| From | Message |
Anthony G
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2003
10:03:13
|
 Subject: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
http://home.earthlink.net/~rpkast/images/DynoM1.jpg
This is some one elses dyno, but this is what I've been saying all along! Anything Under 3500RPMS was weak on the M1 2bbl.
|
Brad
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2003
10:51:46
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
I don't know about you, but I really don't care if I lose a little power down low. I can't get traction in 1st gear as it is! I'll take a slight hit in low for the gains it gives on the top end. Besides the M1 is basically a single plane intake with much shorter runners than the stock intake. By design it is going to have a more peaky hp and torque curve than the stock. The stock was designed to make low end torque. That is why the stock peaks out 300 rpm earlier than the M1. Overall peak numbers you give up no torque and gain 20 hp. I'll take that any day.
|
rtdkota
R/T
 
1/13/2003
11:41:43
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
I don't believe the 3200 rpm #s on the M1-2bbl were accurate on that dyno--- 30 hp loss and 45+ ft. lbs. seems a BIT too much-- on my 5.9L I lost 26 ft. lbs. PEAK, and was only 4 hp under the stock intake until about 3500 rpm, then it pulled and peaked 16 hp over stock... Now, I have a 4bbl m1, so my gains should be less, and my losses more in the lower rpm ranges than a 2bbl, even on a 5.2L. If you were to think about daily driving, having THAT much of a loss from 0-3200 rpm would make it a pig and half, driving about the same as a 3.9L (no offensive to the 3.9L guys-- I still envy your gas mileage! )
Sam
RTDKOTA
|
Anthony G
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2003
12:36:26
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
I don't doubt the numbers, this is exactly what I notice when I used my 2bbl M1. It will vary from truck to truck on performance. I'll soon be testing out my cut & ported stock intake. Since I'm stuck with a 2001MY PCM and with 4800 rpm shift points and a KRC206 cam with a idle-5000rpm power band the M1 2bbl isn't for me. So a 5.9L might loose less tq with the M1 but the hp output will be lower due to a small cam vs the 5.2L. So at least I know me and this person saw a very dramatic power loss with the M1 2bbl under 3500rpms and around the same power as the stock intake around 4000 and only an increase in power for another 800 rpms and up. Sometime today or tomorrow I'll be able to try out my cut & ported intake.
|
GtsDart
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2003
16:51:15
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Just wondering how do you like that 206 cam I was thinking about getting the 206x for my 360.
|
Anthony G
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2003
17:30:43
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
It's much better than a stock cam or a stock cam with 1.7RR. It pulls strong from idle to 5250+ fuel cut off for me. Peak HP will depend on intake. Other than that I haven't tried any other cam combos. If you want to run a M1 2bbl properly, skip the KRC206 and run a KRC210 or higher, you then require PCM, stall and some other goodies. Don't mix match parts, it doesn't make for a good combo. It's like throwing a supercharger on a V8 and still having 15inch 195/60 on the back. I'm almost done with my modded stock intake to complement my KRC206 cam and R/T heads.
The KRC206X has a 108 Center Line which can cause havoc on your PCM, watch out for low intake vacuum Don't forget to read it's recommendations.
|
GtsDart
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2003
19:23:47
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Well I thought about doing the m1 and turtle along with the cam, but I have a 4x4 Durango and it is pretty heavy so I think the 210 cam will be too big. I have mp pcm and krc's website doesnt say anything that I dont have required to run the 206x. I was looking at the X because the torque peak is better. Any thoughts anyone?
|
TJ318
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2003
21:16:23
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Im very interested in knowing how your self moded intake turns out... thats the same route that I was thinking of going, 4350lbs is too much I think for the M1 and a 318.
