LG Motorsports Super Pro Exhaust, gains over 60 ft-lbs at the rear wheels!!

[Camarojt]

[QUOTE=BlaqWhole;6907285]I agree that the base numbers are too low. And that is why I think there was something wrong with the car in the first place.

YEP!

[John Deere Racer]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Thanks for the reply. Maybe you don't do that with the tune, I'll give the benefit of the doubt. But I've seen places manipulate numbers to augment their alleged gains. But like I said before, I doubt these headers are making 48 more hp and 64 more tq to the wheels over the OEM manifolds. Especially when gains from headers have been shown to be way less than that time and time again. Even the best most expensive and highest quality headers from companies that have been in the game for a long time have not made even close to those numbers on an otherwise bone stock NA car. And if it did in fact make those numbers, then something was wrong with that original tune or the manifolds or cats or something. Or there was some other reason why. But it wasn't from a header/exhaust/dyno tune alone. And I think an independent test will show impressive gains from your system, but not 48hp/64tq.

The headers alone are not Makeing 48hp
It's the whole exhausts system from headers to the mufflers
That Is Makeing48hp

It doesn't say headers only !!

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by John Deere Racer

The headers alone are not Makeing 48hp
It's the whole exhausts system from headers to the mufflers
That Is Makeing48hp

It doesn't say headers only !!

I'm aware that they are talking about the entire exhaust system. I mentioned that on several other comments I made in this thread. You just so happened to pick the one comment where I mentioned the headers alone. What can I say? I got tired of writing "headers/exhaust/tune".

And I still doubt this type of gain is possible with this mod on an otherwise healthy set-up.

[gnturboray]

I'm running the LG full system and love it!!!

[John Deere Racer]

I made 430rwhp
With there cai along with header exhaust v max tab
And Norris tune
And asp UDP

Ls3



What's ur ls3 rwhp?

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by John Deere Racer

I made 430rwhp
With there cai along with header exhaust v max tab
And Norris tune
And asp UDP

Ls3



What's ur ls3 rwhp?

I'll tell you when I get dynoed. Probably some time later this week after I install my ported intake manifold and get the tune updated. Your numbers look good but they are within range of what others with similar set-ups have posted. Yet I have never seen any other header/exhaust claim or show the numbers LG claims. What RPM is your hp at? Do you have the graph? What tq?

[John Deere Racer]

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166391

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by John Deere Racer

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166391

Again, those are great numbers. I hope I have numbers like that...or more, lol!! And I'm assuming that the dyno video and the graph are yours. But still John Deere, I'm not questioning whether or not LG makes a great product or whether their product makes good numbers. I'm sure their numbers are just as impressive as any other manufacturer. My disagreement is wiht the amount of hp/tq they are claiming to make. And your dyno clearly shows that. Because your car with all the mods you have did not make 64 tq over the baseline. So how can a bone stock car with only the headers and exhaust make that much? Get what I'm saying? I'm in no way bashing your build or even LG themselves for that matter. I'm disagreeing with the claims.

[shibbs]

Something tells me the car was originally stuck in the low-octane fuel map. Flashing a new ROM to a car resets the fuel learn, and it would go to the high-octane maps after that.

Great exhaust system, I'm not doubting that, but the numbers are VERY high.

[Anthony @ LG Motorsports]

Now.......

Let me say a few things.

Others have posted similar curves in the past and it goes by with :bigg rin: and nothing more said.


This is in fact what this car did before and after and the best before run the car had....the other two were barely over 300 at the tires. I completely agree this is on the low side of a before number. If you look at my past threads on doing headers, or on our website, you will see most of the auto cars will throw down 325-335 at the tires and roughly 360-365 after.

It was also stated that the car was not completely stock on the before run but it did not have a tune prior.

I have seen the cars stuck in the low octane table and it would have been lucky to put that number down through the auto, heck the manual cars are lucky to make 350 in the low table stock.

That is how the car arrived....and how the car left. No tricks were used, and I believe I stated everything that was done both before and after including the tune. The gains were real on the car...and yes I do agree....more time spent tuning the car before hand would have shown less of a gain but a gain never the less.


No one ever commented on the thread I did two days later...that gave almost the same final results....but only gained 50 Odd don't you think?

Either way, don't take the thread as trying to hide anything or slow the car down on the before numbers....just happened to be what THIS CAR did on the before runs. We can all pretty much agree it was low and the final numbers are right were the should be....and still making more torque than the other guys

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Anthony @ LG Motorsports

Now.......

Let me say a few things.

Others have posted similar curves in the past and it goes by with :bigg rin: and nothing more said.


This is in fact what this car did before and after and the best before run the car had....the other two were barely over 300 at the tires. I completely agree this is on the low side of a before number. If you look at my past threads on doing headers, or on our website, you will see most of the auto cars will throw down 325-335 at the tires and roughly 360-365 after.

It was also stated that the car was not completely stock on the before run but it did not have a tune prior.

