JUNKYARD LS TUNING SECRETS! A/F TEST-10:1 v 11:1 v 12:1 v 13:1. TIMING TEST-17, 20, 24, 29 DEGREES!

TUNING YOUR LS FOR POWER! WHAT WORKS? HOW MUCH TIMING SHOULD I RUN? WHAT A/F SHOULD I RUN? IS 13:1 TOO LEAN? IS 10:1 TOO RICH? HOW MUCH POWER DO I LOSE WHEN I RUN AN LS AT 11.0:1? WHAT HAPPENS IF I MISS MY TUNE? CHECK OUT THIS VIDEO WHERE I RAN A 5.3L ON THE DYNO EQUIPPED WITH A BTR RED HOT CAM. THE MOTOR WAS "TUNED" TO PROVIDE NEAR 13:1 A/F, THEN 12:1 A/F, THEN 11:1 A/F THEN 10:1 A/F. WHAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE IN POWER? I THEN "TUNED" THE IGNITION TIMING STARTING AT 29 DEGREES, THEN 24, THEN 20 AND FINALLY, 17 DEGREES. WHAT HAPPENED TO POWER.

[@FormulaBoat]

450hp from a cam only 5.3L. Awesome. This guy needs to be paid more. His contributions to the community are more than any other 10 combined. Thanks buddy.

[@richardholdener1727]

thnx

[@user-xw4hn7lb3x]

headers & no accessories or air filter

[@gunluvS14]

this is so clear, such an excellent comparison demonstration. Thanks Richard

[@Maverick09171]

Great video. No one shows test results like this. Much appreciated

[@BrotherdMike]

Awesome video! Thank you for making these comparisons, A truly valuable asset for many. Looking forward to a video like this, but showing what boost pressure and timing do together and how to find the limit of timing. Thank you Richard!

[@krr868]

So helpful. I had no idea. When you see the charts it makes sense. Thank you!

[@markbuskens6070]

This was super interesting to me,when I used to watch Tune specs when ls was in the early stages I always thought it was super critical.and when you did the one on ignition timing that was educational too 👍👍👍👍

[@tptrsn]

Excellent stuff Richard, thanks!!

[@CarsandCats]

Great stuff! Best dyno channel on KZbin by far.

[@michaelspiering7585]

That was really informative, thanks. It's helpful for me to tune my ride.

[@Alexwaltman850]

Holdener is like the internet's engine tuning Mythbuster.

[@ibanez741852]

Super cool data. This might be what inspires me to bring my 5.3 back down to the high 11:1 range and see if it likes more timing

[@AB-80X]

Before you do, pull the plugs and see where the timing marks are. Don't change anything before you do that. If you are not on the dyno, the timing marks are what you use, and you also use those on the dyno btw. Nothing is more important than reading the plugs.

[@morley3810]

Gotta say I was not expecting these results. My assumption about timing was about right, but I did think the AFR would have a much more significant effect. As always, the numbers don't lie. Thank you!

[@independentassesor2630]

I have personally experience the same thing when tuning my ls and went richer as I go between 5 - 20 % ethanol with out an effective sensor. I tried simmilar with a barra years ago and that engine for some reason was very touched when it came to richer afraid in the 10's . The LS didn't care one bit

[@ChurchAutoTest]

Over the years I've found that the better the combustion chamber, the more tolerant of a wide AF range an engine is. Something really good like a Honda K-series (or late model turbo BMW engines) don't really care much if they're at 11:1 or 14:1 as long as you're not knocking. You'd want the richer mixture just to control exhaust temps and protect against knock, but they're just really good at maintaining a homogenous mixture and using all the air you throw at them. For a 2-valve setup, the LS heads are pretty good as well. For some reason, the DI LT motors, especially boosted, do not like being run too rich. Might have something to do with trying to control charge placement in the chamber with that little cup in the piston.

[@richardholdener1727]

would be cool to see what is happening in there

[@AB-80X]

I've done a lot of DFI tuning here in Europe and also a few LT engines now, and compared to the BBC, LS, and SBC tuning I've done, the DFI engines have a much smaller window. I have not seen a difference in the LT1 and LT4 as far as tuning window, only that they both don't like to be rich or lean. I'm guessing that it has to do with how efficient the combustion actually is. The atomization of the DFI is much better than the MPI as there's no obstruction to mess with the atomization. This means that the combustion is faster and more complete, and thus the same fuel will require more air. I have done a lot of Mercedes V8 tuning and the MPI vs. DFI show the same tendencies. So the theory here is that the reason for the smaller tuning window is that when richened up, the engine is much quicker to act as if it is overly rich while if you lean it out, the efficient combustion will be quicker to react as an overly lean condition and spike the temps in the chambers really fast. At least, that is the theory that seems to be fitting with my experience on the dyno.

[@MrAnviljenkins]

Great info :-). Glad it was a video not a 1:15 live :-).

[@ashfl6748]

Excellent video!

[@michaelblacktree]

Watching the "bouncing ball" move around is mesmerizing. It's also good tuning info.

[@richardholdener1727]

it is fun

[@Modified1]

Keep it satisfied and advanced!!

[@idriwzrd]

Must be nice, only tuning WOT all day long. Great video, good info.