TJ
|
RED97KOTA
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2003
21:55:39
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
I'm currently installing the KRC 206X in my 97 5.2L as we speak. My combo will be as follows: Hughes stage 2 T/Body, M-1 intake, extra large turtle, ported stock heads with Mopar "062" springs and retainers. PPH headers with crossover and flowmaster catback. A friend has this same cam with a similar combo,it idles pretty good but it took the pcm about 2 weeks to adjust. He moved the sensor to the manifold and the idle improved alot. It's got a nice sound and it comes on really hard. Should have mine up and running in less than a week... Film at 11....
|
Nick
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/14/2003
11:23:22
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Red97kota, let me know how that cam works out, what has you friend run for times? I am looking into the 210x for my truck. I would like to know what you think of the cams. Thanks
|
GtsDart
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/14/2003
15:02:09
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Are new springs a must for the 206x or can i use the stock springs? Let me know how you like the cam also.
|
RED97KOTA
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/15/2003
18:14:20
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
I went with the 206X because I thought the 210 was too much cam for a daily driver. So I had marty at KRC get one from Comp ground on 108 centers with a 104 install (4 degrees advanced). My friend has the same cam and the torque seems to come on real hard.
He had the original springs with an R/T cam and the valves would float at high rpm's. The R/T cam just did not have the torque in the upper mid range like the 206X has. I would go with the 062 d/c springs and matching retainers so the motor would reach its potential without float.
|
cryppie
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/15/2003
18:40:48
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey Anthony,
Haven't we gone through all of this before? Are you SURE you are not in the keg-porting business?? If not, whats up with all the anti-M1 talk? That is the same dyno posted and talked about long ago. I think in the end, we figured out that it was a problem with YOUR truck and "the bog". Still lovin' my M1, btw.
http://www.dodgedakota.net/boards/per/6543.html
http://www.dodgedakota.net/boards/per/6375.html
cryppie
mods/times available upon request.
|
HSKR
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
01:25:48
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Amazing how nobody has noticed that the dyno runs posted here showed a 20hp and 30ft/lb increse in just 100RPM from 3200-3300RPM. I think the 3200RPM numbers were just wrong!! I've never seen a vehicle gain that much hp and torque that quickly on a dyno unless they sprayed it with nitrous. Maybe people should look at the whole picture and not keep the blinder on just one point. They woudl have noticed the discrepancy in the huge increse from 3200-3300RPM to begin with and this whole argument woudl be null and void. I showed a nice 20peak hp gain on my truck with the 2bbl M1, and 50hp at 5200RPM increase. My dyno runs didn't start till almost 3500RPM so I don't have any numbers from below that, but the butt dyno says little to no low end loss. 4800RPm shift points are EASILY overcome by MANUALLY shifting your tranny.
|
Brad
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
08:46:57
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Thank you HSKR and cryppie. Do you suppose that was a traction problem or just a bog? I thought those numbers looked a little odd. I'll have a dyno done on mine once this lovely winter weather screws off!! Will have the M1 (slightly massaged) and the heads ported by then. One other question, do you think a modified keg intake will flow even close to a M1? I don't think so. I guess if you are slightly modified it would work OK.
|
Anthony G
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
10:49:42
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
I've been sick the last two days.
I'm not the only one that's notice torque loss with the 2bbl M1. Try checking out other sites and search for M1 post.
Moparchat.com
Dodgetrucks.org
Dodgetalk.com
Dodgetruckworld.com
You'll be surprised how many don't seem to like it. That's fine if some of you had very good luck with the M1 2bbl. I'm not anti-M1, because it's a good top end intake, but I'm just informing that don't be surprised if you do purchase the M1 2bbl and go threw all the expenses and time just to find out it's not the best every day road and track intake.
Yes I did get finish with cutting and porting my intake. I only took around 1 inch off the runners, I notice no low end loss and good top end. While second gear comes on very strong. No bog in 3rd like the M1 2bbl.
Shifting gears with the column doesn't seem to produce the solid shifts verses having it shift on it's own.
Why is it so hard for you to have me voice my opinion on it. If everyone say's it has no flaws, then their lying. I'm going to be blunt about this, I'm sure lots of people have spent tons of money on there Dakota's only to perform marginally better. It takes more than just and M1 2bbl to help out the Dakota. I would suggest that it comes last in the upgrade list personally.