I have seen the cars stuck in the low octane table and it would have been lucky to put that number down through the auto, heck the manual cars are lucky to make 350 in the low table stock.

That is how the car arrived....and how the car left. No tricks were used, and I believe I stated everything that was done both before and after including the tune. The gains were real on the car...and yes I do agree....more time spent tuning the car before hand would have shown less of a gain but a gain never the less.


No one ever commented on the thread I did two days later...that gave almost the same final results....but only gained 50 Odd don't you think?

Either way, don't take the thread as trying to hide anything or slow the car down on the before numbers....just happened to be what THIS CAR did on the before runs. We can all pretty much agree it was low and the final numbers are right were the should be....and still making more torque than the other guys

I saw the thread you're talking about before I made my first post on this thread. I chose to only address one of your threads because I didn't want to seem as if I was following you around trying to troll your threads. And like I said before, there was something wrong with the SS in this thread that you tested. That "something wrong" seems to be in the form of the low octane mapping as it now comes out. If that is so, then no, your system and tuning is not responsible for the 64 tq gains. And that is obvious from the members who posted gains nowhere near yours. And that is all I'm saying. But to claim all those gains without even explaining the possibility of the vehicle being in the alternate mapping is misleading to those who don't know any better. Someone who doesn't know will go off thinking these gains are legit. And when they make the more realistic gains that headers and exhausts actually make they will be disappointed in your products or they will think you're purposelly using deceptive tricks to fudge numbers. Face it, any company can put the car in low octane mapping to get higher numbers and then later say that was how the car showed up and they didn't know and it was a true before and after comparison. If everyone did that we wouldn't know honest gains from fudged gains. Just sayin.

[Camarojt]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I saw the thread you're talking about before I made my first post on this thread. I chose to only address one of your threads because I didn't want to seem as if I was following you around trying to troll your threads. And like I said before, there was something wrong with the SS in this thread that you tested. That "something wrong" seems to be in the form of the low octane mapping as it now comes out. If that is so, then no, your system and tuning is not responsible for the 64 tq gains. And that is obvious from the members who posted gains nowhere near yours. And that is all I'm saying. But to claim all those gains without even explaining the possibility of the vehicle being in the alternate mapping is misleading to those who don't know any better. Someone who doesn't know will go off thinking these gains are legit. And when they make the more realistic gains that headers and exhausts actually make they will be disappointed in your products or they will think you're purposelly using deceptive tricks to fudge numbers. Face it, any company can put the car in low octane mapping to get higher numbers and then later say that was how the car showed up and they didn't know and it was a true before and after comparison. If everyone did that we wouldn't know honest gains from fudged gains. Just sayin.

I almost got tha Holy Ghost on dat 1 Blaq!!

[thahemp]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I saw the thread you're talking about before I made my first post on this thread. I chose to only address one of your threads because I didn't want to seem as if I was following you around trying to troll your threads. And like I said before, there was something wrong with the SS in this thread that you tested. That "something wrong" seems to be in the form of the low octane mapping as it now comes out. If that is so, then no, your system and tuning is not responsible for the 64 tq gains. And that is obvious from the members who posted gains nowhere near yours. And that is all I'm saying. But to claim all those gains without even explaining the possibility of the vehicle being in the alternate mapping is misleading to those who don't know any better. Someone who doesn't know will go off thinking these gains are legit. And when they make the more realistic gains that headers and exhausts actually make they will be disappointed in your products or they will think you're purposelly using deceptive tricks to fudge numbers. Face it, any company can put the car in low octane mapping to get higher numbers and then later say that was how the car showed up and they didn't know and it was a true before and after comparison. If everyone did that we wouldn't know honest gains from fudged gains. Just sayin.

Yeah, the numbers are weird. We all know better. You're not helping yourself out by wild speculation though. Let it go.

[John Deere Racer]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I saw the thread you're talking about before I made my first post on this thread. I chose to only address one of your threads because I didn't want to seem as if I was following you around trying to troll your threads. And like I said before, there was something wrong with the SS in this thread that you tested. That "something wrong" seems to be in the form of the low octane mapping as it now comes out. If that is so, then no, your system and tuning is not responsible for the 64 tq gains. And that is obvious from the members who posted gains nowhere near yours. And that is all I'm saying. But to claim all those gains without even explaining the possibility of the vehicle being in the alternate mapping is misleading to those who don't know any better. Someone who doesn't know will go off thinking these gains are legit. And when they make the more realistic gains that headers and exhausts actually make they will be disappointed in your products or they will think you're purposelly using deceptive tricks to fudge numbers. Face it, any company can put the car in low octane mapping to get higher numbers and then later say that was how the car showed up and they didn't know and it was a true before and after comparison. If everyone did that we wouldn't know honest gains from fudged gains. Just sayin.

I shouldn't say this

But grow some nuts and buy there full exhaust system
And prove them wrong

Other wise don't fight it!!!

And ditch the predator tune