[@deanstevenson6527]

Like Mark Campbell said, what makes it work is the skill of the technician. I think he was saying that about Holley carbs, but it works for everything, doesn't it? 🥝✔️ Great episode, thanks for sharing...

[@jimclarke1108]

Practical tests, very interesting videos

[@Jamesrdc]

🔥 hey Richard! Thanks

[@yomomma1328]

Very interesting results

[@killercodplays]

Ive been really nervous to tune my truck due to not being able to find info that was helpful. This really dumbafide it thank you

[@needmoreboost6369]

Another great video! Using a butt dyno in my 3800 it’s very similar fuel requirement and it’s power between those afrs under boost isn’t that noticeable but obviously I try to keep it on the cool side of things as I’m happy to loose a couple of hp for a lot lower egt! Same test on a turbo set up if you have one laying around running would be great!

[@playinghookywithdavidchapa387]

There is a formula, and some websites have calculators, where you can use the weight of your vehicle vs et at 1/4 mile to get an approximate hp/trq rating for you vehicle

[@needmoreboost6369]

@@playinghookywithdavidchapa387 it’s definitely not quick but still a bit of fun all testing being done on a private road of course!! I have been using the Wallace speed calculator and an app on my phone lately my 3800 v6 best et was 12.05 and should be 300whp according to the calculator and my best mph was 136 so 540hp apparently? but using the app it makes 350-400 hp and peak acceleration still just under 1 g maybe more on grenade level boost, it’s choking back to a stock intake for now just have to port one to suit these heads,run’s mid to high 12s at the moment around 120mph on a lazy launch and safe boost and 215 economy tires though

[@dirtymindedpony]

This is good info, wanna see with boost added 👍

[@SkinPeeleR]

My bike is Euro4 compliant. Has 1:14.8 ratio. As soon as the exhaust is changed for a catfree one i'll change it to around 1:12.5. Just to keep it a bit cooler. The aircooled thumper gets rather hot.

[@chrisreynolds6520]

With a NA 4.8 or 5.3L with 862 or 706 heads I generally find 26° total timing and air/fuel of 12:1 at peak torque and 12.5:1 at peak HP to be safe.

[@dustyrogers6652]

I saw ratio numbers pop up in my notifications, I was hoping this was Compression Ratio! Love to see this data just as much. RICHARD! PLEASE show us changing compression ratios, from mild to wild!

[@richardholdener1727]

that is hard to do without changing some other variable

[@madmodsgarage1179]

@@richardholdener1727 maybe start with an engine with very high cr, then add extra layers under the head.. (thicker gaskets? More gaskets? "Sandwich" plates?) and longer pushrods... but of course it's quite a bit of work.. and we actually know what is going to happen :) just wonder how much would it loose and if the loss % would be same down low as up high.. should be, I guess

[@BlueMountainRacingEngines]

Is there a point that compression is too high? A point of diminishing returns? But yes it will inevitably change other variables. How much quench height do you really need..?

[@chrishansen7004]

@@BlueMountainRacingEngines going past 12:1 is usually pointless for most people

[@tadwiltman4875]

@@BlueMountainRacingEngines there's definitely diminishing returns. As a practical matter, anything above 14:1 usually doesn't continue to gain unless the combustion chambers are really small and efficient

[@bonzainews]

this is some important testing right here

[@button-puncher]

Good to know. Shows that you can be safe and run rich without sacrificing power. So where does the "lean is mean" saying come from? Really just a myth? Great video, thanks Richard.

[@ChaseChristensen8]

I’m more interested in what the air-fuel ratio does to knock threshold. For example, since going richer doesn’t cost much in the way of power does it make it more resistant to knock and would it allow you to run more timing? And on the inverse side, where is the cross over point for leaning it out to gain power before it runs into lowering the knock threshold and it starts forcing you to pull timing.

[@salvatorehayes2753]

Awesome 👍. Yea Tuners Become OCD About Having The Engine Do Exsactly What They Want It To Do. That's Why I Dreaded Learning How To Tune On My Own. You Get Stuck On The Little Details And Wanting The Tune To Be OEM Perfect... Which Is A Ton Of Effort For Pretty Much No Gain Just OCD Pleasing haha. The "Magic" In Tuning Is The Drivability, Everything In Between Idle And WOT. That's 90% Of The Work Especially If It's Got An Auto Trans And Electronic Throttle Control Which Are Whole Separate Endeavors To Dial In Your Forever Changing Driving Preferences hahah.

[@Adam_B]

Great video, love the dyno stuff! I would have liked to a bit of an explanation on why adding timing increases hp (to a point)

[@richardholdener1727]

IT CAUSES THE BURN AND EXPANSION OF THE AIR/FUEL MIXTURE AT THE CORRECT TIME TO MAXIMIZE PUSH ON THE PISTON

[@button-puncher]

Too add to what Richard said... When you advance the timing, it starts the fuel/air burning earlier. If more burns, the hot gasses expand more, and give you more power. When you retard the timing, it starts the burn later. Mixture has less time to burn so you get less power. If you advance too much, then you break things.

