I did my first dyno run with it today and pulled 391 hp and 342.5 lbs tq. We did the pull in 5th on my manual. The dynojet is a 248 with a huge inertia roller I guess. The guy said that their dyno comes in on the low side of with the roller they have. He described it as brutal. I was hoping to see over 400. Not on this dyno. The car was fully warmed up after running down the highway with AC on for 40 minutes to get there. There was no cooling fans blowing on the front or anything. The motor was just sucking in hot air from around the motor since the hood was up as well. I was more curious about the air/fuel ratio so I had him track that as well. The tune is running pretty conservative there and not getting too lean in any area which I am glad for. I don't want a lean spot somewhere in the curve and end up burning a cylinder.
Here are the specs on the car as it ran on the dyno today:
Boss intake, Steeda CAI, steeda 93 octane tune, roush axle back, 3.73 gears, JLT oil separator.
Jeez wth? Those numbers should've been way more, i dont care what dyno you used. I have a boss intake manifold, jlt carbon fiver CAI, 3.73 gears, and 91 octane race tune and I made 433rwhp.
some dyno's read differently, its all based on calibration~ so it might not be the car it might be something else who knows. Regardless 410rwhp stock is WAY to high for the 5.0.... that just means the dyno is not calibrated right.
__________________ 2003 Cobra Vert (Redfire) #3938 of 5082 @ 05/27/2003
472rwhp/493rwtq -Modification List - Dyno Sheet 2012 Mustang 3.7L M6 (Kona Blue) 2011 Ford Edge Sport (Red Metallic)
OP do you know how much timing is being ran in your car? And hard to see on phone but what is a/f?
On my bolt on manual we ran 26* timing at wot and my a/f was right at 12.8:1.
As above all dynos read different. Don't get caught with them. Its what it runs at the track or feels on the street that matters. I have seen cars make 420whp then run faster then a car that made 500whp. Because one was done on a low reading and other on a happy high dyno.
I am not sure where the timing is at in the tune. It looks like I am at about 12.3 at the top of the run. It dips to 12 at about 6500 rpm and up to about 12.7ish down at 4200 rpm.
---------- Post added at 11:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:55 AM ----------
Like I said in the first post, the operator said their dyno is harsh. It typically runs lower than others. I want to do another pull somewhere else to compare. Does it matter that I never did the fuel trim relearn? I tuned and then just drove it. This was months ago. Never heard of having to do that till recently. It runs smooth and idles ok.
I am not sure where the timing is at in the tune. It looks like I am at about 12.3 at the top of the run. It dips to 12 at about 6500 rpm and up to about 12.7ish down at 4200 rpm.
---------- Post added at 11:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:55 AM ----------
Like I said in the first post, the operator said their dyno is harsh. It typically runs lower than others. I want to do another pull somewhere else to compare. Does it matter that I never did the fuel trim relearn? I tuned and then just drove it. This was months ago. Never heard of having to do that till recently. It runs smooth and idles ok.
You have some more power threw the tune with the 12 and 12.3 a/f.
I talked to Gus at Steeda about the tune and Dino results. Him and I both agree the number I am seeing now isn't as critical as knowing what the baseline was and seeing the difference. Unfortunately I didn't do one. He said the A/F is where it should be. We talked about the differences in dynos and the more inertia in the roller the lower the number. I think they used a cradle roller dyno for their test at Steeda. What are you guys running on? I tested on a single large diameter roller instead of a cradle roller setup. Their is a lot more mass to spin with the big single. A big heavy single roller will definitely drop the output number as I am seeing. I have another dyno run somewhere else on the 25th. It's a group dyno event. I think they are running a cradle dyno there. It will be interesting to see the results there.
Jeez wth? Those numbers should've been way more, i dont care what dyno you used. I have a boss intake manifold, jlt carbon fiver CAI, 3.73 gears, and 91 octane race tune and I made 433rwhp.
This is incorrect. Almost every dyno differs.
vvvvvv
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpectorV
some dyno's read differently, its all based on calibration~ so it might not be the car it might be something else who knows. Regardless 410rwhp stock is WAY to high for the 5.0.... that just means the dyno is not calibrated right.
