Calgary - random talk thread
10-16-2010, 08:01 PM
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 08-08-07
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 1,641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trifecta is fine for the 2.2's, but the cars that can be tuned by hptuners, you are better to utilize me as you only have to pay for the credits once, and you are able to make changes, re-tune etc. much more easily. And it only costs two credits to license a car.
10-16-2010, 08:52 PM
Senior Member
Thread Starter
10-16-2010, 11:59 PM
some of us do not have a hookup for a dyno, have only met Mark/Pickles once, and aside from the BYT-tune, don't hear jack squat about good HP-based tunes...
Right now, from all the LNF stiff I've read, Trifecta, is pretty much getting to the point of cornering the market as far as mean tunes go - and this doesn't take into account Vince's "hidden tune" feature.
Heck, even the BYT-tune can be combined with a trifecta tune - offering the best of both worlds!
LINK
(is that enough to light a fire here!?)
Right now, from all the LNF stiff I've read, Trifecta, is pretty much getting to the point of cornering the market as far as mean tunes go - and this doesn't take into account Vince's "hidden tune" feature.
Heck, even the BYT-tune can be combined with a trifecta tune - offering the best of both worlds!
LINK
(is that enough to light a fire here!?)
10-17-2010, 12:09 AM
but Considering THIS post, Projects car is nothing to laugh at either - I mean he's posting higher numbers than BYT himself!...
WOW.
I'm wondering if BTY*SS*TURBO was knowingly running a more conservative tune... ?!?
I mean record holding cars seem to all be on his tunes... Cmiller for example.
Ok, I just got that much more interested in his services.
And to Kris/Steve/Graham - if you all read that link, I was very surprised at how small of a difference the 2.4L & 2.2L n/a top spots were...
WOW.
I'm wondering if BTY*SS*TURBO was knowingly running a more conservative tune... ?!?
I mean record holding cars seem to all be on his tunes... Cmiller for example.
Ok, I just got that much more interested in his services.
And to Kris/Steve/Graham - if you all read that link, I was very surprised at how small of a difference the 2.4L & 2.2L n/a top spots were...
10-17-2010, 01:42 AM
Senior Member
Thread Starter
That doesn't suprise me at all. But remember this how many 2.2's and 2.0's there are compared to the limited a few between 2.4's. Makes sense that the 2.2 would be close to the 2.4 because nobody spends the time on the 2.4's
Also take into consideration the 2.4 was built off the 2.0 ss/sc and the 2.2. Also the new 2.0 ss/tc was made stronger by incorporating features such as the oil jets and vvt. up till 08 the 2.2 never had vvt and as far as I'm aware still does not use oil jets as well.
Let a few good people build up the 2.4 and see how close the top spots are then.
Just a few things to consider
Also take into consideration the 2.4 was built off the 2.0 ss/sc and the 2.2. Also the new 2.0 ss/tc was made stronger by incorporating features such as the oil jets and vvt. up till 08 the 2.2 never had vvt and as far as I'm aware still does not use oil jets as well.
Let a few good people build up the 2.4 and see how close the top spots are then.
Just a few things to consider
10-17-2010, 11:59 AM
That doesn't suprise me at all. But remember this how many 2.2's and 2.0's there are compared to the limited a few between 2.4's. Makes sense that the 2.2 would be close to the 2.4 because nobody spends the time on the 2.4's
Also take into consideration the 2.4 was built off the 2.0 ss/sc and the 2.2. Also the new 2.0 ss/tc was made stronger by incorporating features such as the oil jets and vvt. up till 08 the 2.2 never had vvt and as far as I'm aware still does not use oil jets as well.
Let a few good people build up the 2.4 and see how close the top spots are then.
Just a few things to consider
Also take into consideration the 2.4 was built off the 2.0 ss/sc and the 2.2. Also the new 2.0 ss/tc was made stronger by incorporating features such as the oil jets and vvt. up till 08 the 2.2 never had vvt and as far as I'm aware still does not use oil jets as well.
Let a few good people build up the 2.4 and see how close the top spots are then.
Just a few things to consider
10-17-2010, 12:25 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-03-07
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 24,280
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
and personally, being around the hptuner game in canada for awhile, there is only 1 PERSON in Canada i would let touch my car with Hptuners and he happens to live in north Saskatchewan
Anyone can go out and buy HPtuners and call them selfs a tuner.
10-17-2010, 05:07 PM
the reason why I don't, is that's pretty much akin to the old "woe is me" argument/logic.
I'd wager a bet, that for guy's looking to get more power out of their n/a Cobalts - at least half of the guys doing mods are running a 2.4L
Did you happen to notice that there were 19 2.4L cars in the dyno thread while there were 20 2.2L guys?!?
BUT
While only one of the 2.4L guys dyno was for a stock car, four were stock in the 2.2L class...