[@Adam_B]

Thanks, but I was trying to help Richard make better content in his videos. He was more caught up in results, but its the why that actually makes for better videos (ex. Mythbusters)

[@ttsupra87]

HP Tuners KZbin channel did a similar video on fuel and like you showed power was negligible but was really important was exhaust gas temps. Spikes in getting hotter or cooler with just small changes

[@richardholdener1727]

definitely with timing

[@thetriode]

10HP on a 450hp engine is slightly over 2.2%. You can go down 3 full AFR numbers or 5 degrees of timing from optimal and the HP cost is minimal. That means that there's significant tolerance of at least a similarly set up LS engine in terms of both AFR and timing. For people who are doing anything but trying to eek hundredths or fractions of an MPH out getting it close is almost certainly good enough.

[@bluehorseshoe7171]

Richard, I am very thankful of everything that you do for this community, but could you please keep the graphics up for more than a split second? I don't think that I am the only one here thinking this.

[@Hosshoggbossdogg]

Pause it

[@AB-80X]

That was a cool test. Would love to see the EGT's.

[@richardholdener1727]

DEFINITELY BE UP WITH LOWER TIMING

[@reason2gether]

Fuel injection, which already has optimal cylinder-to-cylinder fuel distribution (assuming all the injectors are matched and flowing properly), shows no need of anything richer than what is needed to prevent detonation. With a carburetor, cylinder-to-cylinder distribution is never optimum. This requires an overall richer mixture to make sure the leanest cylinder gets enough fuel to prevent detonation. In doing so, the overall engine can benefit somewhat from the richer mixture which causes intake charge cooling. This effect can allow the richer cylinders to make more power which can compensate for the leanest cylinder's average or normal power output. Now, If the intake manifold is a good design, allowing relatively close cylinder-to-cylinder fuel distribution to begin with, then all the engine's cylinders can take advantage of the richer mixture induced charge cooling for more of a power increase. This effect is a benefit of the carburetor introducing fuel further upstream than the Port & Direct injection systems. You can look at it either way; Port or Direct injection systems can provide their best power with the least fuel consumption. Carburetors have a "window" of power increase with increasingly richer mixtures until fouling combustion occurs. Ignition effects are relatively the same for injection and carburetor systems. In summary, the testing shows the overall efficiency of fuel injection and that there is little to be gained by a richer mixture as there is comparatively little charge air cooling to be had. Carburetor systems can see power increases with increasingly richer mixtures, up to a point, because of the induction cooling effect. They will use fuel less efficiently but they can make more power effectively. Now, if someone were to install the Port injectors further upstream in a well designed intake manifold, they may achieve the best of both worlds. Excellent cylinder-to-cylinder distribution and increasing power with richer mixtures due to charge cooling.

[@lewisfoltz6306]

Excellent video as always. Would you think this test applied to a sbc with aftermarket heads would yield comparable results?

[@richardholdener1727]

PERCENTAGE CHANGES

[@user-xw4hn7lb3x]

Do the gen 5 LT engines. The AFR changes are dramatic with direct fuel injection.

[@itwoammend1735]

Another great vid. Would this be the same on carbed LS applications? I think I have my 6014 set to 32 degrees from idle through 7000. Map is zeroed.

[@richardholdener1727]

32 is close on the msd-they have a 2 degree delay

[@IlPinnacolo]

A takeaway for me is that A/F insensitivity explains why carbs make more power unless you spend 5 figures on an EFI setup. Atomization is more important than an exact a/f ratio.

[@nocturnalspecialties642]

Who spends 5k on EFI?

[@IlPinnacolo]

@@nocturnalspecialties642 5k is 4 figures. A 5k efi setup won't beat a well prepped carb setup for the same money. A lot of people spend 5k on efi and more. 5k is peanuts.

[@nocturnalspecialties642]

@IlPinnacolo :( I misunderstood that. I use Holley Dominator ECUs on all the turbo cars/trucks I build. Kinda hard to run dual fuel in a carburetor setup tho.

[@JKZ103]

Very good test. When my PE is rich I can hear it in the motor and how it runs... it has to be in the 10's though or low 11's... my trucks like about 12.8 in PE... they sounds better and scream up top! Great test to debunk more internet myths! I also run about 22-24* of timing for my daily tunes. Also increase timing in cruising parts of the map for some mpg...

[@chrisreynolds6520]

At low load cruise, I run as lean as 16.5:1 and timing over 50* on some engines. I have seen some factory setups with 50*+ at light throttle and low load. At low load, once you are leaner then stoich your combustion temps and EGTs actually start to drop. P01 and P59 controllers have lean cruise mode to handle this.

[@SamSheepDoq]

@@chrisreynolds6520 lean cruise doesn’t work unless you change the platform code.

[@chrisreynolds6520]

@@SamSheepDoq Well aware. My 99 Tahoe and 97 Express van identify as Holdens. The 99 has a P01 and the 97 a P59. The Express van is really confused, it is a DBC P59 running a 2005 1-ton Mexican L31 GMT800 based tune with E85 and Holden platform ID..

[@johnj2496]

@@chrisreynolds6520 it's so that you embrace how your van identifies it's self As Mexican and Australiaian We got a hot rod motor of the year contender over here Keep emPOWERing You got to watch out on those Mexican ecm tho if your motor blows they'll be candy all over the place

[@craigvwdude]

Pretty interesting info! Curious, have you ever tuned with HP Tuners? Would love a video on that!

