Dyno results :-( - Page 2 - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 1979-1995 Mustang GT



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 04-17-2012, 08:04 PM   #36
Road Trip!
Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Region: Missouri
Posts: 8,779
Re: Dyno results :-(

There are so many possible variables that it would be difficult to pin down the exact cause.


Lower compression could be one major difference.
Driveline efficiency another.
Make copious notes of each car's mods and differences and compare them maybe?
Trojan Horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-17-2012, 08:12 PM   #37
Registered Member
Regular
 
ColeJohnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ketchikan, Alaska
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 2,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trojan Horse

Why not it is simple?
You take the power produced at the rear tires, multiply it by the 18% loss or .18 to find out how much power was lost, then you add that power back onto the RWHP to get an approximation of the FWHP.
By FWHP I assume he means BHP, horsepower at the crank, or flywheel horsepower. The math seems legit, although slightly generalized. Haha

Sorry for this later reply.. I wasn't aware there were more pages already. Lol.
__________________

2016 Comp Orange GT (current)
Aurora - 2002 Boosted GT! (Sold, sadly)
ColeJohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 08:20 PM   #38
Road Trip!
Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Region: Missouri
Posts: 8,779
Re: Dyno results :-(

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColeJohnson View Post
By FWHP I assume he means BHP, horsepower at the crank, or flywheel horsepower. The math seems legit, although slightly generalized. Haha

Sorry for this later reply.. I wasn't aware there were more pages already. Lol.
Yes it is simple and generalized, meant only to give a rough estimate.
Trojan Horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-17-2012, 08:34 PM   #39
Registered Member
Regular
 
NeedSomeMods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Region: Texas
Posts: 775
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColeJohnson

By FWHP I assume he means BHP, horsepower at the crank, or flywheel horsepower. The math seems legit, although slightly generalized. Haha

Sorry for this later reply.. I wasn't aware there were more pages already. Lol.
I seriously thought it meant Front Wheel HP, which is what I normally see FWHP stand for... Fly Wheel HP makes MUCH more sense. Thanks for clearing that up! Trojan, it was my lack of understanding, not your math that was the problem.
__________________
2000 V6 - RIP
The '94 -
NeedSomeMods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 09:01 PM   #40
Road Trip!
Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Region: Missouri
Posts: 8,779
Re: Dyno results :-(

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedSomeMods View Post
I seriously thought it meant Front Wheel HP, which is what I normally see FWHP stand for... Fly Wheel HP makes MUCH more sense. Thanks for clearing that up! Trojan, it was my lack of understanding, not your math that was the problem.
Sorry man, sometimes I just assume that everyone knows what I'm talking about.


I never think about Front Wheel Horsepower.
To me it is always Flywheel Horsepower FWHP or Rear Wheel Horsepower RWHP.
Trojan Horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 07:29 AM   #41
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Region: Florida
Posts: 72
Re: Dyno results :-(

The only chips TRULY worth having are done on the car, using a chassis dyno. The others can be okay, but not all are. Many mail order chips are what you may call "on the ragged edge" and those often lead to overly rich, but more importantly, overly lean conditions. If you have access to any decent tuner, that's your best bet, $500-1000 or whatever. It's safer in the long run.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XXSTEVEO66 View Post
So then roughly my car puts 189hp to the ground...
That was a fairly typical rwhp for a pushrod 5L HO in a Mustang. I saw 187-189 for nearly all stock versions(when there was a dyno in the shop- when there was a shop).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trojan Horse View Post
Usually 4th gear or whatever gear provides a 1-1 ratio I believe.
^^ Thiis, with a 5speed manual.

No matter what, the test is to be done in the 1:1 ratio gear. On many cars, specifically automatics, this is typically "3rd" gear. Most manuals are 1:1 in 4th. The latest Mustang 6spd manual has a 5th gear 1:1 ratio.
All41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 07:48 AM   #42
Road Trip!
Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Region: Missouri
Posts: 8,779
Re: Dyno results :-(

Quote:
Originally Posted by All41 View Post
The only chips TRULY worth having are done on the car, using a chassis dyno. The others can be okay, but not all are. Many mail order chips are what you may call "on the ragged edge" and those often lead to overly rich, but more importantly, overly lean conditions. If you have access to any decent tuner, that's your best bet, $500-1000 or whatever. It's safer in the long run.

That was a fairly typical rwhp for a pushrod 5L HO in a Mustang. I saw 187-189 for nearly all stock versions(when there was a dyno in the shop- when there was a shop).

