Whippled DA Engine Makes 851 hp/870 torque at the wheels on 91 octane/17 lb boost

[Shadowman]

The power from inside the motor is coming from, the compression, cams and head work. The crank is as heavy as the stock crank if not heavier (52lbs i believe and i can weigh both tomorrow and the rods are heavier aswell, pistons are probably close to same weight as stock but idk, I just have aftermarket ones laying around. The only difference in the timing chains is the secondary chains that run the cams as there prone to break, also the one tensioner on the one head for the secondary tensioner is different as they are week and cause the two cams to be off in timing up to 7 degrees. The primary chains are stock as no one makes them yet.
The compression alone here is worth over 100 hp over stock compression.

You want impressive 5.4 power. There was a 5.4 GT style motor just dyno'd with stock compression, a whipple 4.0 with 21lbs of boost unported heads with some chamber work, a set of stock lift custom cams that made 1297 hp and over 1000ftlbs of tq. Make this motor 11.5 to one and it would make t.t killing power.......
This combo would make over 1075rwhp in a gt. With out spray

Once the cam technology is figured out for the blower combo's in these motors they will make some more power yet. I know that im glad im waiting and ive been busy, cause the nhra guys are spending a ton trying to get every ounce of power out of these combo's for the Cobrajet cars. Which are the same motors minus dry sump. I got a good feeling that 1650flwp will be no problem with my centrifical comboand 30+lbs of boost. We will c.

What type of dyno is this that you guys were using? Dyno jet, mustang dyno? Does this car have a stock air box? I look past most dyno numbers unless there on a dyno jet. They are the most accurate out there, well that is my belief anyways.

Your comments are well received and appreciated

Thank you

Shadowman

 

[Shadowman]

Great Numbers Ed and great work Shadowman. :thumbsup Bill was kind enough to share Ed's engine build with photos and a detailed write up years ago. I guess most of you missed it or forgot.

There are not to many people who have built motors with after market cams and all of the other mods that help support the higher air flow that the cams allow. The cams can drastically change the volumetric efficiency of the motor so trying to compare Ed's Whipple car to others is just not apples to apples ..

There are many bolt on Whipple's of the same size and the 4.0"s but I would say there are no others with this exact same set up as Ed's motor so questioning the numbers or trying to compare it to a Whipple bolt on no mod motor is silly.. If you hear Ed's car run it is super sick.. the lopie idle is sinister .. I look forward to seeing all of you In SLC.. Anyone want to talk brakes !! :biggrin

Thank you

See you soon

Shadowman

 

[nota4re]

To set the record strait, Ed's car as about 100 more HP more than a stock block motor, not 200. Whipples with a stock block can achieve 750 RWHP. So 100 is believable but I would agree than 200 isn't. Don't focus on comparing boost numbers that isn't the right thing to do!

I understand (I think) the point that you are trying to make - in that it cannot be solely about boost. I agree and disagee. I disagree on the premise of a very mild (comparitively) timing set-up and the inference of a 91 octane fuel capability. So, admittedly, there's a lot going on and it is tough to simplify... but 750 RWHP has only been achieved with very advanced time and a VERY high level of octane fuel. The "normal-ish" 91 octane Whipple set-ups have tested around 695 RWHP. So maybe for this dartboard we could agree on splitting the difference and calling this a 150 RWHP improvement..... in which I still have a tough time rationalizing the low octane requirements. The fact remains that HP improvements in the ballpark of 150 HP or more that stem from internal mods - is still extremely impressive.

 

[nota4re]

You are wrong;

LOL, very open-minded. The truth will come, Bill. Of this I have no doubts.

 

[Shadowman]

I understand (I think) the point that you are trying to make - in that it cannot be solely about boost. I agree and disagee. I disagree on the premise of a very mild (comparitively) timing set-up and the inference of a 91 octane fuel capability. So, admittedly, there's a lot going on and it is tough to simplify... but 750 RWHP has only been achieved with very advanced time and a VERY high level of octane fuel. The "normal-ish" 91 octane Whipple set-ups have tested around 695 RWHP. So maybe for this dartboard we could agree on splitting the difference and calling this a 150 RWHP improvement..... in which I still have a tough time rationalizing the low octane requirements. The fact remains that HP improvements in the ballpark of 150 HP or more that stem from internal mods - is still extremely impressive.

There is an old saying; I will give you the first 100 HP akin to a drug to a user meaning one gets drawn in however the next 100 HP will cost your sole.

HP gains after a certain point are incremental, difficult to achieve, and very expensive as Fubar made clear not to mention the fact that the process also carries with it compounded risk.

Ed's gal is all of these. The hardware and the design of the platform is certainly key however tuning the gal becomes pivital.

