View Full Version : FordChip Dynotune Numbers!
studio460
10-06-2003, 07:18 PM
I finally got my FordChip dynotune at JBA Racing in San Diego today. Jerry, Chris, and Dave did a great job and were excellent to work with. Bruce and his crew at JBA were terrific as well. I chose to have the FordChip guys flash my PCM rather than install a chip. Just before the baseline pull, I had JBA install the Steeda underdrive pulley set that I had just ordered from Reinhart Automotive (I have no dyno sheet without the pulley). The pulley is my very FIRST mod (other than my Flowmasters which I assume added insignificant or no power at all).
99% STOCK '03 MARAUDER 300B (except for Steeda pulleys) DYNOTUNE DATA:
BASELINE [w/Steedas]:
RPM / RWHP / TQ FT. LB.
5,336 251.2
2,030 . . . . . . . . 326
PULL #05 [w/Steedas]:
RPM / RWHP / TQ FT. LB.
5,336 291.3
2,262 . . . . . . . . 330
NET: +40.1 RWHP / +4.0 TQ FT. LB.
[NOTICE: THESE ARE NON-S.A.E.-CORRECTED NUMBERS--SEE POSTS BELOW]
TripleTransAm
10-06-2003, 07:25 PM
Jesus! Those are healthy numbers!!!!:eek:
studio460
10-06-2003, 07:46 PM
Yeah, Triple-T, I was really surprised myself! I probably would've been willing to trade a few horses for a few more ft.-lbs. of torque, but there's definitely a noticable seat-of-the-pants improvement off the line. My hunch is, is that the Steeda pulley added a few ft.-lbs. of torque, making the dynotune torque improvement less dramatic. Now, my only decision, in the short term (since I probably won't be able to resist the temptation of a supercharger for too much longer--the dynotune was just to hold me over until I decide), is to decide between 4.10s or 4.30s . . . Logan, or anyone else with the 4.30s: are you able to lay any rubber with the 4.30s and only Stage 1-type add-ons? Thanks.
Well I hope you dont take this the wrong way because I dont want to make waves, but something is wrong about those numbers. Could you let us know what kind of dyno it was and the 'verbage' heard from other dyno tune attendees. What I mean by that is... hearing stuff like my car has never run this good, or I cant believe it made that power. Im extatic if those numbers are the real deal, but they seem a little high. Please let us know.
Originally posted by NBC Shooter
99% STOCK '03 MARAUDER 300B (except for Steeda pulleys) DYNOTUNE DATA:
BASELINE [w/Steedas]:
RPM / RWHP / TQ FT. LB.
5,336 251.2
2,030 . . . . . . . . 326
PULL #05 [w/Steedas]:
RPM / RWHP / TQ FT. LB.
5,336 291.3
2,262 . . . . . . . . 330
NET: +40.1 RWHP / +4.0 TQ FT. LB.
Shooter,
Either these #S^^^are wrong....or Jerry has a new program that he's figured out...
291.3 RWHP is 15-20 HP more than I've seen from anyone
326 RWTQ from your "baseline"...would be phenominal considering that 318 is the stock at the crank...
Not meant as a flame...but...could you "double-check" the "math"...
BTW...most "bone stock" Marauders get 240-245RWHP so your 251RWHP on your baseline makes sense, because I think the pulley set from Dennis is good for 8-12RWHP
studio460
10-06-2003, 07:57 PM
Yeah, I hear ya, guys. I was suspicious of those numbers as well. They did a total of five pulls, all with similar, incrementally increasing RWHP figures.
The dyno housing says "Dynomax" and the sheets say "Dyno Dynamics Dynamometer."
And by the way, I would NEVER take anything you said, TAF, as a flame, or sense that any words of wisdom from you, Zack, as "making waves." I know that both of you consistently post honest, informative, and helpful posts. Any ideas on what's going on with these numbers or this dyno?
Awesome
Now take it to the track & tell us how fast it is.
studio460
10-06-2003, 08:07 PM
Hey Zack, I just reread the latter part of your post . . .
I didn't notice any chatter like that, although it may have happened. maudominguez (with his Reinhart Stage I and 4.10s already in place on his Marauder 300B) was there, but I forgot what his numbers were (I believe they were in the same ballpark).
