6.0L 5-Speed Dyno Day Today
10-15-2008, 02:24 PM
#151
UPDATE*= Just got back from the NEW dyno run. It both confirmed a few things and put a lot of things into perspective for me. My co-worker brought his 10K mile '08 LS3 Auto Vette with since he found out where I was going over lunchtime.
First of all, here's my BEST Run of the day, Can you say "Torque" for a little motor???
Next we Have here is a comparison of My truck with the factory intake box and tube installed. The lesser of the two powerbands is actually with no intake tube connected and the TB exposed to open air. This proves that the only place a CAI would benefit me is above 5200 RPM's or so. It didn't give me the big increase like I was hoping BUT this is a reality check. The factory CAI is the better of the two choices if you like a quiet engine.:
Then last but not least, here's my 6.0L truck engine VS. my co-workers LS3 vette. I have over 50 RWTQ up to almost 4500 RPM's than the LS3. Same goes for HP. It's at 5200+ RPM's the LS3 takes off. Which power curve would you rather have?
Last but not least I found a bangin' deal on a brand new in the box 222/224 comp cam with a 112 LSA. I got it so cheap I couldn't refuse. As an experiment I just may plop this baby in and see what she does with the 222/224. I definatly know I wouldn't go any bigger than a 224/224. What is everyone's thoughts with the numbers my truck pooped out today?
First of all, here's my BEST Run of the day, Can you say "Torque" for a little motor???
Next we Have here is a comparison of My truck with the factory intake box and tube installed. The lesser of the two powerbands is actually with no intake tube connected and the TB exposed to open air. This proves that the only place a CAI would benefit me is above 5200 RPM's or so. It didn't give me the big increase like I was hoping BUT this is a reality check. The factory CAI is the better of the two choices if you like a quiet engine.:
Then last but not least, here's my 6.0L truck engine VS. my co-workers LS3 vette. I have over 50 RWTQ up to almost 4500 RPM's than the LS3. Same goes for HP. It's at 5200+ RPM's the LS3 takes off. Which power curve would you rather have?
Last but not least I found a bangin' deal on a brand new in the box 222/224 comp cam with a 112 LSA. I got it so cheap I couldn't refuse. As an experiment I just may plop this baby in and see what she does with the 222/224. I definatly know I wouldn't go any bigger than a 224/224. What is everyone's thoughts with the numbers my truck pooped out today?
10-15-2008, 02:56 PM
#154
It'll be a 222/224 
I'm guessing torque'll go down 20 Ft. LBS and HP up 20 RWHP. What that does for drivability/performance we'll see. I just may end up sticking with the current camshaft yet. It makes the truck a hoot to drive but it'd be interesting to see what it does on the top end...... Cam swaps are so easy on these things it just may be worth playing with.
I'm guessing torque'll go down 20 Ft. LBS and HP up 20 RWHP. What that does for drivability/performance we'll see. I just may end up sticking with the current camshaft yet. It makes the truck a hoot to drive but it'd be interesting to see what it does on the top end...... Cam swaps are so easy on these things it just may be worth playing with.
10-15-2008, 02:59 PM
#155
Driving the truck on the street it has plenty of poop above 6K. I usually shift around 6000-6400 depending how serious I am. With my trans and gears I find myself typically always between 3K-6K unless I'm driving on the interstate. Usually zig zagging in and out of traffic.
10-15-2008, 03:52 PM
#156
TECH Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South Florida
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey, i would think twice about swapping cams. A heavy truck wants torque, don't get sucked into the dyno numbers too much. you may miss losing the 20ft lbs just to gain some upper rpm power.
don't feel bad about the numbers it made, still did good
don't feel bad about the numbers it made, still did good
10-15-2008, 05:37 PM
#157
10-15-2008, 09:09 PM
#159
Launching!
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: pottstown,PA
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some solid #'s that we know are not a fluke, and sick torque! 
Two things though:
1. Your power test w/o tube and box with a good idea however it was a tad bit flawed when looking at the torque because it did not have the tube there to straiten out the air to the throttle blade. I theorize that with tube and no box you would have seen more power everywhere especially with a high flow cone filter on the end to straiten out the air.
2. On your dyno overlay both curves were based off of speed and would be more apples to apples if they were matched by RPM's.
Either way I have enjoyed this thread thoroughly and look forward to results with the new cam hopefully with and w/o air box!
Two things though:
1. Your power test w/o tube and box with a good idea however it was a tad bit flawed when looking at the torque because it did not have the tube there to straiten out the air to the throttle blade. I theorize that with tube and no box you would have seen more power everywhere especially with a high flow cone filter on the end to straiten out the air.
2. On your dyno overlay both curves were based off of speed and would be more apples to apples if they were matched by RPM's.
Either way I have enjoyed this thread thoroughly and look forward to results with the new cam hopefully with and w/o air box!
10-15-2008, 09:34 PM
#160
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Decatur, AL
Posts: 5,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some solid #'s that we know are not a fluke, and sick torque!
Two things though:
1. Your power test w/o tube and box with a good idea however it was a tad bit flawed when looking at the torque because it did not have the tube there to straiten out the air to the throttle blade. I theorize that with tube and no box you would have seen more power everywhere especially with a high flow cone filter on the end to straiten out the air.
2. On your dyno overlay both curves were based off of speed and would be more apples to apples if they were matched by RPM's.
Either way I have enjoyed this thread thoroughly and look forward to results with the new cam hopefully with and w/o air box!
Two things though:
1. Your power test w/o tube and box with a good idea however it was a tad bit flawed when looking at the torque because it did not have the tube there to straiten out the air to the throttle blade. I theorize that with tube and no box you would have seen more power everywhere especially with a high flow cone filter on the end to straiten out the air.
2. On your dyno overlay both curves were based off of speed and would be more apples to apples if they were matched by RPM's.
Either way I have enjoyed this thread thoroughly and look forward to results with the new cam hopefully with and w/o air box!
When I purchased my truck and transformed over to the truck performance world 3 years ago, I had a 4.8 and a Radix MP112. When I cut a 4"X6" hole in the front of the air box there was a very noticable seat of the pants difference from 4500+.
When you just removed the tube, you not alone lost the velocity but are then sucking hot air directly off the radiator.
Here is another manual trans dyno with a 6.0.
https://www.performancetrucks.net/fo...&highlight=L92