it does there with a couple of bodies over the tires to limit wheel spin

 

Even better, nice work. That thing must move, how does it hook up?

 

Actually very well in 3rd gear!



thanks Alberto
Chris Macellaro

 

A couple pictures of the install!

thanks guys
Chris Macellaro

 

I fail to see why everyone calls the motor on the C6 Z06 weak?
The motor is a 7.0L which is puting out 505HP which equals 72HP/L
The car comes with titanium connecting rods and valves.
The compression ratio is high though with a ratio of 11.0/1

The 06 350Z is putting out 300HP on a 3.5L engine or 85.7HP/L
The compression ratio is 10.3/1

I'll even throw another engine into the mix.
The 2005 Mustang GT engine produces 300HP on a 4.6L engine or 65.2HP/L
The connecting rods are powdermetal and the pistons are hyperutectic(crap)
This engine has a compression ratio of 9.8/1
This engine does very well with running 575FWHP on 93 octane at 10psi of boost.

Wouldn't it stand to reason that at 85.7HP/L the 350Z motor would be the weakest of the bunch?

 

Lightweight rods and valves are good for engine respone and NA use, not necessarily for boost. And please tell me how the most efficient motor hp/L you mentioned is the weakest? If the Z was 7.0L like the Z06 and maintaned efficiency it would put down 600hp

 

It has the highest HP/Liter which means it is the most stressed.
I have not been able to ascertain for the time being what is the composition of the 350Z connecting rods.
As far as the connecting rods on the Z06 they are not lighter due to metal removal but using materials of superior quality
The connecting rods are 30% lighter yet the strength to weight ratio of titanium over the connecting rods used in the LS2 is 2/1
Engine failures attributed to excessive RPM's are typically associated with valvetrain failure.
Engine failures attributed to excessive HP/torque are typically attributed to the bottom end.

 

Actually it seems as though a Z with boost and a higher redline, the bottom end fails us, so I cant completely agree with that. It sounded good though!

Actually I would take back your first statement on the excessive RPM's entirely. Most of the time, you can upgrade your valvetrain to such an extent that the piston/rod ratio just cant keep up and with stand it.

 

to my knowledge, titanium is almost as strong as steel, but not quite. We're talking like 95% as strong

 

Nice work! Congrats on the numbers!