CT5-V Blackwing Closing in on 700 WHP

[WONT TAP]

It took our team more than one year to hit 700 whp with the CT4-V Blackwing. The CT5-V Blackwing should easily cross that threshold next month, on pump gas, only two months into the process.

We did four baseline runs over the last 15 days, ranging from 614 to 621 whp on a DynoJet with SAE correction factor and smoothing = 5. We decided to use the median 619 whp pull as our official starting point.

We installed Green performance air filters, Kong Stage X ported supercharger, Nick Williams 103 mm. throttle body and got 673 whp.

Next we switched from the 2.50 to 2.30” GripTec supercharger pulley and installed Brisk RR12S spark plugs with .027” gaps and got 694 whp. All runs were done using 93-octane pump gas. And these products are available now on the Tapout Tuning website.

Next month we plan to add Kooks competition headers, a little more boost and also start testing with ethanol fuel blends. We'll be shooting for 730 to 750 whp.

Special thanks to Alex from Illinois who loaned us his car to experiment with!

 

[A Blackwing]

Happy to make it happen, car could not be in better hands, looking forward to see what is possible still, and very impressed with the progress so far and so quickly.

 

[Slick Blackwings]

It took our team more than one year to hit 700 whp with the CT4-V Blackwing. The CT5-V Blackwing should easily cross that threshold next month, on pump gas, only two months into the process.

We did four baseline runs over the last 15 days, ranging from 614 to 621 whp on a DynoJet with SAE correction factor and smoothing = 5. We decided to use the median 619 whp pull as our official starting point.

We installed Green performance air filters, Kong Stage X ported supercharger, Nick Williams 103 mm. throttle body and got 673 whp.

Next we switched from the 2.50 to 2.30” GripTec supercharger pulley and installed Brisk RR12S spark plugs with .027” gaps and got 694 whp. All runs were done using 93-octane pump gas. And these products are available now on the Tapout Tuning website.

View attachment 15369

Next month we plan to add Kooks competition headers, a little more boost and also start testing with ethanol fuel blends. We'll be shooting for 730 to 750 whp.

Special thanks to Alex from Illinois who loaned us his car to experiment with!

Nice job, again it lost torque compared to stock, why is that?
Any codes engine light ?

 

[WONT TAP]

Nice job, again it lost torque compared to stock, why is that?
Any codes engine light ?

It's pretty standard to lose low end torque when the supercharger is extensively ported. If you look at the chart, you'll see there are only minor losses below 4,200 rpm. And you'll almost never be lower than that engine speed when at full throttle. So it's a non issue, really.

No DTCs or Check Engine light.

 

[dstewart51]

That power curve looks like it was drafted with a ruler. Wow.

 

[NightBlueTTS]

It's pretty standard to lose low end torque when the supercharger is extensively ported. If you look at the chart, you'll see there are only minor losses below 4,200 rpm. And you'll almost never be lower than that engine speed when at full throttle. So it's a non issue, really.

No DTCs or Check Engine light.

Saying it’s a non-issue doesn‘t 100% square for me. In every day driving it is common to be below 4200rpm..so is this solution only for ”hero” runs?

Max torque is lower, so there are trade-offs to be weighed. Could you elaborate on how you think about these vs not going into it?

 

[WONT TAP]

Saying it’s a non-issue doesn‘t 100% square for me. In every day driving it is common to be below 4200rpm..so is this solution only for ”hero” runs?

Max torque is lower, so there are trade-offs to be weighed. Could you elaborate on how you think about these vs not going into it?

Let me say it a different way...

At idle and cruise, peak maximum torque is completely irrelevant. So there is no loss realized.

Under light throttle acceleration, these cars pretty much seem to have infinite amounts of torque. You'll literally never feel like it's not enough. So there is no loss that you would ever feel or notice.

At full throttle, you're almost never below 4,200 rpm. This is the only place in the powerband that has less torque than stock. So yes, there is one condition that is exposed on the dynamometer as having less torque than stock. But no one driving the car would ever experience that situation.

Does this make sense?

 

[NightBlueTTS]

Let me say it a different way...

At idle and cruise, peak maximum torque is completely irrelevant. So there is no loss realized.

Under light throttle acceleration, these cars pretty much seem to have infinite amounts of torque. You'll literally never feel like it's not enough. So there is no loss that you would ever feel or notice.