^^ Thiis, with a 5speed manual.

No matter what, the test is to be done in the 1:1 ratio gear. On many cars, specifically automatics, this is typically "3rd" gear. Most manuals are 1:1 in 4th. The latest Mustang 6spd manual has a 5th gear 1:1 ratio.
Thanks for the confirmation.
I was pretty sure that they used whatever gear it took to get the 1:1 ratio, but not 100% sure.
Trojan Horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 06:49 PM   #43
Registered Member
Regular
 
WhiteCobra94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Region: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,435
I dropped the car off Wednesday and this morning had the car custom dynoed tune by (2nd street speed in Pa) with a 302 bored to 308 , HCI, full off-road exhaust the car dynoed at 304rwhp / 314ft/tq,
WhiteCobra94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 08:39 PM   #44
Registered Member
Regular
 
jhagan1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 648
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteCobra94
I dropped the car off Wednesday and this morning had the car custom dynoed tune by (2nd street speed in Pa) with a 302 bored to 308 , HCI, full off-road exhaust the car dynoed at 304rwhp / 314ft/tq,
There has to be something else done to my car that I don't know about if I'm pushing 364tq!
jhagan1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 08:41 PM   #45
Registered Member
Regular
 
WhiteCobra94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Region: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhagan1980

There has to be something else done to my car that I don't know about if I'm pushing 364tq!
What setup do you have
WhiteCobra94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 09:21 PM   #46
Registered Member
Regular
 
jhagan1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 648
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteCobra94

What setup do you have
What I know of:
TB
Long tube headers
SCT chip with Dyno tune
O/R x pipe
Flowmasters
3:73 gears
C&L CAI
I'm running 266hp and 364tq so I must have something that the previous owner(s) have done that I'm not a where of.
jhagan1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 09:28 PM   #47
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Region: Indiana
Posts: 8,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhagan1980

What I know of:
TB
Long tube headers
SCT chip with Dyno tune
O/R x pipe
Flowmasters
3:73 gears
C&L CAI
I'm running 266hp and 364tq so I must have something that the previous owner(s) have done that I'm not a where of.
yeah the hp is maybe a little over average with a good tune, but that torque seems pretty high.
dreamstang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 09:41 PM   #48
Registered Member
Regular
 
WhiteCobra94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Region: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,435
Heads and cam too?
WhiteCobra94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 10:19 PM   #49
Registered Member
Regular
 
jhagan1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 648
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteCobra94
Heads and cam too?
Not that i know of. I know the heads are stock.
jhagan1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 10:20 PM   #50
Registered Member
Regular
 
WhiteCobra94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Region: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,435
Yea that's odd!!! Lol
WhiteCobra94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 10:22 PM   #51
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Region: Indiana
Posts: 8,044
maybe the stockers have had work done?
dreamstang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 10:30 PM   #52
Registered Member
Regular
 
WhiteCobra94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Region: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,435
What about a 351 short block with stock 302 top end
WhiteCobra94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2012, 12:12 PM   #53
Registered Member
Regular
 
88fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Region: California
Posts: 106
I'm gonna end up with a 331 and stock heads :'(
88fox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 05:22 AM   #54
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Region: Florida
Posts: 72
Re: Dyno results :-(

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteCobra94 View Post
I dropped the car off Wednesday and this morning had the car custom dynoed tune by (2nd street speed in Pa) with a 302 bored to 308 , HCI, full off-road exhaust the car dynoed at 304rwhp / 314ft/tq,
That's pretty good. Depending on the cam specs, you may have made more or less. I've seen S/C'd Fox bodies reaching that power level in the past.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhagan1980 View Post
There has to be something else done to my car that I don't know about if I'm pushing 364tq!
I wondered what was done because the torque number sounds way, way off as compared to hp.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhagan1980 View Post
What I know of:
TB
Long tube headers
SCT chip with Dyno tune
O/R x pipe
Flowmasters
3:73 gears
C&L CAI
I'm running 266hp and 364tq so I must have something that the previous owner(s) have done that I'm not a where of.
With these mods, I'd say there is definitely something odd going on here. With factory stock heads, you'll be lucky to get that much rwhp and the torque may be up there near what you're showing, but that's not common stuff. I'd have to say the heads have been ported, if not replaced.
All41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 08:12 AM   #55
Forum Car Trader
Regular
 
90GTNovi2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by All41
That's pretty good. Depending on the cam specs, you may have made more or less. I've seen S/C'd Fox bodies reaching that power level in the past.