TB, Air Intake System, PCM would be the first to upgrade.
Headers, Muffler, Cat for the second stage
Cam, springs, lifters, push rods for third stage
M1 Intake, Heads, stall converter, maybe gears for the fourth stage.
Supercharger or NOS in any stage. Amounts depend on heads gaskets and heads bolts.
|
cryppie
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
11:22:59
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
HSKR,
If you look at the time at the far left of that chart, it reads 0.00, meaning, that is where they started the run. I suspect this is the reason for the poor results at 3200rpm. If they had started at 2600, like the first run, I bet the results for 3200 would look much better.
Brad,
If the video was still up, you would clearly see that it was NOT a traction problem he was having. I don't think any of us "bought" that it was. When you lose traction, the speedo goes nuts. His didn't, just the bog at a set RPM. Almost like it was flooding out. Also, like I said in an earlier post, his 0-60 time WITH the M1 was better than without, even with the bog.
Anthony,
I don't care who voices what opinion on this board, I just question your motive to do so. It's almost like you are on this anti-M1 quest or something, which makes me think you are profiting somehow either from porting stock keggers, or from someone who ports them. Like I said, we already went through all of this before, and nobody else had the dreaded bog that you unfortunately had with your setup. So how can YOU help people by voicing your anti-M1 opinion so strongly (and so frequently) if it was only a problem with YOUR truck??
As for the other boards that talk about low-end loss: I found that most of those people had never had the opportunity to try an M1 out for themselves. They are going by what others have said that "had a friend" or "heard somewhere that...", and/or that very dyno sheet you posted.
Now I know the 4bbl M1 is too much for most of our trucks, and I have heard bad stories about them. But, from personal experience, I know the 2bbl M1 works great and is one of the best mods I have done. I lost ZERO low end power, maybe gained some. I will try to get a .25 mile slip when it gets warmer to PROVE the difference.
cryppie
mods/times available upon request
|
Anthony G
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
12:01:33
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
I do not in any way profit from saying the M1 2bbl has flaws. I'm just a fellow Dakota owner that tried out many parts. Sure I've haven't tried everything, but enough to find out what will work and what doesn't. Plus there is nothing wrong with my truck, it hauls ass now without the M1 2bbl with lrg turtle. Sure I had most of the bog cleared up, but still nothing close to a stock intake power from idle to 3600 rpms and from 3700-4000 (stock non cut/ported) about the same and only from 4500rpm and up the M1 2bbl just kicks ass, yes. But under that, it's nothing special if not weaker than the two barrel. If your not going all out super drag, then a cut/ported stock intake will work just fine keeping power up to 4800rpm easy. Anyone can cut and polish the stock intake for almost no money. Plus if you mess up, big deal buy a used one for $50.
Yes, I do spend lots of time on the internet reading other peoples post. I have to say, it wasn't hear say stuff. It was people that owned the 2bbl M1. I'm starting to think the M1 supporters either can't admit power under 4000 is weaker or there is profit to be made from supporting it. Once you go M1 you need more and more parts to make up the loss in power under 4000 rpms.
|
cryppie
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
12:17:35
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Fair enough. Works for me, didn't work for you. But like I said, it was a problem with YOUR setup that was causing the bog. Nobody else had that problem. BTW, what was causing the bog?
As for admitting power loss... You think I would leave the M1 on my truck AND defend it on this forum if I lost power? I don't like to lose races, and rarely do, so I do what is best for power and that happened to be the M1.