The first car on the dyno was this wicked black Saleen Mustang. That thing was awesome, but unfortunately, I forgot the numbers. RocketCouch had his N/A SOHC Crown Victoria, and his numbers were totally normal after the tune (lower 200s).
What was the condition of the shop? Was it well maintained?
Dynos need calibration every so often, so this might have played a factor. Can you post the dyno graphs? Those numbers might be 'peak' values, the values recorded when the car either hits the rev limiter or shifts. This is probably the case. Post the graphs and I will tell you.
sailsmen
10-06-2003, 08:16 PM
All the previous Dyno #'s I saw were on a DynoJet.
studio460
10-06-2003, 08:17 PM
Oh, these are absolutely peak numbers . . . The shop was pretty nice. Lots of techs. Clean. Nicely arranged dyno bay. The torque figure I quoted is I think guilty of what you're talking about. The peak torque in the normal powerband is only 322 ft.-lbs. and I believe actually decreased from baseline slightly.
I'll try to get my scanner running and post the graph tonight. Oh, by the way, maudominguez' graph appeared to have a smoother powerband than mine (I remember liking the powerband on his graph much better, even though my numbers may have been slightly higher).
Shooter,
Zack (and others here) are much more well-versed in Dynos, than me. I've just been to 3 FordChip Dyno-tunes with Jerry...and have never seen anyone walk away with 291 RWHP on a Marauder.
As well, the RWTQ numbers just seem way off...if you were to add back the 20% driveline loss on those torque #s...you'd be pulling more torque than Dennis was when he was pushing the envelope with his SC Marauder before backing off some for safety.
I'll let others who are MUCH more qualified, take this from here.
studio460
10-06-2003, 08:22 PM
Well TAF, I'm beginning to think you guys are right. With those kinds of numbers, I should be laying a 10'-15' patch of rubber at every stoplight, shouldn't I? I can't really lay any rubber right now (unless it's on cement and it's downhill).
I guess the only concern I have, Shooter...is looking out for you. You should leave with 2 things from a Jerry/Fordchip Dyno-tune.
1) Reliable and accurate hard-copy Dyno sheets for you to keep and track your progress on your investment (cause...you know you're going to want more)
And...
2) A big smile on your face cause your Marauder now shifts, drives and powers better than ever, and how it should have from the factory.
If you don't have both of these right now, I'm concerned.
studio460
10-06-2003, 09:26 PM
Thanks for your concern, TAF. I'm a bit concerned now too! And YES, I do want MORE! But I do have a bigger smile on my face now . . . Here's the graph from the final pull (#05). Customer name, I.D., and license have been deleted (it is the data from my car). Didn't get a graph for baseline.
http://newsfile.tv/dynograph-1A.jpg
Dynomax dyno graph, final pull on '03 Marauder 300B w/underdrive pulleys only. It reads: 291 RWHP/322 ft.-lbs. torque.
RCSignals
10-06-2003, 10:35 PM
Maybe Shooter just has one of those "mystery" engines that show up from time to time?
RocketCouch
10-07-2003, 12:03 AM
My 98 vic pulled 219 which is a little too high. Its just a 4.6 sohc with headers, cats, cat back, cai, throttle body, ported upper intake and underdrive pullies.
Yet later an 03 cobra with upgraded pulley and intake pulled 430ish rwhp which is about right on the money.
My blown 92 vic made 420 rwhp and 454 ft-lbs and it feels like it and those were the numbers we were expecting.
The dyno was calibrated last week, so it is correct. They mentioned something about real life numbers instead of corrected numbers. I dunno what that means...
cyclone03
10-07-2003, 07:28 AM
My guess is they made the pulls in 2nd gear.
Why would I say that?
When second gear is selected manualy it stays there,so you can make a pull from 2000rpm.In drive we could not use full throttle without a down shift below a 3500rpm start.MHO
SergntMac
10-07-2003, 11:32 AM
First, I'm not flaming anyone here, okay? And I don't think NBC is BSing us either.
When Zack told me these numbers over breakfast this AM, I almost spit out my coffee. Now that I've read the thread, I see what's up. It's a DynoMax machine, without S.A.E. correction software.
I'm surprised Jerry W. ran this tune session on a DynoMax, he insists on DynoJet machines. However, the performance is more important than the numbers, yes? I am sure the tune is solid, and the "seat-of-the-pants" accurate.