I wondered what was done because the torque number sounds way, way off as compared to hp.

With these mods, I'd say there is definitely something odd going on here. With factory stock heads, you'll be lucky to get that much rwhp and the torque may be up there near what you're showing, but that's not common stuff. I'd have to say the heads have been ported, if not replaced.
You gained 100ft. Lbs over the hp.. That's wild with only 266hp.. For the guy who said he has seen s/c'd foxbodies with 320 rwhp..that's weak.. Any decent build supercharged should make 380+ easily
__________________
90GTNovi2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 01:06 PM   #56
Registered Member
Regular
 
gqsmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 638
That some serious torque over hp..that looks like what some diesel engine makes
gqsmash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 01:43 PM   #57
Registered Member
Regular
 
WhiteCobra94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Region: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,435
Maybe the dyno itself isn't correct!!!
WhiteCobra94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 01:09 AM   #58
Registered Member
Regular
 
jwhayne0001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 430
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteCobra94
Maybe the dyno itself isn't correct!!!
That's my guess
jwhayne0001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 01:18 AM   #59
Registered Member
Regular
 
jhagan1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 648
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwhayne0001

That's my guess
That's what your hoping for!
jhagan1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 01:23 AM   #60
Registered Member
Regular
 
jwhayne0001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 430
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhagan1980

That's what your hoping for!
Let's line em up
jwhayne0001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 01:54 AM   #61
Registered Member
Regular
 
jhagan1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 648
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwhayne0001

Let's line em up
Sounds good

---------- Post added at 06:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:32 AM ----------

We can take them to windy hollow dragstrip
jhagan1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 02:25 AM   #62
Registered Member
Regular
 
jwhayne0001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 430
When's there open days?
jwhayne0001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 02:27 AM   #63
Registered Member
Regular
 
jhagan1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 648
Website shows test and tune every Saturday
jhagan1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 04:06 AM   #64
Registered Member
Regular
 
Rm360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Region: Illinois
Posts: 1,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteCobra94
Maybe the dyno itself isn't correct!!!
There is variances in dyno's if you have another shop around you I would take it there and retest it
Rm360 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 10:32 AM   #65
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Region: Florida
Posts: 72
Re: Dyno results :-(

Quote:
Originally Posted by 90GTNovi2000 View Post
For the guy who said he has seen s/c'd foxbodies with 320 rwhp..that's weak.. Any decent build supercharged should make 380+ easily
You goof'd on the quote, but oh well.

You think 304rwhp is weak for a supercharged 5L? Well, it is, but with stock heads, you're not just seeing 380rwhp. That would require plenty of help. We're talking about a car that put about 188hp to the ground when stock, and maybe 256ish lb-ft on the torque... Adding a P1SC isn't gonna set the world on fire. Back when I started with these, nobody had a dyno and the superchargers weren't exactly refined. Gotta work with whatcha have...
All41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 04:53 PM   #66
Forum Car Trader
Regular
 
90GTNovi2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by All41
You goof'd on the quote, but oh well.

You think 304rwhp is weak for a supercharged 5L? Well, it is, but with stock heads, you're not just seeing 380rwhp. That would require plenty of help. We're talking about a car that put about 188hp to the ground when stock, and maybe 256ish lb-ft on the torque... Adding a P1SC isn't gonna set the world on fire. Back when I started with these, nobody had a dyno and the superchargers weren't exactly refined. Gotta work with whatcha have...
Yes I think it is weak for a supercharged 5.0.. But very respectable for all motor... I understand stock heads.. But on 9psi of boost on my stock e7's just cleaned and polished with an e cam .30 kb pistons it made 460 rwhp 430 tq.. On3 turbo setup.. Just IMO I can make 450 with stock heads..

---------- Post added at 04:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:48 PM ----------

Lol and yeah I messed up the quote.. But that being said with the proper build and today's technology 300rwhp mustangs are everywhere..
__________________
90GTNovi2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 10:35 PM   #67
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Region: Florida
Posts: 72
Re: Dyno results :-(

Quote:
Originally Posted by 90GTNovi2000 View Post
Yes I think it is weak for a supercharged 5.0.. But very respectable for all motor... I understand stock heads.. But on 9psi of boost on my stock e7's just cleaned and polished with an e cam .30 kb pistons it made 460 rwhp 430 tq.. On3 turbo setup.. Just IMO I can make 450 with stock heads..

