Mustang Evolution Forum banner

Build. Should I upgrade injectors?

7K views 139 replies 23 participants last post by  JoeyM91 
#1 ·
So I have a 2014 pp mustang mt. I have steeda intake, 93 tune, 80mm gt 5.0 throttle body, bbk shorties, and stock exhaust. I am planning on a catless x pipe and upgraded injectors. Is this doable in a n/a 3.7 and what are the gains. I would go with 60lbs I have read that stock they are 29lb. Anyone done this without being sc or turbo

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#38 ·
Yeah, sweet bro. Go get some. Lol! Once you get 300 rwhp you will want 350. Then , 400 rwhp you will want. Then you will want 500 rwhp. Then 600 rwhp. Never enough. Ha ha ha. Its like money. No matter how many millions or billions a company makes in profit each year, they always want more. Give me more, more, more, more more. Lol

Sent from my naked Johnson. The third real non Boss 227
 
#41 ·
Any one have a manual with 93 tune and the mods I listed

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app

---------- Post added at 02:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:15 PM ----------

And can attest to the final numbers

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#43 ·
It's 15% from the crank I believe and then there's some complicated math after that for autos. Sakib or someone could explain it its been explained to me numerous times on here I just don't understand it will enough to explain it

Sent from my 831C using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#45 ·
It's 15% from the crank I believe and then there's some complicated math after that for autos. Sakib or someone could explain it its been explained to me numerous times on here I just don't understand it will enough to explain it
I could explain it all over again, but really it doesn't matter. The thing is that crank hp calculations are estimates. We don't really know how much is being lost due to friction losses in the drivetrain... to really know that you'd have to do research on the components themselves and only Ford engineers will be able to do that. People just use these percentages as ball-park estimates. So no point in getting too nit-picky about the numbers/calculations.

That said, you guys are saying some stuff upstairs that is incorrect. It's not a 15% difference in between manual and auto. Manuals lose ~10-15% from the crank to the wheels. Autos lose ~15-20% from the crank to the wheels. I don't know where you guys got the 15% difference between the two thing, I never heard of that before, that is way too much. Even if you went to the opposite extreme cases of both (10% for manual and 20% for auto) that's still only an 11.1% difference between the two.

Finally, just for completeness sake, I will put the formulas here. With the note, again, that they are estimates. Let's just say, for the sake of discussion, that manuals lose 15% and autos lose 20%. Here are the formulas for calculating the crank hp if you are given the wheel hp (the number you get from the dyno):

Auto: crank = wheels/0.8
Manual: crank = wheels/0.85

Here's the best article I found online that explains drivetrain losses. It's excellent. Read this and you will understand why this is not a simple answer: Drivetrain Power Loss - The 15% "Rule"- Modified Magazine
 
#47 ·
What dynos are you guys using? Do you guys have graphs?
 
#52 ·
 
#53 ·
Hate to be "that guy", but those dyno numbers don't mean much if you can't get it to the pavement or don't understand how to handle that power efficiently without ham fisting shifts or blowing your tires off.

Time spent there would be more beneficial than theory crafting dyno numbers.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#54 ·
i'm just curious as to how so many guys are breaking the 300rwhp with mild bolt ons ... Unclenard has full bolt ons with super six motor sports ported heads and intake manifolds and is making 308rwhp thats why i'm asking what dynos were used and for graphs.. i know when my car was NA with full bolts ons it was making 275rwhp on a dyno jet
 
#56 ·
 
#57 ·
What fast Ford is getting at is the peak numbers on the dyno is not as useful as what the shape of the curve is. Don't get hung up on the number, it rally isn't so meaningful. And man, check out his thread "project code red". His car makes the hp it does for more than being an auto.

Joey is 100% right. HP numbers is not what your goal should be. making your car fast on the track is your goal. The dyno is just a tool to help you understand where your car needs help, and you do that by looking at the whole curve, not by aiming for a high peak number.

Sent from my HTCONE using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#62 ·
This is completely incorrect.

On average, an automatic car loses 15 - 20% of it's crank rated power getting to the ground. A manual loses 10 - 15% of it's crank rated power getting it to the ground. The difference is likely to be around 5%.

That is why generally, a stock automatic will dyno somewhere around 245 rwhp + or - 10 rwhp, typically. A stock manual car will dyno around 260 rwhp again + or - 10 rwhp.

