This'll probably get split out, but I figured you guys (including dirthead) would appreciate a little demonstration of how the M62 can creat boost.

Cruising at 65, having a little fun. Audio selected to PROVE time-scale. Careful you don't get whiplash watching the needle.

https://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a...h_MOV01162.jpg
(Check out that oil pressure :D )
EDIT:

On a side note, I've been noticing with the IC running, my coolant temps stay a bit lower (noticable, but not significant), and my fuel mileage has improved, especially around town where it was really starting to suffer from the mods.

How can that be Bill :?:

Mine makes boost proportional to the rpm of the engine and my engine doesn't spin up that fast. :?

Must be the special programming. ;)

Paul, it's simple gear ratio and rotating mass. My ratio is more extreme than yours (same crank pulley, far smaller SC pulley) and my SC spins up quicker due to it's smaller mass on the rotors.

My SC has ALWAYS spooled into boost quicker than yours, going all the way back to WCBF 04, when we were both mostly stock. That's what I was trying to explain to Dirthead. And it costs me less HP than it does you to drive the SC as well.

Well yes I under stand that but honestly I have always thought your gauge sensitivity was too high. :P

Think about it. The SC rotors will not spin up any faster than your engine since it's direct coupled....unlike a turbo.
Boost builds linearly with rotor rpm. 8)

When you stab your throttle you are maybe seeing 3000 rpm and your boost gauge is reading 10 psi like right now :twisted:
You have a loose torque converter. ;)

So at 5000 rpm you would be at about 15 psi..............hey wait a minute that about right isn't it. :lol:

I rest your case..

8)

Paul, my boost gauge, as well as John's (the two you're most familiar with) have always SNAPPED into boost. Even Pdad was stunned in 2004. I have no loose TC. Trust me, I'd know. There are two important notes to make here:

1. Mine snaps into boost more quickly than any other Series 1 partially due to the extra idler. I gained much better power through the midrange. I was getting belt slip during accelleration (not at WOT, but on the way there). I get much better boost response during accelleration now, simply because of the improved belt wrap. This is true with both Gates and GoodYear belts. Please note that ALL Series 1's have belt slip with a 2.2" pulley and a brand new tensioner and either brand of belt. I can link you to the topic if you like. The belt path is very different on the S2, and it was re-engineered for this reason. I gaurantee it.

2. Let's also remember that my intercooler design is quite different than the commercial offerings. I RETAIN my boost/vacuum source inside the manifold, and it doesn't have to go through the core of the intercooler. It bypases it altogether. In addition, my core has greater flow area (less restriction) as it's wider and a little longer than a S2, but not as thick. I also have 'overflow' protection at each end so that if the boost builds quickly or is affected by the core, it will simply bypass the core altogether to keep pressures in line.


Dirthead, if you think this is some kind of tag-team scam, you're a fool. Too many people here know and drive my car personally several times a year, and all of them are familiar with other Series 1's on the West Coast. God knows I have a reputation for lying and faking shit on my cars. That whole thing last year at Woodburn dragstrip where I was ripping 1.9 sixty-foots side-by-side with a 12-second GTP? Faked, obviously. PDXGTP is in on the scam also. Yes, my car freaked him out as well. Why? He wasn't familiar with how different of a beast the S1 really is. Those unfamiliar with them simply classify them in their minds as 'inferior and the older type' when in reality, they just shine in a different way. The two types were designed for two very different reasons.

This isn't some kind of scam. It's an answer to the question you asked about why the S1 has stronger bottom end grunt than the S2 (and falls on it's face at the top end). I suggest you go drive one for yourself.

As I stated before, I used to have the curves, as we all did 'back in the day' here, but they are no longer posted on GM's drivetrain site. Rather than calling this a tag-team scam, maybe you should spend the time to find the curves for yourself.

Have you got proof to show otherwise?

Dirthead.... This wasn't even a series I vs Series II debate till you came along and made it that....

And at the same time... The HP peak of the Series I 91.5-93 L67 is lower than the rest of the years... And the PCM will force a shift before the engine ever sees red line.... Stock for stock a series I 92-93 will force a shift at 5200 Rpms and even that is with a 5600 red line... Even with Bills Jet Chip the shifts are only a couple hundred RPM's higher...

When you can shift Bone stock at 5900-6000 and or 5200 on the 92-93 L67 there is going to be a decent difference in shift points... Forcing a series I to shift at 6000 on a stock Cam will push the motor way out of its power band... Even with the Rockers by the time he shifts he is out of his power band... The series I does not have Legs like the 3800 II....


This is not a debate.... The two engines are very different in the way they produce power

__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

8)

Have you ever noticed that it's the MANNER in which you ask the questions that the problem comes from?

What you intend and what we percieve are two different things. If you'd like to discuss this offline, feel free to PM me.