Which means the number of modded 2.4L versus modded 2.2L guys on that thread, has the 2.4L guys ahead in numbers.
changing the subject a little, I would have expected that the 2.4L should be able to easily break 200whp ~ but I'd wager that most either start modding then quit, and buy something else, or plan to mod, look at the amount they would be spending, and call it quits, and just buy a more powerful car.
I know I have read of a couple (pre-ecotec) Sunfire/Cavaliers who remained naturally aspirated, and still broke 200whp...
IMHO, if VVT is holding the LE5's back, then ditch it - go old school, make the ecotec (L61) "race only" cams work in an LE5, and keep building from there.
Last edited by soundjunky; 10-17-2010 at 05:19 PM.
10-17-2010, 07:47 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-03-07
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 24,280
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I understand what you're saying, but I just don't buy it;
the reason why I don't, is that's pretty much akin to the old "woe is me" argument/logic.
I'd wager a bet, that for guy's looking to get more power out of their n/a Cobalts - at least half of the guys doing mods are running a 2.4L
Did you happen to notice that there were 19 2.4L cars in the dyno thread while there were 20 2.2L guys?!?
BUT
While only one of the 2.4L guys dyno was for a stock car, four were stock in the 2.2L class...
Which means the number of modded 2.4L versus modded 2.2L guys on that thread, has the 2.4L guys ahead in numbers.
changing the subject a little, I would have expected that the 2.4L should be able to easily break 200whp ~ but I'd wager that most either start modding then quit, and buy something else, or plan to mod, look at the amount they would be spending, and call it quits, and just buy a more powerful car.
I know I have read of a couple (pre-ecotec) Sunfire/Cavaliers who remained naturally aspirated, and still broke 200whp...
IMHO, if VVT is holding the LE5's back, then ditch it - go old school, make the ecotec (L61) "race only" cams work in an LE5, and keep building from there.
the reason why I don't, is that's pretty much akin to the old "woe is me" argument/logic.
I'd wager a bet, that for guy's looking to get more power out of their n/a Cobalts - at least half of the guys doing mods are running a 2.4L
Did you happen to notice that there were 19 2.4L cars in the dyno thread while there were 20 2.2L guys?!?
BUT
While only one of the 2.4L guys dyno was for a stock car, four were stock in the 2.2L class...
Which means the number of modded 2.4L versus modded 2.2L guys on that thread, has the 2.4L guys ahead in numbers.
changing the subject a little, I would have expected that the 2.4L should be able to easily break 200whp ~ but I'd wager that most either start modding then quit, and buy something else, or plan to mod, look at the amount they would be spending, and call it quits, and just buy a more powerful car.
I know I have read of a couple (pre-ecotec) Sunfire/Cavaliers who remained naturally aspirated, and still broke 200whp...
IMHO, if VVT is holding the LE5's back, then ditch it - go old school, make the ecotec (L61) "race only" cams work in an LE5, and keep building from there.
10-17-2010, 07:56 PM
Banned
Join Date: 01-06-10
Location: Calgary
Posts: 718
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for the record, I love my 2.2L and I have been In contact with Rob H, who is the Trifecta tuner out of BC, and he also had a 2.2l and with what I am running now, at the end of the winter with my N.A mods I should be close the 200whp mark.
With an Agressive toon
With an Agressive toon
Last edited by CalgaryBalt; 10-17-2010 at 07:56 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
10-17-2010, 08:14 PM
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I understand what you're saying, but I just don't buy it;
the reason why I don't, is that's pretty much akin to the old "woe is me" argument/logic.
I'd wager a bet, that for guy's looking to get more power out of their n/a Cobalts - at least half of the guys doing mods are running a 2.4L
Did you happen to notice that there were 19 2.4L cars in the dyno thread while there were 20 2.2L guys?!?
BUT
While only one of the 2.4L guys dyno was for a stock car, four were stock in the 2.2L class...
Which means the number of modded 2.4L versus modded 2.2L guys on that thread, has the 2.4L guys ahead in numbers.
changing the subject a little, I would have expected that the 2.4L should be able to easily break 200whp ~ but I'd wager that most either start modding then quit, and buy something else, or plan to mod, look at the amount they would be spending, and call it quits, and just buy a more powerful car.
I know I have read of a couple (pre-ecotec) Sunfire/Cavaliers who remained naturally aspirated, and still broke 200whp...
IMHO, if VVT is holding the LE5's back, then ditch it - go old school, make the ecotec (L61) "race only" cams work in an LE5, and keep building from there.
the reason why I don't, is that's pretty much akin to the old "woe is me" argument/logic.
I'd wager a bet, that for guy's looking to get more power out of their n/a Cobalts - at least half of the guys doing mods are running a 2.4L
Did you happen to notice that there were 19 2.4L cars in the dyno thread while there were 20 2.2L guys?!?