Not all dyno's are calibrated the same and not all dyno's are the same. So going from a Dynojet to a Mustang dyno can give you vastly different numbers. I have witnessed people getting pissed because they missed whatever number they were shooting for. Then they drive across town and magically they gain 30 rwhp on a different dyno. All because of two different dynos with different calibrations and different ways of measuring the power.

A dyno is a tuning tool. Don't get caught up in the numbers.

Here is a video showing how easily dyno numbers can manipulated -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDwjfZvmPHg



If you want to know how much power your car has, run it at the strip. Generally a 280 - 300 rwhp 3.7 should trap around 104 - 107 mph, with a 1500 or less DA and a decent driver.
 
#65 ·
I know numbers aren't everything but 275 is alot less than 300ish. Especially when talking about tq. I want tq more than hp because that's what's needed on the low side of the power band. Which I stated earlier. So I do read the posts. I started the thread and have been following all of it. Also, the hp and tq difference between an auto and manual could easily be the difference in the dyno numbers. Yes the curve of the power band needs to be smooth and not edgy with a high soule at the end. Most tuners that are worth a crap (u get what you pay for) know this and do there jobs well. A car making 297 rwhp set the naturally aspirated v6 record at the track running a 12.7. So having that power is perfect for tracking and would be better than 275 rwhp every day. The while point of getting about 300 rwhp and close to 300 rwtq is because it makes these cars nasty and very quick. I am not seeking advice on a self tune I am trying to do
I am not a tuner. Just mechanical.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#73 ·
You obviously need a little more real life experience instead of basing everything from what you have read.


And numbers don't mean crap on the rollers but matter on the 1320.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2011fastford
#66 ·
#67 ·
With a stall comverter, a bigger gear ratio in the rear. Far from what I am talking about regards to this thread. The manuals have much better times that the autos. The auto in the mustang is a slush box. Get it tuned and it's a little better. All those times that were under 12.7 had no pictures of the slips either. Just word of mouth that it happened. Not saying it's bs but there is no solid proof

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#78 ·
With a stall comverter, a bigger gear ratio in the rear. Far from what I am talking about regards to this thread. The manuals have much better times that the autos. The auto in the mustang is a slush box. Get it tuned and it's a little better. All those times that were under 12.7 had no pictures of the slips either. Just word of mouth that it happened. Not saying it's bs but there is no solid proof Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
Lmao. U got a lot to learn bud! The autos in the 11+ are no slush boxes..they actually put out better track #s. & I have a manual so I'm not bias! Don't get me wrong the m6 can put it down at the track but it takes a great driver!
 
#74 ·
I am basing what I know on life experience, what I have read, and what I have seen. 17 cars deep and all have been built stage 3 or higher. Numbers don't always mean anything but these cars can put alot 300 to the wheels and be in the mid to high 12's. 275 is low and not going to put that number down. That's the point I was making. Nice try bashing though. You were the same one who doubted the 5.0 throttle body idea. Which, fyi, worked amazing and has huge benefits.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#75 ·
What is the difference on the dyno from the stock 3.7 TB to the GT? What is the track difference? Dyno it at the same time same place without it and then put it on and dyno it do 2 or 3 pulls each. Do 2 or 3 runs at the track same day with the 3.7 TB on and then 2 or 3 runs with the GT one on on the same day. Post the dyno curves and the slips from every pull and run and then we will see what those "huge benefits" are . I'm sorry but "butt dyno" doesn't mean anything or you thinking you feel something

Sent from my 831C using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#76 ·
No it doesnt. But you doubted the whole process and the ability for it to work. It never needed a lt adapter plate. Just a fill and re drill on the 80mm throttle body. And the stock manifold was absolutley 80mm, you said you knew for a fact it was 75mm. I will supply graphs when I finish the latest additions the end of the month. The point is, you have yet to prove anything I have said wrong in previous discussion and bash on ideas and conceptual questions. The runs with the stock tb will never happen. I love the way the car runs now. And it's delivery is incredibly smoother. The intake to the intake manifold matches in size now. No choke point. I wish I didn't work for a living and could play at a dyno/track facility to prove you wrong but being active duty requires much of my time. Maybe you shouldn't jump into the middle of a thread just to put a theory or idea down....or better yet try to say someone doesn't know anything, when you couldn't possibly be accurate about that.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
#77 ·
I have never said any of those things to you or said anything about a 75mm......
If you won't put the stock one back on to see if there's an actual difference than no one will take you seriously. No proof = no one believing you .
Maybe you thought you were talking to smurf? Please read and see who is posting

Sent from my 831C using Mustang Evolution mobile app
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top