[@richardholdener1727]

I only use Holley Fast or MS3 pro-No factory ECUs

[@cncracingheads]

Dyno'd thousands of engines...The power loss comparisons on a few of these static tests appear small, however, when the engine is in the car... timing and air/fuel play a much more important role for engine acceleration, and engine recovery on a gear change. Ted @ CNC Racing Heads

[@jeppakongur]

Could you do the same test on boosted application? Just with smaller steps obviously 🤔. Or will it just be the same %

[@Broadpaw_Fox]

Here's my question Rich (after watching) - how much can the afr vary and still be able to safely run that 29⁰ of timing? Can you safely run that 29⁰ at the 13:1 mixture? Or only at a 'safer' 12:1 or 11:1? I also wonder how feasible 29⁰ and 12:1 is in an actual car, or at least with the normal intake/exhaust that is close to what we'd have - I wonder that with a more realistic 'in car' setup you'd be much closer to, if not past, safe limits at those numbers. I love the theory proving on the dyno, but what about us guys on the street- how feasible are tuning numbers like this for us? Can you test at all and see? Or maybe a better way to put it, how close is this tune to the one in your pickup? You've got a 5.3 in that, don't you? Are you running 12:1 and 29⁰ in that? That's what I'm curious about when talking about these different afr's and timing. 😀 Love the channel and the content. 😀

[@northernninja3321]

I hope he answers this, I was thinking the same thing! I'm all for the super scientific testing, but if we're talking junkyard motors lets talk junkyard vehicles, lol

[@richardholdener1727]

he (meaning me) already answered this-in car timing values are usually less-with the drop in power as shown-AF can be run at 12.8:1, but most factory tunes are much richer-though (as shown) with very little loss in power

[@Broadpaw_Fox]

@@richardholdener1727 - thanks for the response. Did you cover this in a video I'm forgetting about, or have I missed the comment it was in? Also, I still think it'd be a good video to cover the differences between a dyno tune like you use to a real in vehicle tune of a similar engine - like your pickup or something similar. I'll bet quite a few of us would enjoy a video like that, talking about some of the differences and why they happen. 😀 It'd be more content! But also thanks for doing what you're already doing - it's both fun and useful. 😀 **edited for spelling**

[@HKla001]

yeah right On

[@robertbroderick3896]

Hi Richard, great video! Can you do the same test but on a boosted LS? Say at 6 lbs, 10 lbs, 12 lbs, 15 lbs, 18 lbs. Showing relatively safer AFRs on a e85 motor? Also for reasonable safe timing levels? That would be so helpful! I have always heard conservative, on timing, but add boost for more power & longer lived motor! lol I know Matt with sloppy does one boost tune that is good power, fairly safe. Then he ask the owner if he wants the ragged edge of max power! lol Of course caveat there is reliability of motor on hottest tune. Anyways reasonable safe tuning parameters with good power would be perfect for all us home self tuners out there that tune on the street and so very informative! Thanks so much for all your great videos Richard!

[@supernova5end]

I would say do that test but also keep the regular gas too. The benefits of running e85 is the higher octane will enable it to run more timing. So the regular gas will show the base and people and keep reaching for the peak. I say this only because a lot of factors start playing a part in using the "most optimal."

[@akassasin5768]

The thing about that test is that it will be his best guess on what the right timing is. He doesn't use knock sensors and relying on them at high boost levels isn't a good idea. If you are looking to tune your engine talk to someone who knows timing and ask them a good base map to use. Or if you have a good ecu it will know already. Then get a safe air fuel for whatever fuel you are using. O2 sensors will tell you if you're ok or not. Then add timing slowly until you are comfortable with your level and ask a professional what they think even if you have to pay one a couple dollars to look at your tune.

[@robertbroderick3896]

Just saying, I think a great video would be; Richard puts boosted motor on dyno. A. tunes on 91 octane, just like this video above for first a relatively safe but good power tune for timing & AFRs, then maybe another for most HP tune. B. same 2 tunes on race gas showing the difference. C. same 2 tunes on e 85. Would really give guys tuning at home relatively good power at a safe tune direction. Not everyone has access to a dyno or can pay the big bucks for dyno tune. I just think same type of video, but LS motor on boost would be great! Thanks for anyway considering Richard! Your videos super help us all!!! Bob

[@richardholdener1727]

you can never get to optimal with pump gas-just to the level that doesn't detonate

[@supernova5end]

@@robertbroderick3896 ah okay trying to see the benefits of it, like you can get more timing with x and run a afr of x. I would also put meth into the equation and water-meth with the different gas types. We all know you can use it for added safety but it would be great to see how much timing you can potentially add. Which makes me think that these test could also have heads included because we have seen the test that Richard put out for them and with this we could kind of see the benefit of running a head like the 317.

[@Rhett.Castillo]

This is a great test. However, cylinder head design, intake manifold design, quench, etc, all have an effect on what the optimal afr will be.