Good night

Shadowman

 

[BlackICE]

I understand (I think) the point that you are trying to make - in that it cannot be solely about boost. I agree and disagee. I disagree on the premise of a very mild (comparitively) timing set-up and the inference of a 91 octane fuel capability. So, admittedly, there's a lot going on and it is tough to simplify... but 750 RWHP has only been achieved with very advanced time and a VERY high level of octane fuel. The "normal-ish" 91 octane Whipple set-ups have tested around 695 RWHP. So maybe for this dartboard we could agree on splitting the difference and calling this a 150 RWHP improvement..... in which I still have a tough time rationalizing the low octane requirements. The fact remains that HP improvements in the ballpark of 150 HP or more that stem from internal mods - is still extremely impressive.

All of the dyno charts I have seen on Whipples installs your numbers are the lowest. Most range from 710 to 740 HP with a 19PSI pulley I have gotten 750 with my Gen1 and a 19 PSI pulley. With better gas and more timing and I'm sure if I was more aggressive I could squeezed out a few more HP.

Either your dyno gives is real conservative results or your tunes are real safe and conservative. Nothing wrong with that.

I only made 3 runs at Mojave because from my datalogs I saw that the fuel system was maxed out and I decided it was better call it a day rather than risk having to tow the car back to a shop. Ed's car must have a much better BSFC than a stock motor to make that amount of power with the stock fuel system. Note that higher compression will go a long ways in bettering BFSC, but you already know that from your extensive tuning experience that you have shared with us.

BTW, what did you mean with the "go stick it."

 

[Shadowman]

All of the dyno charts I have seen on Whipples installs your numbers are the lowest. Most range from 710 to 740 HP with a 19PSI pulley I have gotten 750 with my Gen1 and a 19 PSI pulley. With better gas and more timing and I'm sure if I was more aggressive I could squeezed out a few more HP.

Either your dyno gives is real conservative results or your tunes are real safe and conservative. Nothing wrong with that.

I only made 3 runs at Mojave because from my datalogs I saw that the fuel system was maxed out and I decided it was better call it a day rather than risk having to tow the car back to a shop. Ed's car must have a much better BSFC than a stock motor to make that amount of power with the stock fuel system. Note that higher compression will go a long ways in bettering BFSC, but you already know that from your extensive tuning experience that you have shared with us.

BTW, what did you mean with the "go stick it."

I would now focus on her extreme torque because this is why most folks enjoy the supercharge'd gals; there is no doubt that the increased compression etc played a pivital role in this.

Takes care

Shadowman

 

[Fubar]

The torque is a very good point to raise. On my last day at the dyno, my GT managed to get 780hp but only 690tq. Now I believe that my headers converted some tq to hp (but this was a very disputed theory). Incidentally, I also got the same motor to make 830hp on 109 race fuel. The only major change from most 4.0l Whipple is the fuel system on my car.

Anyway, my point was these number are very beleivable, especially with the named mods. Frankly I think they are low but I haven't used 17lbs of boost sense 2006. It sounds like a very safe tune. I would love to see higher torque numbers (relative to my hp #) in my next rendition of the GT motor.

'wait 'till they geta load me'

 

[SteveA]

Damn!
I've been wasting my time watching the stock market for my weekly dose of up and down out of control wackiness.

 

[nota4re]

All of the dyno charts I have seen on Whipples installs your numbers are the lowest. Most range from 710 to 740 HP with a 19PSI pulley I have gotten 750 with my Gen1 and a 19 PSI pulley. With better gas and more timing and I'm sure if I was more aggressive I could squeezed out a few more HP.

Either your dyno gives is real conservative results or your tunes are real safe and conservative. Nothing wrong with that.

Yeah, don't know if it is a case of conservative tunes or perhaps the dyno but for sure, we'd rather be safe. When we tested FastFreddy's 21 psi Gen2 at 750 RWHP, I was under the impression that this was among the better results for a Gen2. Thus, the 695-700 @ 19psi also seemed "normal". Are there posts here or links that you could provide to other graphs? Please, I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to learn.

 

[GTFUN]

Here is my dyno sheet after the Whipple 3.4 Gen II install for reference.
The car has Heffner exhaust but nothing more.

We tuned it conservatively.

RWHP 711.37

Max Torque 637.08

Max Boost 18.87

PS: The other curve was the 600 hp it had with a simple tune & Pulley

 

[STORMCAT]

Exactly the opposite. I think we are all in agreement that the delta gains are coming from the internal engine mods. I think there is merit in normalizing/isolating the effect of the Whipple so we can see from where the improvements are made. So, we are all in agreement that it is the internal work - an area probably far less explored (and equally less understood) as compared to the "bolt on" mods.



On this there has never been disagreement! But, concluding that lopey idle = more power is, by itself, a flawed conclusion.

