Emissions tests and dyno numbers

[wallew]

OK, I've now emission tested two of my three CUCV's. The third one will get tested in a couple of weeks. I've got to replace it's exhaust system.

My vehicles ALL run 15/40 Royal Purple and an K&N air filter. And just before emissions testing they get an oil change. Which means I currently change my oil once a year in each vehicle. I also clean the air filter IF necessary - though that's generally every other year.

Other than that, the vehicles are completely stock. My vehicles ALWAYS pass the emissions tests the first time. All the numbers are from the dyno and are measured at the rear wheels. One run only. The vehicles were at operating temperature, as it's about a twenty minute freeway drive to the guy I go to for my diesel emission tests.

OK, first up is my 1985 M1009 Blazer with 66k miles on it with stock 6.2L, TH400, NP208 and gear ratio is 3.08. It showed 98 HP and 225 Ft/Lbs of torque

My M1028A2 dually with 18k miles on it with stock 6.2L, TH400 (recently rebuilt with upgrades and a tranny cooler added), NP205 and gear ratio is 4.56. As a side note, the dually also has Royal Purple in the transfer case and the axles. It showed 110 HP and 450 Ft/Lbs of torque.

I've got a 1984 M1009 that I will post the numbers on in the next couple of weeks after I get the exhaust system installed, the oil changed, the K&N air filter installed, the fuel filter base and all replaced, and I will then check all the belts, hoses, fluids (radiator, tranny, etc) and decide what can wait or what must be changed or fixed.or replaced. THEN it will be tested and registered.

So, you guys got any numbers on YOUR CUCV's? Not a competition, as these never were power house engines, but for their era, they actually produced a tick more HP and torque than the stock gas engine of the era.

 

[JAsher45]

i do not have the numbers for my M1009 on a chassis dyno. but when i pulled it to refresh it it made 138 hp at the flywheel. after re-ring and new seals and injectors made 162 at the flywheel. these engines are to make about 150hp at 3600RPM

 

[wallew]

JAsher45,

Thx. Yeah, I've got a 6.2 in the can waiting for it's rebuild. Hopefully this winter. But first I'm going to rebuild my spare TH400 and then my spare NP208.

THEN it's the 6.2L's turn. If I can rebuild it to get 150 at the fly wheel I'll be a VERY happy camper. That should translate into at least 120 Hp and hopefully about 500 ft/lbs of torque, all at the rear wheels. But we will see.

I'm not so much interested in some kind of huge hp motor. I'm about just building these back to be the best they can be.

 

[mudguppy]

... about 500 ft/lbs of torque, all at the rear wheels. ...

really?

 

[JAsher45]

might be a lil high but these engines do produce alot of TQ at 1800 rpm

 

[wallew]

My dually got 450 ft/lbs of torque TODAY. And that's without me doing anything BUT an oil change. AT THE REAR WHEELS. So I'm pretty sure that AT the flywheel she would be putting out 500 ft/lbs at least.

So if I tweaked the injectors (mapped them) and had the heads 'flowed' (old hot rod trick), I don't see any problems with 500 ft/lbs of torque. Probably NEVER make over 200 hp ever. And I'm basically talking these numbers at the rear wheels.

 

[Westech]

RW Torque is always higher due to alxe and trans gearing. really your only getting 250 ish at the fly wheel. 6.2's are rated from 130-160 HP and 230-260 Foot pounds. Thats it boys.

 

[Flyingvan911]

I'd like to see what a deuce does on a dyno. You put up some very interesting data.

 

[Westech]

135 hp and 305 foot pounds give or take a couple

 

[mudguppy]

My dually got 450 ft/lbs of torque TODAY. And that's without me doing anything BUT an oil change. AT THE REAR WHEELS. So I'm pretty sure that AT the flywheel she would be putting out 500 ft/lbs at least. ...

i think you need to find a new dyno operator.

 

[2deuce]

I have a couple of aircleaners off M1009's that the stickers on them say 145HP and 155Hp what is internally different in the engines they were on? was it a turned up IP?

 

[JAsher45]

I have a couple of aircleaners off M1009's that the stickers on them say 145HP and 155Hp what is internally different in the engines they were on? was it a turned up IP?

internally the are the same the only thing different is the pump settings

 

[wallew]

i think you need to find a new dyno operator.

T,
The numbers from my first M1009 are the same two years in a row. And are consistent with a couple of the other M1009's in our club.

I just asked about the dually numbers this year.

And no, my dyno operator is older than I AM and has been doing this for more than thirty years. So he knows his stuff.

He also worked on CUCV's while in the military and says my dually is the cleanest running 6.2L he's ever seen or tested. He's said he could 'help' my M1009, LOL! I told him let me rebuild the engine and THEN I'll let him map the injectors, etc.

He knows his stuff and his dyno work is dead bang on. Always has been. I just don't know where I'll go once he retires.

 

[mudguppy]

what engine rpms were the peak numbers at?

have him map engine rpm and roller speed on the same graph - they won't be linear because of torque converter slip. torque converters multiply torque.

this was not properly accounted for, given the resulting numbers.

 

[motormayhem]

I'm pretty sure that AT the flywheel she would be putting out 500 ft/lbs at least.

Thats the gearing making the engine's 250ft*lbs 500/450 at the wheels. A tubocharged 7.3L powerstroke only makes around 500ft*lbs at the flywheel and there is no way that a stock 6.2 can even come close to that.

 

[mudguppy]

might be a lil high but these engines do produce alot of TQ at 1800 rpm

450 ft-lbs at 1800 rpm = 154 hp at 1800 rpm.

that's 40% more than the 110 hp posted.

 

[mudguppy]

... And no, my dyno operator is older than I AM and has been doing this for more than thirty years. So he knows his stuff. ...

look, just because he's been using the same method that makes 250ft-lbs of flywheel torque look like 450ft-lbs of rear wheel torque for 30 years doesn't make it right. it just makes the dyno operator look consistant ... and popular.

 

[wallew]

MG,
You want to bring YOUR DYNO TO DENVER AND PROVE MY GUY WRONG? Be my guest.

Otherwise, stick it back where it belongs and grow up.

Kindly note that the very FIRST THING I SAID WAS 'IT'S NOT ABOUT THE NUMBERS'. Then you proceed with FIVE POSTS out of seventeen telling my how wrong my numbers are and how wrong my guy is...

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

So, until YOU want to bring YOUR equipment here AT ALTITUDE and prove my guy wrong ON YOUR DIME? I'll take what the guy I and most of the 'working diesel crowd' go to for diesel work.

I could give a doo-dah about the numbers. But you know ZIP about my guy, his techniques or anything else he does.

And as I said, the BLAZER M1009 numbers are dead bang on. You don't like the 450 ft/lbs of torque he told me?

Guess what? I DON'T CARE.

 

[mudguppy]

what engine rpms? if you don't have engine rpms, you can't measure torque, period.

what are the engine rpms at the hp and tq peaks?

 

[blackhueys]

correct me if I am wrong but are the cucv s not emiisions exempt mine has a sticker under hood saying so? I lived in las vegas and they do emissions testing but I was told by the state that my truck would be exempt I moved to minnesota now so no need to worry but just wondering?