[@richardholdener1727]

there was little to no difference in power between optimal and sub optimal af

[@Rhett.Castillo]

Believe me, I understand what you mean, to a certain extent. In my 23 years of tuning GM, Mopar, and Fords, some combos are just more sensitive to AFR than others. It's like trying to run a stoich of 14.6 at cruise with a cam that has lots of cam reversion, that engine is not going to be happy. But I do agree on this info for 90% of combos out there.

[@14truelies]

Now what I’m curious about is different timing intervals at different AF ratios. See if the fueling has a different affect when you have different amounts of timing. Does more fuel like more timing and less fuel like Tess timing

[@richardholdener1727]

no

[@tiitsaul9036]

AF ratio affects detonation threshold. Rich mixture can take more timing, thus can make more power. Am I right ?

[@dereksimenac8844]

Can use a lot more timing if you have a richer mixture. Lean mixtures can't handle more timing

[@richardholdener1727]

timing isn't mixture-it is primarily chamber and piston design

[@GuruTwan]

🎉

[@hooligans_garage7465]

Could u do the same video but with boost

[@brianmathew09]

Timing just scares me..rattle a motor a few times and you could have a a pile of scrap metal. I do hate the thought of leaving 30-50 HP on the table too, but..i hate all that rebuild work..i keep my turbo car at 10.7 WB and 17* with meth alky control inj.

[@jonadkins9339]

I'd like to see pulls at different coolant temps. 160-180-200-220. Forums seem to say that they're design to run hot. And making them run cooler hurts power.

[@richardholdener1727]

THAT IS INCORRECT-COLD WATER ADDS POWER, HOT OIL ADDS POWER

[@jonadkins9339]

@@richardholdener1727 I figured. I trust your input way more than *insert username here* on LS1Tech.

[@V8Lenny]

@@richardholdener1727 Grumpy would disagree.

[@chrisreynolds6520]

Really it is cool cylinder heads, hot cylinder bores, cool air and high oil temps that will make the most power. Never understood why GM went away from reverse cooling. 90s LT1/LT4 can run a full point more compression with the cooler cylinder head temps helping prevent detonation.

[@mcbridemotorsports5788]

IYO would there be a bigger effect felt under load and the full weight of the vehicle with AF Changes? I was conducting some Real Time Tuning through HPTuners this morning on my 2000 Chevy Silverado 1500. (Someone else was driving.) When I moved my AF from 11.9-12.3AFR under hard non full throttle acceleration 65-85% Throttle to around 13.9AFR. The acceleration felt stronger and actually smoother as well, So much so that my driver asked me if I had changed anything because they noticed it without me saying anything to them.

[@richardholdener1727]

felt stronger?

[@mcbridemotorsports5788]

@@richardholdener1727 Felt like it was pulling more consistent through the entire RPM Range rather then it feeling a bit more sluggish on tip in and through 2k-3500k RPM range and then pulling hard from 3500k on up.Before it felt as if there was a dead spot within that RPM Range before I made the change. Im sure this isn't related to any HP or TRQ gains as much as it is maybe a more efficient burn of the AF in conjuction with the timing. I dunno, im somewhat new to tuning (2 years) and there's still a lot left to learn. Unfortunately I don't have access to an actual chassis dyno at the moment.

[@rabban89]

Give a little take alot... But would be nice to see temratures also. high ignition low afr. I was driving a C4 corvett with street map. That had red glowing headers in burnout competition. Then maby more fule would cool it of and be happier.

[@richardholdener1727]

LOW TIMING CAUSED HIGH EGTS

[@supercoupe28]

I'd like to hear your opinion on the effective environment change going from a dyno to an engine bay concerning afr. I.e.- baro, humidity, water grains, etc.

[@richardholdener1727]

water grains?

[@supercoupe28]

This should explain it better than I can.

[@doubletee4391]

Amazing how different the timing tables are versus a small displacement turbocharged 4 cylinder.

[@richardholdener1727]

this is an na motor

[@navaho5430]

What amount of A/F ratio until the engine would run really bad (or blow up) e.g., 5/1 or 20/1 same with timing 40 or 0 cheers.

[@aarons.5523]

"Perfect Timing" Richard

[@Bill-flatplanefool]

2 questions 1. In a boosted application where you are using the rich mixture to control temps does mixture have a bigger affect on power since it might affect burn rate more? (I guess you will go into the 10.5/1 range when using fuel to cool so that makes sense) When I was tuning my Subaru I typically noticed no power gain leaning it out above 11.7/1 and just more fuel sensitivity so I stopped there under loaded cells. When you don’t have enough timing can’t that heat up the exhaust and cause under hood temps to skyrocket?

[@kirbyswarp]

I swear that on E85 on my supercharged cobalt, 12.0 feels faster than 11.7-8. Edit: the timing is the exact same.

[@richardholdener1727]

low timing will increase EGTs

[@HaydenDN]

5 degrees less and make 10hp less. I’d take the 10hp loss over ping pang boom 🤯

[@RH-ke3od]

Wow..crazy to think that so little would..would this impact be the same on a carb'd sbc?

[@michaely6665]

I've seen graphs were there is a point of timing advance where power begins to drop off. I tried on my car on the street advancing +3 degrees each drive, after +9 extra the motor did loose some torque response, but still wasn't tapping from early ignition. I settled with the timing between settings that felt punchiest, for my optimised road setting. I wonder how Holdeners motor would go at 35 degrees!