We use DynoJet machines because they are conservative in their reports. If a DynoJet says the RWHP is 250, it's a guaranteed 250 everywhere, or better. Likewise on the RQTQ. That's one reason why everyone uses a DynoJet, it's a no BS precision tool.
The second reason, is the WinPep S.A.E. correction software. Shooter's numbers are peak, and unfortunately, meaningless. You want the "mean" number NBC, and nothing else. If you use these number to dial in your expected 1320 bracket, you're going to lose.
My very first dyno was on a Mustang machine, and it reported 385 RWHP from an early Stage I kit. When I called Dennis pleased as a pig in *****, he fell off his chair laughing! I was a bit peeved, but I had just started my learning curve and this was my first moment of truth.
Sorry, Shooter, your dyno report is accurate, but only on this dyno. If you ever get strapped down on a DynoJet with WinPep software, you are going to be disappointed, and about 25 HP shy of where you're at today. Sorry, my friend, no flame intended.
LincMercLover
10-07-2003, 01:17 PM
I was gunna say, geez! I thought I was happy with yesterday's dyno run with my car! I'll post about it later when I get the sheets scanned, but I pulled a 271RWHP/270RWTQ and a 266RWHP/295RWTQ on a DynoJet. I'm a happy camper! :D
studio460
10-07-2003, 01:21 PM
Hey Sarge, no "flame" taken here . . .
I'm just glad we got this cleared up!
amerikan
10-07-2003, 02:04 PM
INSANE. good thing sarge cleared it up cause i was very very confused. Still good numbers NBC! I really recommend the 4.10s buddy... and 180 stat.
Smokie
10-07-2003, 03:27 PM
NBC Shooter I have no dyno numbers, but I can provide with you some facts that can be used for comparisons purposes. My bone stock MM. would not break traction under "any" circumstances at all. After the Reinhart programming, Densos and stat. it will lay a 1 to 4 foot dual strips of rubber (depends on pavement) no exceptions. This is stabbing gas pedal in drive from dead stop. I have stock gears, all else is stock. Are you laying down any rubber after dyno tune ?
studio460
10-07-2003, 03:47 PM
Smokie:
"1-4 foot dual strips of rubber?" Wow! No, I'm not laying ANY rubber on asphalt from a dead stop without torque-braking. I've heard others here say that even with DR Stage I mods AND 4.10s, they still cannot lay rubber (without torque-braking). Can others here with that set-up confirm/deny this? Maybe YOU'RE the one with that "special" Marauder, Smokie! I've always wondered if Logan can lay rubber with his 4.30s. I'm still deciding on the 4.10s vs. the 4.30s. I didn't think ANY normally apirated Marauder would be able to lay rubber on asphalt (except as Directedby says, his '04 lays rubber no problem--100% stock)--that's the whole reason I NEED a blower!
I could NEVER spin the tires from a stop before the Supercharger. Even with 279rwhp and 301rwtq
studio460
10-07-2003, 03:53 PM
Yeah, I hear ya, Zack. And those are awesome N/A numbers! Not denying your claim, Smokie--just wondering how the heck you're able to do it!
Smokie
10-07-2003, 04:21 PM
NBC Shooter Well I sort of assumed that everyone that did Stage 1 was burning rubber afterwards, This past weekend went to local bank, lot was empty so I did a burn out, stopped went back and measured 2 strips about 18" long. since I don't want to blow smoke let me clarify about the 4 foot, it was estimated on a regular busy road by turning around driving by; and estimating as I drove by next to it (traffic) did not get out to measure. The 18" on empty lot was an actual measurement.
At Marauderville...BigDog driving...me in the front (that's 600+ lbs of boys there)...LML in the backseat (maybe a buck/25)...ask him what happened from a dead stop on the access road. Then ask him how the 1-2 shift was...then the 2-3 shift...
LincMercLover
10-07-2003, 05:31 PM
Gotta lil wheel spin/chirp from the get go (hey, for as much weight in that car, I couldn't believe we actually could move! :lol:), hard 1-2 shift (I think MAYBE a lil chirp, hard to tell with that exhaust note), then another "slam ya in the seat" 2-3 shift. VERY impressive. By far the best thing you can do this car is tuning!