BUT
While only one of the 2.4L guys dyno was for a stock car, four were stock in the 2.2L class...
Which means the number of modded 2.4L versus modded 2.2L guys on that thread, has the 2.4L guys ahead in numbers.
changing the subject a little, I would have expected that the 2.4L should be able to easily break 200whp ~ but I'd wager that most either start modding then quit, and buy something else, or plan to mod, look at the amount they would be spending, and call it quits, and just buy a more powerful car.
I know I have read of a couple (pre-ecotec) Sunfire/Cavaliers who remained naturally aspirated, and still broke 200whp...
IMHO, if VVT is holding the LE5's back, then ditch it - go old school, make the ecotec (L61) "race only" cams work in an LE5, and keep building from there.
now granted i could take the exhaust cam out of the 2.0 ss/tc and put it in my car as a direct swap and it would work but without the intake cam to match it with its useless
not to mention people don't take the time to realize that a good port and polish and port matching on these cars will go along ways when its done correctly. these cars can handle alot more hp then what this community has seen. GM has proven this and even wrote up an article detailing what they did to reach 750hp on more or less a stock block, modified head and yes FI
article is here http://www.turbomagazine.com/feature...ine/index.html
Last edited by outtamymind; 10-17-2010 at 08:22 PM.
10-17-2010, 09:00 PM
Banned
Join Date: 01-06-10
Location: Calgary
Posts: 718
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GM also has a 1400hp 2.2L
Also Actually alot of the mods for the n/a cars are for the 2.4L but since the 2.2 and 2.4 have alot of interchangibility, us 2.2 owners can use the 2.4 stuff
Also Actually alot of the mods for the n/a cars are for the 2.4L but since the 2.2 and 2.4 have alot of interchangibility, us 2.2 owners can use the 2.4 stuff
10-17-2010, 09:45 PM
so I don't push that point much anymore - but I did mention it in my last post.
Steve, you do have another option, which I suspect few in the LE5 community have thought to go;
WEBCAMS dot com
They can take a core cam, and change it to virtually any other profile - and in your case, I would suspect that you would have to go one of two routes (for either case, you would need to acquire a spare set of LE5 cams as cores for them to regrind from);
1) figure out if they already have the "race only" 2.2L cam profile on file, or get one of them so that they can make a computer file version of the cam lobe profile; if you do this, you will end up with the "race only" grind on a re-ground LE5 cam set
2) have a sit down/or good emails between them and yourself and pick from their extensive library of cam profiles.
I believe you'd be looking at roughly $600usd (less any shipping, or cost of core cams), but you would be well on your way to getting well in excess of 200whp
I agree with your porting comment, but everything needs to be matched - if your ports already can aptly handle the cams you have, porting would do little if anything;
that's where making sure your exhaust & intake systems are as efficient as possible.
If your intake and exhaust systems have already been optimized, and porting will yield little results, you would need to look into bigger cams.
My other FWD car* uses a stock shortblock, unported head, with upgraded exhaust, slightly upgraded intake (mostly filter), and gearing very similar to you, but between the exhaust/tune**/cams, has gained over a second in the quarter @ Race City.
*I only refer to because it has about the same sized engine, aprox the same compression, and factory hp rating virtually the same as yours, and is in a car aprox the same weight.
**honestly, to call it a "tune" is too much, I used another canned tune, and used most of it overtop the cars original tune - I have been unsuccessful at data-loging to this point (but never tried this exact year).
10-17-2010, 09:53 PM
Ok guy's (and gals - if any of you are reading this).
I received an email this evening that I fell is my duty to share/pass along.
I received an email this evening that I fell is my duty to share/pass along.
Originally Posted by Motorsport Council of Calgary
Dear Motorsport Enthusiasts;
Over the past 3 years, the Calgary motorsport community has been threatened with the loss of Race City Motorsport Park. Somewhere along the way, city administration lost sight of the fact that Race City is an important venue to maintain for Calgarians, and they made other plans for the city-owned land that Race City occupies. By the time that these plans were communicated to Race City owner Art Mackenzie, the public, and city council, administration had progressed so far down this path that it seemed Race City was doomed.
The motorsports community has banded together through the Motorsports Council of Calgary to oppose the termination of the Race City lease with the City of Calgary. We have so far received support from about half of the aldermen, led by alderman and now candidate for mayor, Ric McIvor.
Council did not support a lease extension in Feb 2009, but Ric McIver tried again and on Sept 28 2009 city council directed city administration to work out a deal to extend the lease with Race City to 2015, which resulted in another two year deal (2010 - 2011).
It is important that we continue to support aldermanic candidates and a mayor that support Race City and/or motorsports in the City of Calgary.