[@kirbyswarp]

Can you do a similar video on a boosted application on E85? I want to see if my 12.0-12.1 AFR is worth it over something like 11.8 in terms of power.

[@kirbyswarp]

I say E85 because you can run MBT and change only the air-fuel ratio as the only variable.

[@richardholdener1727]

12.0 vs 11.8 is next to nothing

[@jeppakongur]

I have a 468 sleeved ls7 with hand ported heads , hand porting not tested and the motor didn't have much power over 4000rpm. The camshaft was unknown but it had a grinder skid on the end.. this is a long and sad story about a great build that ran out of money at the builders... He double-crossed the guy who bought this engine. I have a new healthy cam but would like to test the heads... Is there a way to test them without using a dedicated flow bench... We don't have that here in Iceland. Egt's on each exhaust port to even out the ignition timing on each cylinder and see what power it makes ?.. hehe

[@richardholdener1727]

not sure how to test heads without a dyno or flow bench

[@Akestler]

Are you using injector end point timing specific to the cam? I subscribe to the Tom Nelson fueling strategy. Give enough fuel till it almost chokes then back it off a slightly and it will live. I do all my street tuning with a 12-12.4 target at WOT. After watching this I'd much rather leave it closer to 12 and trickle in some more timing up top.

[@ChurchAutoTest]

Excellent question. To add to that, does the Holley HP calculate injector duration from start of injection or end of injection as well? Probably wouldn't have made a huge diff, but it might have been measurable.

[@smiller225]

Would love to see some info on this

[@richardholdener1727]

every time we try to change injection timing we get nothing

[@smiller225]

@@richardholdener1727 I'm talking more of choosing injection timing for street ability. I heard that messing with injector timing could reduce the exhaust smell at idle.any tips on ballpark starting points?

[@michaelallen2501]

@@ChurchAutoTest Holleys injector timing table is called Injector End Angle. They reference the end of the pulse. And like Richard said it doesn't make power. But it does improve literally everything else. Drivability, fuel smell with a catless exhaust, as well as brake specific fuel consumption. I was able to pull a little fuel from my VE table to achieve the same target AFR in a few areas with the injection timing being optimized.

[@jeppakongur]

Does the exhaust in the Dyno cell have effect. Are there super extract systems for the exhaust fumes or just not a issue ?

[@richardholdener1727]

big fans and massive flow-exhaust is not an issue

[@Joebauers2505]

With all your great tests would it be possible to get a test similar bones to bones only difference being compression ratio like maybe 9.5 versus 10.5 versus 12.5

[@richardholdener1727]

VERY HARD TO ONLY CHANGE COMPRESSION WITH NO OTHER CHANGE

[@Joebauers2505]

@@richardholdener1727 instead of trying a high compression shootout. Would it be more possible to test lower range compression ratio on a stock motor with only changing the Pistons say 7.5,8.5,9.5. I would think using a low comp build would give the best option for apples to apple.

[@jasonbrinegar6759]

2nd, and I'm gonna say they're all important! lol

[@fusiondensity3287]

You were 3rd but nice try

[@lucsavoie9501]

What about the combinations, low afr and high timing vs high afr and low timing vs low afr and low timing vs high afr and high timing. after all they do work in harmony...

[@richardholdener1727]

the ideal timing has little to do with AFR-that is primarily chamber/piston design. when we test the effects of 1 variable, the others are optimized

[@lucsavoie9501]

@@richardholdener1727 You say they have little do with each other, so you have tested these combinations?

[@thomasjohnson1142]

Notice he didn’t go leaner because leaner is NOT meaner lol . I get tunes in the shop that are so dangerously leaned out . So thank you for this Richard you just busted an ignorant myth .

[@soldierbyname]

What about in a boost application and egts. Would 7psi and 28 degrees be better then 15psi and 15deg of advance. Taking into account under hood and exhaust manifold temp. Burning plugs wires and so forth. At what point in a mild build is it better to fine tune low boost max timing or just go big boost and pull all the timing and have everything after the cylinder heads bloody glowing like the sun

[@richardholdener1727]

28 would be way too much for boost

[@akassasin5768]

More boost will always make more power. Timing is mainly about peak cylinder pressure. Keep your Temps low and fuel good. Uncompressed fuel will burn slower than compressed fuel so the more compression and boost the faster the burn. Taking timing out doesn't always mean that your fuel is burning later in the troke of the engine. Sometimes we take timing out to keep the same peak pressure.

[@Boosted_e63chuck]

Would you say that the red hot camshaft would be good for a centrifugal blower application?? I thought this camshaft was for the 6.0, and 6.2L.

[@richardholdener1727]

YES

[@peterlogan706]

You get vastly different results in your power from afr for some reason over there, I re tuned an LS1 the other day, original tuner had it set at 10:1, I pulled fuel out to 12.8 and gained 47hp, I would post the dyno graph but I can’t on here. I also pulled 3deg timing out from 22deg to 19deg as it was pinging when I pulled fuel out.

[@dennisrobinson8008]

Same type of result with the AFR, especially under boost.

