Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,306 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I was able to get a dyno run in earlier this morning after a court appearance in Chatsworth. 3 dyno runs for $75. I may go back for another run, after I hear back from the forum regarding the ideal settings for the runs - T/C off/on; D, 4 or 3rd gear; sport mode off/on etc....The numbers are a bit disappointing, but they are what they are...the tech only logged the results for two runs....Anyway, here are the numbers and the attached graph....RWHP 227; torque 190
 

·
Registered
2018 XT5 Black on Black
Joined
·
1,852 Posts
Re: Dyno 3.6 w/ V-exhaust & Volant & 20s

From what we have all been watching, I wonder if your losing 4 or 5 more horsepower due to the 20's (wheel weight and mass). I thought we were only geting 204hp stock (RWHP). This based on 20% loss and some of the stock runs from the air intake challenge posts. So 23 hp would be pretty good, the torque loss I wonder would be from the bigger pipes. Still for this combination I have $300 invested, not a bad return, and should improve the throttle respone.(I still use my 16"s).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,306 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Re: Dyno 3.6 w/ V-exhaust & Volant & 20s

B Hoth said:
From what we have all been watching, I wonder if your losing 4 or 5 more horsepower due to the 20's (wheel weight and mass).
The techie said I would lose about 5hp because of the 20s

Basically, with the V-pipes, Magnaflow exhaust and Volant, my CTS is putting out ~ 284 at the crank? Or is my calculation off? Ody???
 

·
Registered
2003 CTS Manual Trans., '93 STS
Joined
·
3,035 Posts
I lost four RWHP between my dyno runs with 18's and the stock 17's last Friday.

227RWHP/0.80=284 HP. Pretty amazing that these are V6's!

You have to run with TCS off or the car will try to apply the brakes (thinking your spinning on ice). Also A/C off to make sure there's no parasitic loss, 4th gear (1:1), although I hit some kind of speed limiter at 120mph (6000 RPM) in fourth. They may be able to factor third gear ratio into the SAE correction to get past that, since you'd only be running around 95 in third. Also Sport mode should allow you to keep it in the same gear without down/up shifting.

At 70, my car flashed all kinds of warnings: "service stability system" and the ABS light came on. They went away each time I started the car, and the drive home was uneventful.
 

·
Registered
CTS
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
pjohnesq said:
I was able to get a dyno run in earlier this morning after a court appearance in Chatsworth. 3 dyno runs for $75. I may go back for another run, after I hear back from the forum regarding the ideal settings for the runs - T/C off/on; D, 4 or 3rd gear; sport mode off/on etc....The numbers are a bit disappointing, but they are what they are...the tech only logged the results for two runs....Anyway, here are the numbers and the attached graph....RWHP 227; torque 190
What's dissapointing??? Sounds like a pretty good run! About 25 HP increase over stock is great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,306 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
jteolis said:
What's dissapointing??? Sounds like a pretty good run! About 25 HP increase over stock is great.
For some reason, when I first posted, I thought the actual gains were low. After re-reading HavBlue's thread and then Ody's, and SD's, and I saw the actual numbers and the calculations, you're right, not so disappointing at all..I'm satisfied with the numbers.
 

·
Registered
CTS
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
pjohnesq said:
For some reason, when I first posted, I thought the actual gains were low. After re-reading HavBlue's thread and then Ody's, and SD's, and I saw the actual numbers and the calculations, you're right, not so disappointing at all..I'm satisfied with the numbers.
Won't have to be so late for court now that your car can boogie. Unless you get stopped by Sheriff John Brown.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,187 Posts
odysseus said:
I lost four RWHP between my dyno runs with 18's and the stock 17's last Friday.

227RWHP/0.80=284 HP. Pretty amazing that these are V6's!
So RWHP/0.80= HP that means I am at

238RWHP/0.80= 297.5HP

I think the biggest gain I see in mine though is the 42 pounds of torque over PJ's since I torqued at 232 I think that is cause of the X pipe and headers.
 

·
Registered
2003 CTS Manual Trans., '93 STS
Joined
·
3,035 Posts
Yeah Marine, we all know it . . . .you're car is simply BADASS! :D I have a feeling you're not stopping there, after Pete introduces his ESC for another 80+RWHP. That would put you in V territory!

The mods Pete did to those headers, helped quite a bit, I suspect. You're sitting somewhere around 40 to 45 over stock. ~300 HP out of a V6 with only exhaust and intake mods. Pretty amazing. I wish Lund had made them for the 3.2L car when it was being produced!
 

·
Registered
07 SRX V8 AWD Diamond White Sport Edition & 08 C6 LS3/418ci
Joined
·
736 Posts
odysseus said:
Yeah Marine, we all know it . . . .you're car is simply BADASS! :D I have a feeling you're not stopping there, after Pete introduces his ESC for another 80+RWHP. That would put you in V territory!

The mods Pete did to those headers, helped quite a bit, I suspect. You're sitting somewhere around 40 to 45 over stock. ~300 HP out of a V6 with only exhaust and intake mods. Pretty amazing. I wish Lund had made them for the 3.2L car when it was being produced!
Marine's also running higher "useable" RWHP and torque in the lower and mid-range RPM band if you look at Marine's Dynameter run and that is a HUGE DIFFERENCE that has been overlooked aside from the tire RPM baseline issue.

He's not cooking his rear differential at 6000 RPM's to generate the 250 RWHP that he is getting from the headers and that is a huge difference.