At full throttle, you're almost never below 4,200 rpm. This is the only place in the powerband that has less torque than stock. So yes, there is one condition that is exposed on the dynamometer as having less torque than stock. But no one driving the car would ever experience that situation.

Does this make sense?

First off, Merry Christmas!

2nd, thank you for the thoughtful reply.

I guess what I’m trying to understand is if this is similar to fitting a larger turbo where you get more lag in lower rpms but with more power in the higher rpms.

This seems to be the trade-off as I’d expect to see lower torque down low for by and large every throttle position. So I have a hard time conceptualizing that this is only a hypothetical, and saying that these cars “seem to have infinite amounts of torque” under light throttle is a subjective statement that doesn’t help me square it.

I’m guessing your point is that the small trade-off down low will be hard to feel from a “seat of the pants”-perspective, but will provide significant power in upper RPMs despite what the dyno reads? (FWIW, this car has materially less torque across the power curve than the car I drive most, so I may be more concerned about losing daily drive-ability than others.)

That said, I may be wrong. I’m just trying to understand. Thanks

 

[MatthewAMEL]

Saying it’s a non-issue doesn‘t 100% square for me. In every day driving it is common to be below 4200rpm..so is this solution only for ”hero” runs?

Max torque is lower, so there are trade-offs to be weighed. Could you elaborate on how you think about these vs not going into it?

I'm not sure I understand your concern.

Max TQ is lower, but Max HP is higher. It's common to be below 4200 during street driving, but you wouldn't notice either the gain or the loss depending on if you were WOT below 4,200.

If you put the OEM car up against either modded car, the higher HP car will win.

 

[dribs15]

First off, Merry Christmas!

2nd, thank you for the thoughtful reply.

I guess what I’m trying to understand is if this is similar to fitting a larger turbo where you get more lag in lower rpms but with more power in the higher rpms.

This seems to be the trade-off as I’d expect to see lower torque down low for by and large every throttle position. So I have a hard time conceptualizing that this is only a hypothetical, and saying that these cars “seem to have infinite amounts of torque” under light throttle is a subjective statement that doesn’t help me square it.

I’m guessing your point is that the small trade-off down low will be hard to feel from a “seat of the pants”-perspective, but will provide significant power in upper RPMs despite what the dyno reads? (FWIW, this car has materially less torque across the power curve than the car I drive most, so I may be more concerned about losing daily drive-ability than others.)

That said, I may be wrong. I’m just trying to understand. Thanks

Are you trying to ask about/ concerned with the possibility of a more noticeable turbo lag towards the low end?

 

[Snowwolfe]

How do you “tune” this car to make sure it will not run to lean?

 

[MatthewAMEL]

How do you “tune” this car to make sure it will not run to lean?

OEM ECU can make the adjustments. BW has Wideband O2 sensors.

 

[OldGoat]

Are you trying to ask about/ concerned with the possibility of a more noticeable turbo lag towards the low end?

I've looked everywhere and still can't find the turbo under my 5 hood.

 

[OldGoat]

I've looked everywhere and still can't find the turbo under my 5 hood.

I'm glad you have a good sense of humor

 

[dribs15]

I've looked everywhere and still can't find the turbo under my 5 hood.

Totally deserved that one!

My bad,... so much of @WONT TAP 's work has been geared to the 4 that I thought they were talking about the 4 in this thread too

 

[dribs15]

I'm glad you have a good sense of humor

I'm from Jersey too and also the youngest of 4...I can take it as well as I dish it

... and (almost) always mean to in good fun

 

[1Evil55]

Awesome work @WONT TAP
Excited to see what's to come.
Sitting here wondering if chicago guy will be offering test rides when the car comes back?
From,
another chicago guy!

 

[sleepys4]

Just checking in on this! Can I reuse the stock belt once I decide to pull the trigger? Also how many Lbs of boost are you seeing with the 2.30 pulley??

 

[WONT TAP]

Just checking in on this! Can I reuse the stock belt once I decide to pull the trigger? Also how many Lbs of boost are you seeing with the 2.30 pulley??

Yes, the factory serpentine belt still works fine.

I am not sure about the boost number, and there is no underhood access point for us to log boost on the dyno. But it was around 14 psi if I remember correctly.

 

[DiGiam1976]

Still no check engine lights or DTC's? How does it drive with the 103 TB and no tuning?