Mine now will spin 'em pretty good outta the hole with a sharp punch (no pre-rev) on rough asphalt. Blacktop, well... let's just say doing doughnuts anymore is a sinch, don't even need WOT for that anymore! Keep in mind I still have stock 3:55's too!
cyclone03
10-07-2003, 06:13 PM
With the stage .7,no gears,just nail the throttle and 1-2 feet on dry pavement.Everytime.
sailsmen
10-07-2003, 06:22 PM
Interesting article comparing different dyno types.
http://www.mustangdyne.com/?source=overture
SergntMac
10-07-2003, 06:51 PM
Just some side notes here, "brain farts" if you will, about spinning tires and doing "burnouts," or, being able to burnout at all...
Torque is what you want, because torque builds horsepower.
The more torque you build, the more horsepower you have.
Looking at it this way, you want torque, all you can get, be a real torque pig, K?
From that, you can measure horsepower, and if you follow me here, horsepower is more an index, a "speedo" if you will, for torque. A way of measuring how much torque you have built.
This "Jerry Tune" we speak of, and the Reinhart Performance Chip, does more than just open up new torque hidden in our MMs, it serves to shift that torque curve down lower, where we can access that sooner in the powerband.
A bone stock MM won't gain any real power until you are over 4000 RPM, our "Jerry Tune," or, a RPC makes that power accessible at 3500 RPM, perhaps at 3000 RPM, depending on other mods.
(BTW, this is not an endorsement of Jerry, or Reinhart's theories alone. But, they are the only experience I can comment on. Other chips on the market intend to do this too.)
The ultimate goal here, is not to spin tires, but to launch a heavy car with as much power as possible in the lower RPMs. Combine your new access to low end torque with a higher stall speed torque converter, and you should expect to launch in, or, very near your power band, again "depending on other mods."
Tire spin and "burnouts" are lost time. You could tune your MM to burn the tires half way down the 1320, but you'll turn a 16.0 ET because you are not hooking up. What do you want to do? Be a show, or be gone?
LML mentions weight...Gasoline weighs 8 pounds per gallon, and that affects tire spin. You may lay down a few tracks here and there, even be surprised when and where you do. But, how much gas did you have on board when you did that?
Full tanks add to tire adhesion by weight. Low tanks slosh weight to the rear end, which allows a light launch, but a heavy run. Low tanks could be fatal too. Moreover, what other conditions contributted to your show, i.e. humidity, ground temps, tire temps and pressure, and so on?
MY MM is fastest when running on fumes, but that's not good for my engine, K? An air bubble in the fuel system could blow my motor.
The real point is to be consistent. Get the same results EVERY time you get into your power band. Get your MM dialed in to do the same thing every time you WOT, be it an intersection, or the race track. Consistency is the desired end here, what your MM does EVERY time you launch.
At this time of year, air is colder everywhere, and this is a seasonal advantage to lower ETs. However, we don't always have cold air, do we? And when it's time to go, you have to know what your consistency is, and that you can get to your power time and time again. Otherwise, it's all just a game.
These BFG tires we get are eight inches of rubber at each back corner, how much power does it take to spin them? They do not screech, or, smoke up easy because they were designed, and intended to provide, maximum grip over a large spectrum of driving applications, not just our launch.
Once you leave 8, 10, 12 feet of rubber at a light, ask yourself how much stick you want in those back tires when you're hugging some of the more interesting roads out there? Rockies? Apalachins? 10 story circular parking lots? Chicago's Dan Ryan? My point is, is that what spins in your launch may slip in your stop. How much slip do you want?
Okay, I'll knock it off now. Just some thoughts from an old brain that's still in love with going fast with no other place to post that. Thanks for enduring a long read, and be kind to my old brain with your come backs...It still knows some things.
Enjoy your MM anyway, and everyway you can. This is why we bought 'em, yes?
looking97233
10-07-2003, 06:53 PM
Funny with 14k miles totally stock I get about a half second of spin from a dead stop. No brake torque, just stomp the gas from a stop. WOT 1-2 shift at 5500ish' get a nice bark. No 2-3 chirp ever.
Before my reprogram, no chirps or rubber..
After Dennis reprogrammed my EEC and I changed the plugs-
LOUD Barking from the tires and lots of spinning/fishtailing!