Someone needs to learn to read, I said it sounds sinister. This does not mean I concuded it is more powerful.. We all know sound has nothing to do with power. I have a louder exhaust and I have not concluded I have added more power because it is louder .. I'll run any of you guys to 100 mph with my pulley tune car and you maybe surprised.. :biggrin
Why are none of your Tuned Turbo guys bringing thier cars to the rally ??? :confused

 

[Luke Warmwater]

What is the correction factor being used for all these dyno runs? Having competed in several dyno competitions in Denver I have seen many inflated numbers for turbo setups with CFs based on NA setups were applied. They were easily off by 6-8%. The dynos lied.

 

[Fubar]

Yeah, don't know if it is a case of conservative tunes or perhaps the dyno but for sure, we'd rather be safe. When we tested FastFreddy's 21 psi Gen2 at 750 RWHP, I was under the impression that this was among the better results for a Gen2. Thus, the 695-700 @ 19psi also seemed "normal". Are there posts here or links that you could provide to other graphs? Please, I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to learn.

I looked all over for an image of those dyno runs but I don't think I posted them up. I had a lot going on when we did that dyno, my Texas Mile trip was a day or so after the dynotesting. I need to get those up so that people can see the results. Give me a few hours to get them scanned and posted. I don't remember what we had smoothing set on or what the correction standard was. It was a DynoJet dyno tho (which I think typically produces a higher number than other machines).

P.S.
Also, I think my car made around 620hp when I had a pulley. Then it made around 720hp when we added the Whipple. We did a few more mechanical tweaks along with the fuel system to get to the 780hp number on pump.

 

[Fast Freddy]

Interesting and thanks for letting us see inside Ed's motor.

when my crank breaks i will be getting my motor worked by accufab. it appears to me that he can get an extra 100 + rwhp of the motor with his mods....

i will need an upgraded fuel system though. i already got the headers sittin in a box out back in the airplane hangar.

so can anybody tell me who makes an upgraded fuel system for the GT and what it consists of for a whipple charged application?

 

[B.M.F.]

Your comments are well received and appreciated

Thank you

Shadowman

NO prob, but you have not answered a single ? I have asked.


What type of dyno were you dynoing it on?? Stock air box or NO? What a/f were ya running? Stock Injectors? Boost a pump in it? I think I read where Kendall said it knocked a catylatic converter out of it. I take it your runnning it in the 10's for air fuel with that much compresion and yes the cats will not live long like that. This car probably would not be safe with a texas mile style pull with this much power and stock fuel system. Do you agree? These are great numbers no doubt but fill us in on the rest of the info.

I also see where Kendall is coming from, when Ed posted these numbers, there was no description to as what was done to the motor, besides you chiming in and saying the Gal had been massaged. (Btw gal and these cars really don't fit well together) Just saying. So this leads the undeducated people to believe there is Magic Vodoo going on @ da. When all the power really came from more compression, cams and some head work along with a fatter a/f so it lives on pump gas and pulling a few degrees of timing. Not everyone has paid attention to Ed's earlier build thread, nor was the compression even talked about that I can remember in it. I think Kendall is just trying to make everyone on the same page. As for those who are not in the KNOW on what the internal work will do to increase power, will think that da is a super hero for making that power with that low of boost when that is not the case. The internal engine mods are 95% of the reason for the increase which you did have a part in as you built it.

Like i said early, Dynojet in my mind is the industry standard in hp figures. Mustang dyno, superflow, and all the other ones out there are usually off in numbers compared to dynojet's. You can dyno on a 224 dyno jet and travel across town and dyno on a 248 dyno jet and they with be within a few numbers. Heffner uses dynojet, torrie uses dyno jet. I believe that Soroush's guys use dyno jet, hennessy has dynojet, Kumar's guy has dyno jet. I have a dyno jet. By your dyno graph it looks as you are using something different so WHAT IS IT?

 

[Fubar]

so can anybody tell me who makes an upgraded fuel system for the GT and what it consists of for a whipple charged application?

You can add a pump pretty easy. I went with a more dramatic revision but I knew I would be looking for 1100+ hp with a supercharger. If you want some details from me my set up, give me a call. 214.549.8181

Details here
http://www.fordgtforum.com/forums/s...Fuel-System-(lots-of-pix-not-dialup-friendly)

 

[B.M.F.]

Also Shadowman. I see where you say its got the best crank and 10.1 compression in one of your other posts. But in your build pics on your web site its got a stock crank that has been modded and it says cp pistons with stock compression? So im assuming stock crank or does it have a billet and you changed that out after the pics taken and your website is wrong and it does have 10.1 compression?

 

[nota4re]

GTFUN - thanks for posting the dyno chart... and a very complete one. Everything is there - HP/TQ, Dynojet which seems to be the most popular these days, boost and a/f. But the key is also some very impressive numbers!! Very informative.

 

[Luke Warmwater]

Superflow dynos are called lie detectors for a reason. They expose the lies told by dynojets...