Low end power?

[johnnybignuts]

Before I start, i have read the go fast basics sticky and i understand there is a long list of things to do, but i am trying to figure out what will give me low end power. This is my second 96 impala, My current is a 96 DGGM. I have put on the RAISS CAI, 52mm throttlebody, throttlebody by-pass, F-Body MAF, air pump delete, PCMforLess tune, brake mods, chopped and swapped mufflers for 44 Deltas (cheap way... I know). Above 3k rpm i have seen a noticable increase in power. My question is before i just keep throwing money at my car, what would be the best way to get more low end power?

[The Bolt-On Terror]

3.73 gears (4.10's if you don't highway drive it much), and then a 9-1/2" torque converter.

[johnnybignuts]

I agree that gears will make it feel faster, but doesn't really add power. This is also my dd, will that kill my mpgs, cause gas ain't getting any cheaper.

[The Bolt-On Terror]

Yes, I intentionally read past your request for "low end power". It's pretty tough adding power below 3k rpm. The stock cam and heads do a pretty good job up to there. You've already got a tune on it, so you've helped it some. A true dyno tune and hands-on low rpm tuning would help some more.
The point to realize is that the gears and TC will let the engine be up there in its "happy" range and mask what you consider a lack of power. The way to actually increase torque and power down at 2k rpm is to add cubic inches. We have to work with what we have

Since you're concerned with highway mpg, you could skip the gear swap, and go with the tightest 9.5" TC you can get from Yank or Edge (high stall with stock gearing gives very sluggish part-throttle performance), and you wouldn't miss the sub-3k rpm performance as much.
I still don't like looser TC's with stock gearing though. I prefer to take a 1-2 mpg hit on highway mpg and enjoy the snappy part-throttle response.

[johnnybignuts]

Thanks for the help, I think I will take the MPG loss to get that better response in the low RPM range.

[ProTools4]

Below 3K power

-wide LSA cam that has lo to no overlap with .550+ lift
-heads ported for velocity with as little CC increase as possible
-decked heads in the 11-11.5 CR range
-Long tube 4:1 headers into smooth bent 2.5 with X exhaust
-ASP crank underdrive pully
-meziers H20 pump

[Moby Dick]

Originally Posted by johnnybignuts

I agree that gears will make it feel faster, but doesn't really add power. This is also my dd, will that kill my mpgs, cause gas ain't getting any cheaper.

Lol. You buy a "second" 2 ton car with a V8 and are concerned with gas mileage?

You should of titled the thread " Dyno queen wanted"

Pat's advice is the best out there. When I added my gears and Yank TC back in the day. I kicked myself in the pants for that upgrade wasn't my first. This IS the most noticeable bolt on mod any B Body nut can do to their car PERIOD.

[9C1 Newbee]

+1 on the 9.5 converter. It had a lot of slip with 3.08's. But at WOT it would almost rip the tires off.

[Marky Dissod]

Originally Posted by johnnybignuts

I agree that gears will make it feel faster, but doesn't really add power.

I know what you mean when you say this. Getting the engine to release more power requires working on the engine [to get it to move more air]. Old Coot's & ProTools4's suggestions are all on the money regarding more engine power.

However …

93 Caprice 9C1 L05, 3.42: 200 horse, VMax ~ 130MpH (tested by Michigan State Police)
94 Caprice 9C1 L99, 3.23: 200 horse, VMax ~ 130MpH (MSP again)
Even if the L99 had 3.42, the L05 would win any race to any given point. The longer the race, the closer the trap speeds, but the poor little L99 won't get there first.
94 B-wagon LT1, 2.56: 260 horse, VMax ~ 130MpH (I ran out of b@11$ @ 131MpH)
I'll bet the L99 & my wagon would have an embarrassingly close race.

All the dyno certifications in the world would simply imply that 2.56 effectively squanders 60 horse!

Besides 3.42 or 3.73, there is no single other mod that would allow my wagon to exceed 150MpH.
The amount of power the engine makes is not actually as important as the how much power is put down to the ground.

Power equals work done, divided by how quickly that work got done. More powerful CAR always wins [choose your definitions carefully].

Originally Posted by johnnybignuts

This is also my dd, will that kill my mpgs, cause gas ain't getting any cheaper.

Your city MpGs, or your Hiway MpGs? Be specific.

Originally Posted by The Bolt-On Terror

I drove my Impala with the stock engine and 5.57 gears for several weeks to work 2 summers ago and got 19MpG. No high speed interstate miles, 44 miles one way with 46 intersections/potential stops.
I'm sure mileage would have been worse at interstate speeds.

3.42 & up tends to improve city MpGs.
3.73 & up tends to worsen hiway MpGs.
To help you choose between 3.42 & 3.73 …

1. I'm gonna race, or 'play hard'?
Y = 3.73 [or more] N = 3.42

2. I'm gonna tow/haul, or 'work hard'?
Y = 3.73 N = 3.42

3. Lotsa hills where I tend to drive?
Y = 3.73 N = 3.42

4. I care more about city MpG, less about hiway MpG?
Y = 3.73 N = 3.42 (No highway WHATSOEVER? Consider 4.10 or 4.56)

5. I've an extra $400 lying around, just in case the stock driveshaft's harmonics FORCE ME to buy a new driveshaft?
Y = 3.73 N = 3.42

6. My valvetrain has [AT LEAST] 1.6 roller rockers and upgraded valvesprings?
Y = 3.73 N = 3.42

7. It's a toy, not a daily driver
Y = 3.73 [or more] N = 3.42

Y > N? 3.73
N > Y? 3.42

By the way, the more gear, the better for your transmission. Ask the people here with V4P D-cars / Cadillac Fleetwoods with tow packs how many times they've had transmission rebuilds.

[nomrlz]

i get 15 city 22 highway religously in my wagon with 3.73s and 2800 edge.