Bottom line is that 250 RWHP in the RPM midrange is far more friendlier to that 3.6 CTS differential than 250 RWHP at 6000 RPM's and a new differential after you shatter that sloppy sand cast aluminum rear-end case. Been there, seen it; done it!

Bottom line is that he doesn't need a supercharger because the rear differential won't support the additional torque.

If I had his dual intake plenum and cylinder heads for 2 weeks to work with; I would have him at 300 plus RWHP and it would be totally stealth, undetectable and not jeopardize his warranty as a supercharger would.

Anyway, the CTS differential won't support much more than 300 RWHP as V owners are already on there 3 Getrag rear's and we're only running 318 to 323 RWHP "bone stock". And you want to mod that????

Marine is sitting on about 250 RWHP in a very useable low-midrange RPM band and that is the key difference. He's not heating up his tranny and rear differential to generate those numbers.

We can get him to 300 RWHP with just "reworking" the dual intake plenum, TB and cylinder heads and then I would cap him off unless he want's to invest $6000 in a bullet-proof rear differential, because the OEM differential will be "saw-dust" once you break the 320 RWHP mark at the 6000 RPM band. And that is an unshakable fact gentlemen.

ps: "reworking" the above means that we won't tell you how we do it. And it also means that if you sell Cadillacs, we don't cryogenically treat it, buy it from China; nor do we have a a Cadillac mechanic chained up in the service area with 27 years of Cadillac dealership experience of working on front wheel drive Northstar engines "cookbooking" the recipe for us.

Good day, happy holidays & safe motoring to all - Pete
Cadillac MotorSports, Ltd
[email protected]***********************
 

·
Registered
07 SRX V8 AWD Diamond White Sport Edition & 08 C6 LS3/418ci
Joined
·
736 Posts
odysseus said:
Yeah Marine, we all know it . . . .you're car is simply BADASS! :D I have a feeling you're not stopping there, after Pete introduces his ESC for another 80+RWHP. That would put you in V territory!

The mods Pete did to those headers, helped quite a bit, I suspect. You're sitting somewhere around 40 to 45 over stock. ~300 HP out of a V6 with only exhaust and intake mods. Pretty amazing. I wish Lund had made them for the 3.2L car when it was being produced!
Ody:

We can fabricate the same package for the 3.2 platform if you have any interest. If so PM me at your convenience.

best regards - Pete
 

·
Registered
None
Joined
·
987 Posts
There seems to be a huge torque loss going on here if he got 190ft lbs max isn't that 237 at the engine? Almost 20 ftlbs less than rated, what's causing this? Loss of backpressure?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,187 Posts
AsAkAs said:
There seems to be a huge torque loss going on here if he got 190ft lbs max isn't that 237 at the engine? Almost 20 ftlbs less than rated, what's causing this? Loss of backpressure?
I personally think its the V exhaust which was was the reason Exhaust companies choose not to go with 2.5" pipe. The 3.6L doesn't put enough power for DUAL 2.5" pipes meaning loosing a lot of back pressure meaning loosing a lot of torque. When it comes to exhaust going too small can lower your HP and torque BUT it goes the same way when going TOO big if that wasnt the case you would see people with 3.5" exhaust. Finding the perfect size is what exhaust companies get paid the big bucks for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,472 Posts
pietroraimondi said:
Ody:

We can fabricate the same package for the 3.2 platform if you have any interest. If so PM me at your convenience.

best regards - Pete
hmmmmmm.....i'm wondering what this fabrication may cost. by adding headers like SD's do you get a huge increase in noise? with the borla's i'm pretty much maxed out on the sound for my tolerance. may be able to stand alittle more, should the HP gain be worth it.

SD, do you have high flow cats as well as the headers?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,187 Posts
TripleOught said:
hmmmmmm.....i'm wondering what this fabrication may cost. by adding headers like SD's do you get a huge increase in noise? with the borla's i'm pretty much maxed out on the sound for my tolerance. may be able to stand alittle more, should the HP gain be worth it.

SD, do you have high flow cats as well as the headers?
It doesnt get louder it just gets Deeper you actually hear the engine Purr instead of just the mufflers.
 

·
Registered
CTS
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
SdMarineGuy said:
It doesnt get louder it just gets Deeper you actually hear the engine Purr instead of just the mufflers.
What might be a better solution to a V exhaust could be a fabricated 2" flow through exhaust with mufflers/resignators added as desired for sound tuning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,187 Posts
jteolis said:
What might be a better solution to a V exhaust could be a fabricated 2" flow through exhaust with mufflers/resignators added as desired for sound tuning.
2.25" bends with madrel bend because most exhaust shop will bend the pipe making the flow shut off by the bend, Sorry I am kinda drunk
 

·
Registered
2005 SRX N*V8 RWD; 1999 DeVille Concours
Joined
·
514 Posts
Much thanks to pjohn (#1 above) and to HaveBlue (Great Air Intake Challenge pp9, #161 & #163) for their sharing of data!! Q?- HaveBlue's charts (ie Volant only) seem to cover a greater range of RPM with a bit higher maxes than pjohn's (both Volant & performance exhaust systems, although pjohn's seem flatter between ~5500 & 6000). Should one conclude that: 1) the Volant Intake @ ~$300 improves HP & torque across the RPM range -and markedly below ~4000, 2) that the performance exhaust additions @ ~$$high are only significant only above ~5500, or 3) the dyno data cannot be compared for ??? reason. HaveBlue convinced me to add a Volant CAI to my 2005 SRX V8, but I'm still collecting data for performance exhausts. Thanks again to all participants !!
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top