[@peterlogan706]

@@dennisrobinson8008 where abouts are you ? I’m in Australia, something very different with fuel in the US, never had an LS that could run anywhere close to 29deg timing. As Richard said 10:1 still drove quite well but after re tune it was a completely different car to drive

[@dennisrobinson8008]

@@peterlogan706 in usa. Af being way off makes a power difference in my experience especially under boost.

[@peterlogan706]

@@dennisrobinson8008 true, yes I find it makes a pretty good difference with afr, generally find most power at 12.8, generally if it’s around 13.5 I’ll gain 10-20hp dropping it to 12.8, if it’s 12.5 I’ll usually gain 5-10hp, not really worth worrying about 5-10 but I do and people are happy with as much as they can get, even though they wouldn’t notice the difference 😎👍🏻

[@dennisrobinson8008]

@@peterlogan706 sounds about right. As much power we can get while remaining safe and out of detonation. Are you doing e85 on any of your vehicles?

[@RENEGADEX800]

I thought afr would have had more of an effect

[@recruted]

Being that more timing makes more power, could running e85 n/a allow more timming advance and more power, or is it slightly offset by having to add 20-30% more fuel decreases the amount of air in the cylinder, ...offsetting the benefit of the timing advance Or is e85 just beneficial when you have extreme cylender pressure like under boost or high compression (12:1+ compression) where on pump gas the timing advance would have to be less or half of what would be ideal because of detonation or knock I say e85 because of availability but methanol is another fuel for discussion along with ethanol for n/a things, but on a 10:1 compression engine the gain is what about 10-20hp? But on a 12-15:1 compression n/a engine we would be talking 30-80hp on alchohol fuels vs 91 octane pump gas? ,, or alchohol(s) vs 100+ octane gas =20-40hp? Do you already have a video on the subject ?

[@richardholdener1727]

e85 has been tested many times-almost no gains (with a few notable exceptions) on most na motors (even with more timing), lots of gain on boosted motors (even without changes in timing-then more with additional timing).

[@michaelspiering7585]

So as long as the afr is between 11/1 and 13/1 ignition timing is the critical tuning variable, right?

[@richardholdener1727]

CHANGES FROM TMING WERE SHOW. CHANGES FROM AF WERE SHOWN

[@ChurchAutoTest]

Rich did you find that power stayed constant above 29 (maybe to 31-32) or did it drop above 29?

[@richardholdener1727]

remained the same at 30 & 31-as far as we tested it

[@chrisreynolds6520]

At WOT I find 862 or 706 heads generally like 26* safely. Even my LQ4 with large valve ported 862s likes 26*. You won't gain much if anything over 26*. I always laugh when I see a LS car or truck that is "tuned" for 30* and 13:1. I would reduce the timing to 26, 12:1 afr at peak torque and 12.5:1 at peak powr. Car would always run better.

[@ChurchAutoTest]

@@chrisreynolds6520 You're generally right, but it all depends on the application and fuel. My 900 hp LSA on E85 runs 25 degrees at peak torque and up to 28 degrees in some places. Tried less but it loses on the dyno and in timed acceleration runs. It'll handle more without knock, but that would just be beating the bearings out of it. I've seen some LSA guys run a flat 30+ degrees across the board on E85 and their motors lived for quite a while too. When I first started testing the limits on the dyno, I was sure the car would be quicker with less timing on the road, but it wasn't. Sometimes the dyno and the real world match up.

[@trailerparkcryptoking5213]

Well then.....what factors are tuners tuning if afr and timing don’t make much difference for a huge range?!? I have a 454 BBC and bumping total timing from 30 to 40 degrees gave me an absolute buttload of extra power, like a different engine!

[@richardholdener1727]

timing made a big difference in power as shown

[@notme8121]

So does this mean that richening the fuel mixture is done more to protect the motor rather than to make power?

[@AB-80X]

To a certain extent yes. However at some point all you do is washing down the cylinders, build up carbon and foul plugs. Read your plugs, it's a must that will tell you how it runs.

[@brianlafollette7530]

At what point will adding fuel stop helping control detonation?

[@akassasin5768]

I think you will lose power from being way to rich before you gain power from being able to put more timing in. Plus in a street car you will burn your cats out and it will smell horible and burn a lot of gas. In a race car the wrong tune doesn't make sense anyway. I think that taking timing out for detonation is much better than adding fuel power wise.

[@brandonr9918]

I wonder why my Gen 4 5.3 Silverado can’t go over 24 degrees on Supreme or E85 w/o knocking? 🤷🏽‍♂️😐 Dude hit 29 degrees. FML. Burst Knock Zero’d.

[@richardholdener1727]

cold water temp!

[@brandonr9918]

That’s why I stay subbed brother.

[@turbosupra2jzdragracingtob249]

Wish you would have went higher on the afr and see if power drops before knock.

[@richardholdener1727]

leaner than 13.0:1 at WOT? no thanks

[@turbosupra2jzdragracingtob249]

@@richardholdener1727 I was just curious if the dyno would start to show less power before it got critical./ knock

[@nitro1271]

Question when you take out and you got the rings do you reuse the old rod bolts or do you put new ones in?