Sometimes a 1-2 scratch, too!
An obvious increase in RWTQ, I would say...
Kevin
SergntMac
10-07-2003, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by sailsmen
[B]Interesting article comparing different dyno types.
Good article Sailsmen, thanks. But, it seems to promote the "eddy-current" style a bit too much.
This style of dyno is the best there is for emmisions testing, but it's weak and innacurrate in RWHP/RWTQ testing, because (again) it does not S.A.E. correct.
Here's one magazine artical that covers them all...From a magazine called "Mustang" too, and not related to the dyno type or manufacturer.
It's a few pages, but please read on, K?
http://www.mustangdyne.com/ChassisDyno/50mustang/50mustang-article.htm
Gawd, I hope this isn't another oil thread...
sprtyworty
10-08-2003, 04:13 PM
I also had my MM Dyno tuned at JBA last night by Chris and the guys at Bittle. They said it was the most HP and Ft LB gain they had seen yet. Stock was 243 RWHP. They removed Reinhart chip and by the last pull ended up with 305.4 at 4700RPM and peak Ft Lb at 356 at 3540 RPM. After a few test drives with Chris and his lap top we firmed up 1st to second shift substantially. I have the 4.10's and I can feel a seat of the pants improvement. Even the exhaust note is quieter go figure? I have the Serge referred Ravins and Megs w/o resonators. I am very pleased with the bang for the buck at $270.00. Next will be theunderdrive pulley set and headers from Dennis. Love my wifes car more every day.:)
Originally posted by SergntMac
Gawd, I hope this isn't another oil thread...
Not to cause that^^^...and I'm glad that your "seat-of-the-pants" meter is happy sprtyworty...but ANYONE that tells you...
Originally posted by sprtyworty
They said it was the most HP and Ft LB gain they had seen yet. Stock was 243 RWHP. They removed Reinhart chip and by the last pull ended up with 305.4 at 4700RPM and peak Ft Lb at 356 at 3540 RPM.
is full of :bs:
sprtyworty
10-08-2003, 04:32 PM
Who is full of it? Chris. Surely you do not mean me. I have the chart just like Shooter. I realize these are peak numbers and not the most conservative Dyno machines. I am just saying it is a substantial increase over my RPC set up. And the quote came from the tuner being Chris who works for Jerry.
Originally posted by sprtyworty
Who is full of it? Chris. Surely you do not mean me. I have the chart just like Shooter. I realize these are peak numbers and not the most conservative Dyno machines. I am just saying it is a substantial increase over my RPC set up. And the quote came from the tuner being Chris who works for Jerry.
I'm not comin' at you sprtyworty...
I'm just saying that if Chris, Jerry, Dennis Reinhart, me...if ANYONE tries to tell you that you now have 305.4 RWHP & 356 RWTQ on an N/A Marauder with just a chip flash and some gears...then THEY are full of it.
I'm glad you're happy with your car, shift-points, etc. But those numbers are worthless as to anything factual about the true RWHP/RWTQ on your car.
If anybody thinks I'm wrong....prove it.
JamesHecker
10-08-2003, 08:37 PM
That's kind of an odd post, TAF. It sounds like your being inflammatory and asking to have something proven that is backed up by a dyno run.
Are you saying you think the dyno numbers are false? Do you think sprtwrthy (and for that matter Shooter too) are getting bull****ted?
I'm just confused 'cause the way I read your post seems out of character for what I think I know of you:confused:
studio460
10-08-2003, 09:02 PM
James:
If you re-read the entire thread, I think you'll better understand the context from which TAF's comments were made. The dyno pulls we all made at JBA this past week (10/06-10/07) are somewhat misleading because they apparently aren't S.A.E.-corrected (S.A.E.-correction software generates more standardized, more conservative numbers). Most everyone posting dyno runs here previously have been posting pulls made from Dynojets.
sprtyworty
10-09-2003, 07:09 AM
I was wondering whar RWHP numbers people were getting from the Dynojet as opposed to the dynomax in stock trim. It seems to me 243 RWHP from an advertised 302HP at the crank is reasonable. All things are relative. The car still gained 62 RWHP relative to stock versus post tune. Would the car have not posted a simialarly incrimental gain on a Dynojet even though lower numbers on both ends? I still see a 25% increase over stock, whether the numbers are too high or not it is still 25% That is still a unheard of bargain at $270.00.
