just because some haven`t been down the track or HAVE BEEN and you don`t know it is 100% none of your business. beat it

 

Still a little wound up from the Nats huh?

 

Fact is: Who's going to believe you spent good money years ago now on a Bill Travoto engine, and as a life long drag racer never raced it, but the reality is you couldn't get it done at the track NA...........

 

Vortec pro. I don't doubt you got some good knowledge but you are like the herpes. It's a bit of an inconvenience when you bash guys who have built more olds stuff than you.

 

I'am not sure he has, and mine run faster than 12s. Anyway, the copper cutlas was the inspiration for my new 355 shop truck engine build, you were just a little quicker than my 4000 pound mild NA 327 shop truck, and I couldn't stand it, were going to see if your luck holds out when the 355 goes in there? Sorry to inconvenience you.

 

Lets clean up the language, are you setting a good example how to conduct yourself ( especially with the younger guys and gals tuning in) on this site or in your daily lives?? I don't think so. OVER AND OUT.

 

fact is: I get it done at the track every time I go. Some people work for a living and don’t have time to appease the peanut gallery ( this is you). You comment on others posts with your negative Nancy liberal triggered head explosion. Bring your shot to the east coast so I can shut your mouth

 

Vortecpro should have been booted a long time agai. You wanna boot me for my language and let the Chevy guy stay…. Fine by me

 

I don't want see you go any where, after all, you need all the tech advice copper can muster to get you out of the 12s with your 455 plus CU IN rides. BTW-liberal I ain't.

 

Vortecpro I actually turn to Dr..Dan for advice . I will say he is a very good source of advice and I pick his brain for bracket racing advice. . You see Dr. Dan has been a fixture in the olds world for a while and is a solid dude. I don't think he has ever picked at anyone's builds . I think he has probably stacked up more time slips than you this year. A slow car down the track beats a bench racer any day.

 

This is a CALL OUT

 

....and this is a PUNK OUT

 

Dr Dan is a solid guy as said. He loves the maligned 403 in the less loved 83/84 HO and ran pretty solid times with them, with the 2004R and Qjet. Don't go Dr. Dan, you have helped many of us.

 

This is very mellow compared to RealOldspower at its peak of Oldsmobile engine building discussion.
Personally Classic Oldsmobile has never had so many real world racers giving great feedback. I think the moderator is doing a great job in not over reacting. Racers are competitive by nature that's why they race and why performance threads tend to be more abrasive.
Oldsmobile engine building knowledge was very limited when one builder was over marketed and his name still leaves its mark in a bad way!
Feedback from as many builders and racers is a good thing and good for the performance minded Oldsmobile enthusiast.

 

I'am going to agree with that. I think you might want to know a pro stock engine does not have a VE of 123, thats why I question it. Although I have NO problem with Bill and have done business with him and think he solid, I will challenge you: lets see dyno data backed at the track from Bill's shop, not power adder stuff NA cars at a known weight. This was one of the reasons I was so intent on seeing Dan's 403 run, and clearly he's hiding something, if it ran good he would be proud to say what it runs. I looked at Bill's red street Olds, not fast by any means, I looked at Bill's stocker Olds, not fast by any means, now I see Bill racing a Monza on a system? I'am sure Bill is a excellent engine builder, but I only know what I see, please by all means feel free to correct me with facts and dyno data and time slips.

 

Why don't you give it a rest or is it your natural traight to **** people off? You're basiclly calling all of them a bunch of dumbass's. I think you are suffering from an inferrority complex.

 

Why can't we talk about Bill's performance, I'd really like to see some examples out there I just haven't seen them, post them up.

 

Bill's "Monza" was actually an Oldsmobile Starfire that ran a nascar block punched out to 403" and had a ton of nitrous. That car went 7.85@185, I believe. To stay competitive in NMCA like he likes to run, he built a "newer"/5/6th gen Camaro probably 10 years ago (?).

 

See this is information I can use

 

Just Google "Bill Trovato Starfire"; there's a bunch of videos. It was only 174mph, not 185

 

Bill has not run a NHRA stocker since the early 90's the car was quick for that time period. As you know NHRA class cars keep getting quicker as the class rules change and technology advances.
The car was not sporting acid ported heads even though they were quite common back then and even more popular today LOL.
You would have to do a search on realoldspower for feedback and down track results, he has many builds out there with positive results.

 

I'am sure there is positive results, but how do the results compare to the dyno data, thats what I want to know. And when you say Bill's stocker was quick where did it run on the index? All these are valid questions. Do you know what class/combination Bill ran with the stocker?

 

E stock East cost, I don't know how long he ran the car for.
As far as dyno numbers and VE efficiency numbers I can't speak to that.
To be honest I don't think one should pick an engine builder strictly by dyno numbers nor put to much weight on them unless you are searching for HP/TQ for your racing program.
I'm with you on down track results only if you race otherwise its pointless as one cannot maximize a cars potential on the street anyway.
Inflated dyno numbers on a street only engine are for marketing and for the parking lot lawn chair muscle car enthusiast, it really does not matter if the customer is happy with their build IMO.
I'm not saying anyone's dyno has over inflated numbers!