Aside from calibration, a dyno is meant as a tuning tool that you refer to consistently. Using a dyno in Arizona to then use one in NM to compare numbers shouldn't make someone upset they didn't attain a certain goal because using the same dyno will yield the most accurate increases.
He would have had to run his car stock at the same dyno to then compare his new numbers.
Dyno numbers are bragging rights and dynos are a tool. It all matters are if the car actually gain power.
---------- Post added at 12:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:44 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by guzie
I talked to Gus at Steeda about the tune and Dino results. Him and I both agree the number I am seeing now isn't as critical as knowing what the baseline was and seeing the difference.
I actually got 392hp at the wheels as well. This was on a 91 octane, boss 302 intake, and JLT carbon fiber cold air intake. The air fuel ratio was absolutely perfect and on a straight line with perfect mixture.
The guy before me didn't have the boss 302 and pulled 400. I hear some mustangs are a bit different.
I did my first dyno run with it today and pulled 391 hp and 342.5 lbs tq. We did the pull in 5th on my manual. The dynojet is a 248 with a huge inertia roller I guess. The guy said that their dyno comes in on the low side of with the roller they have. He described it as brutal. I was hoping to see over 400. Not on this dyno. The car was fully warmed up after running down the highway with AC on for 40 minutes to get there. There was no cooling fans blowing on the front or anything. The motor was just sucking in hot air from around the motor since the hood was up as well. I was more curious about the air/fuel ratio so I had him track that as well. The tune is running pretty conservative there and not getting too lean in any area which I am glad for. I don't want a lean spot somewhere in the curve and end up burning a cylinder.
Here are the specs on the car as it ran on the dyno today:
Boss intake, Steeda CAI, steeda 93 octane tune, roush axle back, 3.73 gears, JLT oil separator.
I pulled 441hp and 390tq. My mods are boss manifol, jlt cai, bbk cat deletes, and flowmaster 3inch catback with mufflers. Royal purple from front to back too. Tuned for 93 octane. Dyno'd on a dynojet 224xLC load bearing dyno. Numbers are from a loaded run with SAE correction factor. With STD correction it was 459hp and 401tq. Baseline was 387hp and 370tq. 2013 GT/CS Manual Trans. All runs were done in 5th gear.
I am not a real quarter miler by any means. I ran it one day at the track. The best I got was a 13.3 but my 60ft time was a 2.4 something. Terrible. I am running on my GT500 tires which are not meant for that.
I am not a real quarter miler by any means. I ran it one day at the track. The best I got was a 13.3 but my 60ft time was a 2.4 something. Terrible. I am running on my GT500 tires which are not meant for that.
I am not a real quarter miler by any means. I ran it one day at the track. The best I got was a 13.3 but my 60ft time was a 2.4 something. Terrible. I am running on my GT500 tires which are not meant for that.
F1's are crap. get some DR's or bias ply's on it
And then run it. DYno's are cool to use for tuning but unless driving a Supra looking to make huge whp and not be fast. Who cares about numbers on it. 95% of my tuning has been done at the track and on the street.
And then run it. DYno's are cool to use for tuning but unless driving a Supra looking to make huge whp and not be fast. Who cares about numbers on it. 95% of my tuning has been done at the track and on the street.
Supra's problem is that they can not fit a tire for the power. They are absolutely fast but uselessly so without some fabrication to fit a wider tire.
That being said, they have lost much of their luster and our cars have the same potential if not more while still being n/a. It is old at this point.
Supra's problem is that they can not fit a tire for the power. They are absolutely fast but uselessly so without some fabrication to fit a wider tire.
That being said, they have lost much of their luster and our cars have the same potential if not more while still being n/a. It is old at this point.
There is supras that have went 240+ in the TX mile. No streetable mustang has done that yet. They have also went 7 sec 1/4 mile. Our cars have yet to do that.
The 2jz has made 2000hp no 5.0 has done that. I imagine it never will any time soon.
---------- Post added at 05:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:56 PM ----------
I stang by what I said. Do you want a dyno queen or a proven setup. I watched a 800whp supra with 10" wide slicks run same times as me and its and easy 500lbs lighter being it is gutted. Not impressed. Its trap speed shows he would walk me on the street though. 140+. But at the track its all about ET not trap.