---------- Post added at 04:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:48 PM ----------

Lol and yeah I messed up the quote.. But that being said with the proper build and today's technology 300rwhp mustangs are everywhere..
The Mustangs I've seen at that power level were in the mid 1990's till around 2001... Things have come a very long way. A turbo will change things far more than a simple 1990's centrifugal supercharger on an otherwise stock 5L. I've never seen stock E7 heads on any car making even 350rwhp. If you can get 100 more, think of how well the tuning has come along. 450 certainly makes me think the dyno is happy.

PS .30 overbore... Must be MASSIVE pistons... I've used .030-.060, but that's tiny by comparison....

As for power on stock E7 heads... I wouldn't waste my time trying to break into the 300's on stockers. Just far too restrictive for me. Then again, I'd never really want a Ford square cam either. To each his own.
All41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2012, 07:28 AM   #68
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Region: Illinois
Posts: 776
Just to add a money wrench to the equation here: I have the 70mm on3 kit with a bone stock 91 5.0 and I got 294rwhp/407rwtq@ 8.65lbs. This was tuned professionally btw.
JayKranz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2012, 09:14 AM   #69
Forum Car Trader
Regular
 
90GTNovi2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayKranz
Just to add a money wrench to the equation here: I have the 70mm on3 kit with a bone stock 91 5.0 and I got 294rwhp/407rwtq@ 8.65lbs. This was tuned professionally btw.
Yep I had the same on3 kit on me 89' and no speedtek has the best dyno available in dfw... Although we cranked the boost up and blew it sky high... Go to on3performance.com they have stock junkyard motors with 180k miles running 400+ rwhp that made me buy the kit 2 yrs ago.. I upgraded my kit also... E7 heads do suck and restrict big time but with a good polish and matching them to the intake ports they flow well enough to hit 400.. Seen it done im about to attach a video once I can dig on my computer.. I have tons of proof but this is a new phone and old one is in the river somewhere..

---------- Post added at 08:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:55 AM ----------

On 3 Performance 5.0 1986 – 1993 Mustang single turbo system, shipping daily. We developed this kit years ago and now countless cars are running and putting down the numbers. We have put together what we think is the best horsepower per dollar modification you can do to your Mustang. You can literally bolt this kit on and double the factory horsepower(Close to TRIPLE the torque). Most stock 5.0 motors will put down around 185 +/- rear wheel horsepower. Most stock head and cam 5.0’s cars are making around the 480-520 rear wheel HP range.

---------- Post added at 09:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:59 AM ----------

I'm not saying you guys are wrong by any means but just my opinion I am young and have only built 9 foxbodies but I have seen 400+ on ****ty e7 heads it didn't last long though lol.. So if I were to do it again... I would definitely stay with the 9psi spring and conserve my motor and I would still have my 89
__________________
90GTNovi2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2012, 10:10 AM   #70
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90GTNovi2000

Yep I had the same on3 kit on me 89' and no speedtek has the best dyno available in dfw... Although we cranked the boost up and blew it sky high... Go to on3performance.com they have stock junkyard motors with 180k miles running 400+ rwhp that made me buy the kit 2 yrs ago.. I upgraded my kit also... E7 heads do suck and restrict big time but with a good polish and matching them to the intake ports they flow well enough to hit 400.. Seen it done im about to attach a video once I can dig on my computer.. I have tons of proof but this is a new phone and old one is in the river somewhere..

---------- Post added at 08:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:55 AM ----------

On 3 Performance 5.0 1986 – 1993 Mustang single turbo system, shipping daily. We developed this kit years ago and now countless cars are running and putting down the numbers. We have put together what we think is the best horsepower per dollar modification you can do to your Mustang. You can literally bolt this kit on and double the factory horsepower(Close to TRIPLE the torque). Most stock 5.0 motors will put down around 185 +/- rear wheel horsepower. Most stock head and cam 5.0’s cars are making around the 480-520 rear wheel HP range.

---------- Post added at 09:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:59 AM ----------

I'm not saying you guys are wrong by any means but just my opinion I am young and have only built 9 foxbodies but I have seen 400+ on ****ty e7 heads it didn't last long though lol.. So if I were to do it again... I would definitely stay with the 9psi spring and conserve my motor and I would still have my 89
Not a bad price for the kit.
tbonestang is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 1979-1995 Mustang GT

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


» Like Us On Facebook



05:16 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.