VQ's

[nissandoms47]

That is why the VGs last so long, they are dogged out making the stock parts last longer.

 

not really

[tmorgan4]

Also, notice that it's at altitude. Up here in CO you aren't making close to 240hp at the flywheel in a VQ. After reading the link about the VG potential I'm set on keeping this block.

 

Drivetrain loss in a 4wd is a whole lot more than 5-10%.

[Gripenfelter]

Also, notice that it's at altitude.  Up here in CO you aren't making close to 240hp at the flywheel in a VQ.  After reading the link about the VG potential I'm set on keeping this block. 

 

Drivetrain loss in a 4wd is a whole lot more than 5-10%.

On my rear wheel drive Camaro the drivetrain loss is about 15% and I've dynoed it a lot. I'm guessing its over 20% with a 4x4.

Edited March 23, 2007 by Gripenfelter

[Acey]

Here is dyno test of a vq done by K&N for their air intake. It shows the baseline at 169 HP at the rear wheels.

Thats a 30% loss if stock is approximately 240 HP.

 

Edited March 23, 2007 by Acey

[FUELER]

The proof is in the pudding.

 

Unfortunately for ug VG owners, if we put our 96-00 R50's on a dyno, we will probably be lucky to see 140 hp

Edited March 23, 2007 by FUELER

[mora2818]

Wow, that is pretty decent power improvement for an air filter on the VQ's. Is it that drastic on the VG's?

[Acey]

K&N didn't make one for the VGs. An intake on a VG would be just as drastic, depending on the intake.

[turbopath]

The Z guys typically dyno high 240's to the wheels with the typical intake/header/exhaust setup. (just as a contrast from their 235 to the wheels stock)

Edited March 25, 2007 by turbopath