---------- Post added at 05:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:56 PM ----------
I stang by what I said. Do you want a dyno queen or a proven setup. I watched a 800whp supra with 10" wide slicks run same times as me and its and easy 500lbs lighter being it is gutted. Not impressed. Its trap speed shows he would walk me on the street though. 140+. But at the track its all about ET not trap.[/QUOTE]
True true
__________________
01 gt
Procharger d1
Mmr long block
480 rwhp 450 # of torque
Supra's problem is that they can not fit a tire for the power. They are absolutely fast but uselessly so without some fabrication to fit a wider tire.
That being said, they have lost much of their luster and our cars have the same potential if not more while still being n/a. It is old at this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnt2gofst
There is supras that have went 240+ in the TX mile. No streetable mustang has done that yet. They have also went 7 sec 1/4 mile. Our cars have yet to do that.
The 2jz has made 2000hp no 5.0 has done that. I imagine it never will any time soon.
---------- Post added at 05:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:56 PM ----------
I stang by what I said. Do you want a dyno queen or a proven setup. I watched a 800whp supra with 10" wide slicks run same times as me and its and easy 500lbs lighter being it is gutted. Not impressed. Its trap speed shows he would walk me on the street though. 140+. But at the track its all about ET not trap.
I was talking in the 1/4. As you said, ET not trap.
Twin Turbos have amazing power potential. Like you said about running same times with more power reminds me of an old 'joke' that a 1000 HP Supra and 500 HP Supra both run 10s.
10 inch wide slick is not enough for the insane amount of power the Supra can make.
Realistically, where could you drive a Supra at that speed regularly? I'll keep my S197. No knock on the Supra though.
I was talking in the 1/4. As you said, ET not trap.
Twin Turbos have amazing power potential. Like you said about running same times with more power reminds me of an old 'joke' that a 1000 HP Supra and 500 HP Supra both run 10s.
10 inch wide slick is not enough for the insane amount of power the Supra can make.
Realistically, where could you drive a Supra at that speed regularly? I'll keep my S197. No knock on the Supra though.
No different then the videos I posted of the 5.0 that both are DD and make 1000whp. Or the TT Lambo a buddy has that makes 1258whp and traps 160+ that is DD also.
No different then the videos I posted of the 5.0 that both are DD and make 1000whp. Or the TT Lambo a buddy has that makes 1258whp and traps 160+ that is DD also.
Saw your vids on the other forum. Awesome. You trapped way higher than that Vette Z.
My question what are all you 1/4 mile times? Or is every one just worried about dyno numbers?
My first run, stock with less than 100 miles on the car was 13.2 @ 109mph. Had a horrible 60ft. of 2.30, bogged real bad. Didnt take it to the redline either because i was worried. Plan to go back soon, now that i have the mods done. Been working on my 60ft. using the track apps. Got it down to a 1.90. Looking forward to getting back to track. I know its a long shot, but im trying to get in the 11s on street tires.
My first run, stock with less than 100 miles on the car was 13.2 @ 109mph. Had a horrible 60ft. of 2.30, bogged real bad. Didnt take it to the redline either because i was worried. Plan to go back soon, now that i have the mods done. Been working on my 60ft. using the track apps. Got it down to a 1.90. Looking forward to getting back to track. I know its a long shot, but im trying to get in the 11s on street tires.
Good luck. My 2011 manual we went 12.5-12.8 stock Swapped wheelse and this happen. Far as we are tracking still fastest stock-tire swap only. 12.1 then actually backed by 12.4 then later after cool down went 12.1 and 12.2 back to back. This is my car with about 100 miles on it. I had it for a week. and was gettong used to dricing a manual again.
---------- Post added at 09:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Just saw this on the tube. Cuss words at the end aren't family friendly, but it's insane how fast the car disappears. I didn't know!!!
They have huge Turbo and built 2jz's. Titan Motorsports supra ran a low 7 on one pass. The drivers door flew off at 180mph. Its a tube frame pure drag car that makes over 2000hp.
Chevy Camaro Forum
Ford Mustang Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum
Volkswagen Touareg Forum
Land Rover Defender Forum