This Monday October 18, we collectively have the opportunity to reach another milestone in the battle to maintain a motorsports venue in Calgary.
Our research shows that we have the opportunity to elect a motorsport friendly City Council. While we held a slim majority in the past, we were missing the most important part, a motorsports friendly mayor.
We urge you, and your family and friends to get out and Vote for Ric McIver for Mayor, and vote for the motorsport friendly Alderman that represents the ward you live in. Visit Time For Action for further info.
The Aldermanic picks are as follows:
Ward 1: Dale Hodges
Ward 2: Joe Magliocca
Ward 3: Jim Stevenson
Ward 4: Brad Northcott
Ward 5: Ray Jones
Ward 6: Brent Mielke
Ward 7: Kevin Taylor
Ward 8: John Mar
Ward 9: Mike Pal
Ward 10: Andre Chabot
Ward 11: James Maxim
Ward 12: Roger Crowe
Ward 13: Diane Colley-Urquhart
Ward 14: Richard Dur
Your vote is important, and the future of motorsports in Calgary depends on it.
Sincerely,
Motorsport Council of Calgary
Over the past 3 years, the Calgary motorsport community has been threatened with the loss of Race City Motorsport Park. Somewhere along the way, city administration lost sight of the fact that Race City is an important venue to maintain for Calgarians, and they made other plans for the city-owned land that Race City occupies. By the time that these plans were communicated to Race City owner Art Mackenzie, the public, and city council, administration had progressed so far down this path that it seemed Race City was doomed.
The motorsports community has banded together through the Motorsports Council of Calgary to oppose the termination of the Race City lease with the City of Calgary. We have so far received support from about half of the aldermen, led by alderman and now candidate for mayor, Ric McIvor.
Council did not support a lease extension in Feb 2009, but Ric McIver tried again and on Sept 28 2009 city council directed city administration to work out a deal to extend the lease with Race City to 2015, which resulted in another two year deal (2010 - 2011).
It is important that we continue to support aldermanic candidates and a mayor that support Race City and/or motorsports in the City of Calgary.
This Monday October 18, we collectively have the opportunity to reach another milestone in the battle to maintain a motorsports venue in Calgary.
Our research shows that we have the opportunity to elect a motorsport friendly City Council. While we held a slim majority in the past, we were missing the most important part, a motorsports friendly mayor.
We urge you, and your family and friends to get out and Vote for Ric McIver for Mayor, and vote for the motorsport friendly Alderman that represents the ward you live in. Visit Time For Action for further info.
The Aldermanic picks are as follows:
Ward 1: Dale Hodges
Ward 2: Joe Magliocca
Ward 3: Jim Stevenson
Ward 4: Brad Northcott
Ward 5: Ray Jones
Ward 6: Brent Mielke
Ward 7: Kevin Taylor
Ward 8: John Mar
Ward 9: Mike Pal
Ward 10: Andre Chabot
Ward 11: James Maxim
Ward 12: Roger Crowe
Ward 13: Diane Colley-Urquhart
Ward 14: Richard Dur
Your vote is important, and the future of motorsports in Calgary depends on it.
Sincerely,
Motorsport Council of Calgary
10-17-2010, 09:54 PM
Senior Member
Thread Starter
actually graham its the other way around. majority of it is for the 2.2 but again because of interchangability the 2.4's can use them. very few mods actually add decent amount of power if staying N/A.
Tuning is the biggest thing that add's power to the 2.4's. the 2.4's tune is so overly conservative it is retarded.
there are a few other things i can do to increase my hp rating before i tune which will be done over the winter.
and when i'm ready for cams i already have a guy doing them for me as well as porting and polishing.
Tuning is the biggest thing that add's power to the 2.4's. the 2.4's tune is so overly conservative it is retarded.
there are a few other things i can do to increase my hp rating before i tune which will be done over the winter.
and when i'm ready for cams i already have a guy doing them for me as well as porting and polishing.
10-17-2010, 10:07 PM
you can do it yourself.
unfortunately you either need a spare head to do it on, or you have to take apart your engine to remove your head;
it's best to either buy a ported head, or buy a spare and do porting on it;
if you go the second route, you're covering your butt, because even builders who port as a job have been known to occasionally go into the water jacket when porting... if that happens to your only head, then you're kinda screwed.
unfortunately you either need a spare head to do it on, or you have to take apart your engine to remove your head;
it's best to either buy a ported head, or buy a spare and do porting on it;
if you go the second route, you're covering your butt, because even builders who port as a job have been known to occasionally go into the water jacket when porting... if that happens to your only head, then you're kinda screwed.
10-17-2010, 10:08 PM
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: 07-13-09
Location: Calgary,Alberta,canada
Posts: 2,002
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ya i was thinking of getting a new head to do it on and steve if you dont mind me asking what is the shop im going to do some pricing