cryppie
mods/times available upon request
|
b1llyw
DakotaEnthusiast
1/16/2003
13:19:45
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
The only time I've used an M-1 is on a 408. Torque was never a problem. :)
Bill White
2002 QC 4x4, SLT , 4.7, 5 spd, 3.92 LSD
1995 CC 4x2, SLT, 318, 5 spd, 3.55 LSD
|
rtdkota
R/T
1/16/2003
13:52:07
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Just a FYI--- I am getting reprints of ALL my dyno pulls with the various configs, and where I am now. Plus, will be testing a 2bbl-M1 on my setup to show the difference between 4bbl-M1 and 2bbl-M1... Most definately the 2bbl will bring my torque up from the present 325 peak-- I'm think in the 340-350 peak range, but no idea on what it'll do on hp- top end. My only comparisons are racing against other RTs with similar mods-- bigger valve heads & gears, and comparing out head to head races... Travis Mock has a very quick 99 RT RC, 4.56 gears-2.02 heads, M1-2bbl... a cam, etc... He ran a 12.33? @ 107.9 vs. my 12.65 @ 109.9 mph... The low end is better, much better with his config-- but, my mph shows I am makeing more hp on the big end (thus the higher trap speed)... 60' times were similar with me in the 1.8xx range to his 1.8xx range or better.
I still think Anthony there's something not right with your combo-- honestly-- the video I watched (over and over and over again)-- Most likely something with the torque management in your PCM... Hard to say. Kenny Simpson runs a 2bbl-M1, heads/cam/etc and runs a 12.2x-3x on a 150 shot of NX.. sub 14.00 on the motor alone-- His is a 2001 RC RT. The m1-2bbl magnified the problem--
Sam
RTDKOTA
|
cryppie
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
15:01:35
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Sam,
I agree. It is most likely an electrical problem somewhere. I'm thinking it could be his "cam sensor mod". Whatever it was, he still has it. Here is the video he posted after switching back to the keg:
http://members.cox.net/fastdodge/80.mpg
Listen closely and you can still hear the bog. You are exactly right when saying the M1 magnified the problem.
cryppie
mods/times available upon request.
|
rtdkota
R/T
1/16/2003
15:17:20
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Can't remember if I posted this here (i probably did)-- I have an in car video of me testing out the new GTS-II hood. Should give you an idea of what my truck sounds like, run like, etc...
Only a hint of bog/hesitation from the 2nd-drive pull..
www.socaldakotas.com/VIDEOS It's the 25 meg LARGE video-- sorry, wanted to keep the quality as best I could, so the filesize is huge...
Sam
RTDKOTA
|
03graphrt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
15:44:00
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
hey just thought id put my input here since i just got my m1 2bbl in, here my mods-bg m1 flash,intake,cat back mbrp,thermostat,and m1 2bbl w/ xlarge turtle.i can seriously say that i felt no loss in low end, and that my 0-60 has definitley gotten quicker, my speedo plays catch up with the m1 installed.as u can see im basicaluy stock and i realy dont feel and loss of low end, i can still spin the tires for about 20 feet.
|
Anthony G
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
15:52:20
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Yes I do have the cam sensor mod, but my original video with the bog was without the sensor mod.
From the 80.mpg, the speed isn't bad for a n/a engine with a stock intake.
est. only
0-26: 2.0
0-36: 3.0
0-45: 4.0
0-52: 5.0
0-60: 5.9
0-65: 7.0
0-71: 8.0
0-75: 8.5
0-80: 9.0
From my butt dyno my cut/ported intake should yield better performance.
I'll take another video of that when the snow melts around here.
I'm sure more power can be had with a custom PCM, but do you think it could make that much of a bog? <--question not being sarcastic
|
cryppie
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
16:15:41
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
Who did your flash? That could very well be your "bogger".
Yes, it is a good running truck. I had about the same numbers before the M1 and ran high 13s with my 318.
cryppie
mods/times available upon request.
|
Anthony G
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
16:45:54
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
No flash, no PCM upgrade at all, all stock computer.
I was just wondering if a modded PCM would of help the bog?
Say if I have a torque managment system on my current PCM which I have no idea if it does, wouldn't it still bog my engine even with the stock intake?
|
me
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/26/2003
01:58:35
| RE: M1 Dyno
IP: Logged
Message:
yeah you can really here the bog when you hit bout 65mph and i think it got to be the pcm try a flash for your setep and let us know how it turns out.
skunk
|
| | P 1 Next Page>> |