MAD-3R
10-09-2003, 07:25 AM
Sprtyworthy,
In my beast, stroked to 5.0 liters, only 600 miles on the new rebuild, on the stuff they call "GAS" in Chicago, with the Jerry tune and 180 stat, I only put down 275 RWHP when I was in Chicago this past Summer.
It was on a DynoJet.
Saturday I go back on a Dynojet. I have put in Denso Plugs ( I love them, but they are NOT cheap!) and have the motor fully seasoned, and good gasoline, I have some hopes and some expectation.
I will post the numbers and printout Saturday afternoon.
Originally posted by sprtyworty
I was wondering whar RWHP numbers people were getting from the Dynojet as opposed to the dynomax in stock trim. It seems to me 243 RWHP from an advertised 302HP at the crank is reasonable. All things are relative. The car still gained 62 RWHP relative to stock versus post tune. Would the car have not posted a simialarly incrimental gain on a Dynojet even though lower numbers on both ends? I still see a 25% increase over stock, whether the numbers are too high or not it is still 25% That is still a unheard of bargain at $270.00.
Look...I am one of the biggest proponents of Jerry's tuning. I have had it done to my Rienhart chip. What bothers me is I think you were fed a load of crap as to the affect of this tune. There is no chip, dyno-tune, reflash, etc. that will give you 62 RWHP. It's not happening. And I think it's a disservice to you and Shooter for someone to provide you with "hard-copy dynos" stating that. Do the numbers...
243 RWHP is within range of what has been seen on stock Marauders (302 at the crank - 20% driveline = 240-245 RWHP)
You also stated...
Originally posted by sprtyworty
They removed Reinhart chip and by the last pull ended up with 305.4 at 4700RPM and peak Ft Lb at 356 at 3540 RPM.
With the same driveline loss of 20%...that would mean you are at 360-370HP at the crank and 410-420TQ at the crank....this is impossible. That^^^would be more torque than Dennis or Zack got from a supercharged Marauder.
I'm not flaming you guys...I just have 2 problems with this thread...
1) I feel you guys were mislead at what your cars are producing at the rearwheels
and
2) That these numbers are being presented as facts and I feel they are far from it.
SnakedMark8
10-09-2003, 11:28 PM
Ok, I'll trying and clear things up here for you all. First off the Dynamic Dyno will always read lower than a Dyno Jet. I've set up every dyno tune from the beginning at JBA with Jerry. I've also assisted in numerous other dyno tunes. I've got too many dyno pulls to even try and count.
I've had a number of nah sayers try and contradict me also and have proven them wrong. The last time this came up as soon as we finished the money pull on the Dynamic dyno I had them drive their cars to The Dyno Shop located about 10 miles from JBA. They let the cars cool down and then each had 3 pulls on the Dyno Jet. Every one of them were right around 15 - 20 rwhp over the final pull at JBA.
The problem with a Dyno Jet is that it measures acceleration. You can take a vehicle and pull a base then add gears, a lighter flywheel or drive shaft and because of the lighter components the engine accelerates quicker so the Dyno Jet reads more hp. Did you really make more hp, no you just increased your acceleration speed. To prove that, just try and hold a Dyno Jet at a set mph or rpm and see what it reads. It won't because your not accelerating.
The Dynamic Dyno reads actual torque to over come the electric brake. You can hold it at any rpm or speed and you will still get a torque output.
Now the first day during this dyno tune event the dyno operator set the dyno up to resemble a Dyno Jet because of all the problems they have had with people complaining that their numbers are always lower than the other shops using Dyno Jets. The dyno was just calibrated last week. The problem here was that they didn't use the correction factor in these pulls, I'll get to that in a second.
Some of the other shops around here took advantage of the fact this one reads lower and would rip off some unsuspecting customer by saying they could get a better tune than Jerry or JBA. So the guy falls for it, gives them his car and they do nothing to it. Later on that day the guy comes to pick up his car and they've got a dyno sheet showing they tuned out 15 - 20 more hp when they didn't do anything.
As for NBC's numbers, yes they are high because they are not corrected. If they were corrected at the time of his pull they would be right there with a Dyno Jet's numbers.