[@richardholdener1727]

reuse rod bolts

[@nitro1271]

Install new head gaskets on my 4.8, hearing a lot of noise bottom end, Baeings worn out,? Motor does have 280,000

[@independentassesor2630]

If your running 10:1 or 11:1 AFR over an extended period of time would there be a build up or carbon on your pistons and valves?

[@richardholdener1727]

not from compression

[@independentassesor2630]

@@richardholdener1727 No I mean 10.1 - 11.1 Air fuel Ratio?

[@randyj9965]

The dyno and the track are not the same. My 415 made it's best power at 25 degrees of timing on the dyno, but at the track 25 degrees only got a 1/8 mile pass of 5.67 @ 121.5 mph. i made the next pass at 35 degrees and it ran 5.55 @124.79 mph with no other changes.

[@richardholdener1727]

did you try 30 degrees where it should have been

[@randyj9965]

yes, and it wasn't as fast as 35. I have a 6300 stall and shift a 72-7400 rpm.@@richardholdener1727

[@richardholdener1727]

sometimes the rate of acceleration changes timing needs-but do what works best for you at the track

[@randyj9965]

@@richardholdener1727 Just to let you know I wasn't trying to disprove you or anything like that , I was just posting my experience and what worked for me.

[@richardholdener1727]

no worries-in the end-do what works best

[@bonzainews]

so you should not be concerned about losing power with excess fuel, but maybe should worry about carbon build up, fouling plugs quicker, and wasting expensive fuel unnecessarily.

[@Dragonfabb]

Washing those rings

[@Bacongrease00]

First

[@nitro1271]

What pound fuel injectors do I need to do a thousand horsepower on a 4.8 2006?

[@richardholdener1727]

80-100 pounders will do that on gas, but you need 1500 cc (or so) for e-85

[@willievanhoesen4455]

FormulaBoat, and he doesn't just do ls testing! he, does some of the stuff you go i wonder what would happen if? stuff. hopefully, he gets his mitts on the new 4 cyl from BPE. that made a showing at the last PRI, show. 340hp 3.6 they estimate, bet he could pull close to 4 hundo, out of it. he has toys you know. and he uses dyno water like engine,pierre.

[@richardholdener1727]

that bpe motor will most likely not be offered with an LS head is the last info I got

[@willievanhoesen4455]

@@richardholdener1727 but, im sure you can spin the wheel with the Ford head. I, just read what I thought was a new article earlier today.

[@willievanhoesen4455]

@@richardholdener1727 i,was amazed by the bore and stroke that little mill will boast. It's pretty exciting actually it may well end up starting a new trend in little big power.

[@Vettespeed]

Any good reason why my car after a tune would want to run at 14.7 a/f ratio

[@richardholdener1727]

only under cruise-you should never run it at wot at 14.7:1

[@Vettespeed]

@@richardholdener1727 under WOT it settles down to 14.7 a/f but under cruising it bounces around everywhere

[@luvoldshit]

Is 29 the best you’ve found have you tried 30-31?

[@richardholdener1727]

timing sweeps are performed on every combo-including going past 29-but if no power gains come from going from 28-29, then you won't get any going to 30 or 31

[@luvoldshit]

@@richardholdener1727 oh I didn’t see the dyno from 28-29

[@bradonoliver2973]

What should my afr be at idle on a cammed 5.3 ss2

[@richardholdener1727]

12.5-13.5 is fine

[@bradonoliver2973]

@@richardholdener1727 ok thanks. Had some guys say it needed to be leaner

[@bradonoliver2973]

@@richardholdener1727 another thing. Idle vacuum. Mine is at -5ish.

[@richardholdener1727]

you can run it at 14.7, but they tend to idle a little better if you run them a tad richer-the motor will tell you what it wants.

[@bradonoliver2973]

@@richardholdener1727 ok thanks 😎

[@CarsandCats]

You should have went leaner on the test up to 15:1.

[@richardholdener1727]

no

[@CarsandCats]

@@richardholdener1727 You're missing the point. You started at a happy place and went richer which showed nothing. Had you went leaner, you would have had a result.

[@akassasin5768]

Yes his result would have been a damaged engine. And we wouldn't have learned anything because we all know it would lose power.

[@badass84bowtie]

I assume this is gas and not ethanol?

[@richardholdener1727]

THE AF IS THE SAME ON THE GAS SCALE FOR E85 AND M1

[@moparjohan]

You lost about 12% of ft.lbs down low and you lost about 12% of ft.lbs @6200rpm. Is that really significantly more? 🤔

[@richardholdener1727]

now do your calculation in hp

[@randy6350]

Richard, Sir with ALL DO RESPECT why don’t you show what these mods on what us real life owners have and that’s a factory air filter, factory exhaust manifold w/ cats or A cat and a mechanical water pump w/ a clutch fan. Something more along the lines of real world. I’m saying factory air filter because I’ve had REAL ISSUES WITH K&N filters‼

[@richardholdener1727]

SEE THE ACCESSORY AND AIR FILTER TESTS-THE MODS DO THE SAME THING-JUST START LOWER AND END LOWER

[@randy6350]

@@richardholdener1727 Thanks sir! You have so many videos it’s hard to find what I’m looking for plus I really don’t know how to search for something all that well.