 

And he took the long route.

 

I am friends with WJ and he told me dyno numbers don't always relate on the track. He said he's had engines that made power on the dyno but didn't mean it was quicker on the track.

 

How much power difference do you think there was that didn’t make a difference in pro stock with WJ? 5,10, 15? It seems like they claw and fight for every pony, so I wonder when he didn’t see a difference in times.


I would really enjoy picking WJ’s brain on a few things….. the problem is so much of that development and knowledge is hard to translate into engines that people in the real world can regularly afford…. Big blocks turning nearly 11,000rpm with the power band in the stratosphere. I am sure there is still so much one could learn from him though.

 

Questions for the real engine gurus here….



Back in the real world of street cars:


Isn’t it rare to see a true VE on a very well tuned engine that is over 105%, especially an Olds???


I think most would agree that a good engine Dyno, if properly calibrated, and the correction factors are true and honest, will be a good tool to help gauge the potential for an engine once installed in a car. It seems many Dyno operators in the engine building industry are manipulating correction factors to show very favorable power numbers to those customers who they want to impress for business reasons or bragging rights. The issue is, these inflated Dyno numbers will not translate to real power once installed in a car.


Correct me if I don’t have this right:

To see how well a car is using the power available from the engine, as measured on the Dyno-
1. you will need an accurate race weight with driver
2. an optimized and efficient converter in a well-built, efficient auto trans or manual trans with a good clutch
3. a properly sorted suspension and chassis
4. an optimized fuel and ignition system and induction (carb or efi) that is well tuned to optimum power numbers
5. a good Dyno sheet with honest numbers to compare to.




From what I understand, a well tuned car will show the Dyno horsepower with the proper calculation, and sometimes, the time slip E.T. and MPH will show more than Dyno power by a little if the car/setup is very efficient and using the power well.

Is that correct?

 

Cool that your friends with WJ he was so approachable truly one of the nice guys. You could not find a better source of information for performance engine building.
On the class racer form I have read quite a few times that a racer saw an increase on the dyno but not down track.

 

That’s what I’ve been saying for years.

 

I'm not saying the HP number is wrong, but what I'am saying its not running at 123 VE. It looks like the filter setting is jacked to the moon in my opinion.

 

Right, there's *tons* of variables that make it very hard to do 1-for-1 comparisons, either on dyno or on track. In either case, those are just numbers. They're not absolute truths. The value and relevance of those numbers will vary greatly.

 

That's true but you were on Bill's water temperature dyno pull numbers.
So it's okay for you to call Bill out but not for others to call you out?
If a customer is not happy they will tell others and as far as I can tell Bill's customers are happy.
If customers are happy then the dyno sheet is a just a nice piece of paper with happy numbers on it.
Again I'm not saying anyone's dyno numbers are off!!

 

I wasn't going to say it, buuuuuuuuut........

 

Bill posted two pulls of a 403 on his FB page. He said he had an ignition problem but fixed it on the second pull. That one made more hp, understandably, but made a lot less lower end tq. I asked why. He admitted he entered the wrong info initially. I told him thanks for the explanation.
Do your own Dyno pulls at different temps and you tell me what you find. I run everything at or near normal running temps. Look at the sheets, it’s all there. And yes I called him out on that too, but he’s never responded to that like he did on the 403 test. Go figure.

 

First of all I'm not an engine guy but have some knowledge. I was surprised when he said that dyno numbers don't tell the whole story. In other words one engine would make more power on the dyno but didn't mean it was quicker on the track. I have seen some pulls on his dyno and it's something to see/hear. To answer your question he didn't elaborate. Here's a picture of WJ,me & his first car he one a NHRA P/S race with. He called it butterbean.

 

Nice!

 

I understand that cooler water temperature creates more HP/TQ that's why racers go to all kind of lengths to keep water temp down prior to a run. They are also concerned with fuel temperature and the need to keep it as cool as possible. Do you think he might be recreating starting line water temperature for a quarter mile pass?
When Mark asks for down track data have you supplied it to him?
I have no problem with your dyno numbers or anyone's dyno numbers!
Bill has taken engines to the engine masters and done well, I think he knows how to build HP/TQ with out power adders!

 

Bills Engine masters build that came of his dyno.


https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/09...mobile-engine/

 

You’re missing the point, again.
His info MAY have been correct on that session. My problem is they seem inconsistent. In addition if it’s a street build why are you still dynoing at cooler temperatures? Is that real world? No.

 

Why to show optimal performance given set up at the time of the dyno session and why not?
There is a old saying one should not throw stones if one lives in a glass house that's my point. You do not like being questioned about your builds and lack of down track data. Bill has lots of happy customers and a track record yet you still want to call him out on dyno numbers? If the customer is happy on the street or strip then there is no issue. If you bought an engine from an engine builder and it was under performing then go ahead.
The problem with calling someone out, if your not happy with down track results is that a lot of it is based on car, driver and location of track.
The dyno is a tool to help sell engines and validate performance but its most important job is to create **** storms .