My car was run about 10 pm that same day. That's when I noticed that they weren't corrected numbers. So we tuned my Mark with that set up first then did the money run after cool down. Cooled the car down again and then set up the dyno for the normal pull with corrections and found the first numbers to be 12 hp and 20 ft over the real numbers. The whole day was pretty much perfect for dyno runs so if you took the difference I found with mine and subtracted that from NBC's it would be pretty damn close to what you would see on a Dyno Jet.
Oh by the way, I don't work for JBA so I'm not trying to justify anything for them. I do subcontracting for them on special projects and assist Jerry W with tuning events when I get him out here. And yes he is using his new Tuning software which is much better than his old stuff.
With my old setup, EEC IV it laid down 274 rwhp and 291. This was with my good free flowing exhaust, Cobra intake, CAI, MSD, UD pulleys and 12C plugs.
Now this is a testimony to this new tuning stuff of Jerry’s and as Jerry said going to the EEC V helped since it has more controlling parameters that can be adjusted. Now this is with 6 cats, that’s 4 more than before and smaller dia pipe. The smog nazi made me install a factory Cobra H-pipe, it’s about 2” dia compared to my 2 ½ mandrel bent system. And now with all the smog crap on it with smaller later style cast iron exh manifolds so I could install air injection and no UD pulleys, MSD, CAI. The car put down 279.5 rwhp and 305 ft lbs.
http://members.tccoa.com/lonnie/DynoOct03.jpg
studio460
10-10-2003, 02:40 AM
Thanks for helping to clear things up, SnakedMark8. I'm still learning how all this works. I just called JBA and Bruce is doing everything he can to assist me.
Dave Compson
10-10-2003, 03:05 AM
Wow shooter, i dont know what to say. Hope it all works out.
sprtyworty
10-10-2003, 06:54 AM
snakedmark8, Thank you for the clarification.Since posting my numbers I have received a lot of doubt regarding your dyno numbers pertaining to my car. I enjoyed my visit with you guys and am very pleased with the results. You had told me this was the most conservative type of dyno. You guys are very professional and knowledgeable. My hats off to you. Next time I'll bring the ole Shelby with the Paxton maybe we can get a little more out of her to even though she is carbeurated.
studio460
10-10-2003, 07:04 AM
I found a contact e-mail address at superchipscustom.com and sent them the information on my car. A quick response came from someone there and said they would forward the post to Jerry and Chris.
sailsmen
10-10-2003, 07:32 AM
It seems to me they could rerun your dyno pull data thru with the correction sofware and give you a new print out.
SnakedMark8
10-10-2003, 07:58 AM
NBC,
That's too bad that it's pinging now, wish you would have came back that same day and we could have fixed it. Anyways, I'm sure one of them will get in contact with you soon. What will most likely happen is they will have to send you a chip to correct the problem. Every car is different and some just don't like the added timing while others will take more than that average MM. Chris is right though, you will lose some hp with less timing.
As for the printouts JBA keeps a the hard copies so you can give Bruce a call and get copies. Also in the past when something like your pinging has come up the problem was correct through JBA. Jerry either sent the corrected file to them and then they tested it and burned a chip. Or he just sent a chip, either way you won't be left out in the cold.
It's to bad we don't have any way of getting the bar, humid, temp of the exact time you were on the dyno so we could get a correction on you numbers. Sorry for all that confusion though, if I'd noticed the settings earlier I would have had the operator change it.
studio460
10-10-2003, 10:03 AM
Thanks, Snaked, but . . .
1. Yup, I should've come back that day. With the traffic, I wasn't sure I would've made it back in time.
2. I had my EEC flashed at the dynotune, so there's no chip to flash/replace. I didn't want a chip for warranty reasons.
3. I already have all the copies of my tabular data print outs--the air/fuel data was never captured--the dyno sensor was bad on the baseline pull, so there's no data to recover.
4. Again, no chip. Hopefully JBA will have the ability to reflash with the new software sometime in the future.
5. I'm still new to all this and I'm still trying to sort it all out. Hopefully I can re-dyno someday and get the corrected numbers.
6. Through their website, I think I now have a communications conduit to Jerry. I'll summarize the desired adjustments and forward that to him via that route.
Thanks again for all your help here, Snaked!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.