Dyno time!

[driller]

I've had this in the planning stages for weeks. I wanted to get some dynotuning done on the Blue Flame after switching to the 4.88 gears and before the racing season started to basically shortcut the tuning time at the track. With the help of a couple MN12 friends, we arranged the date at the same venue we had used last year for the final summer blast event.

My first time actually hands-on 'driving' the car on the dyno was an exhilarating experience, far better than standing idly by. No pics of the car because it was filthy from road spray after towing it across the mountains in WV and MD the evening before through several snow squalls.

The first pull was a 'garbage' pull as the car refused to hold 3rd gear with a locked converter. We then loaded the SCT value file to force the transmission in 3rd with a fully locked converter. I called it the "bucking bronco" tune as it then became quite difficult to put the car in gear without it either stalling or lunging wildly. But the value file did the trick and we were able to get a couple clean pulls for a baseline.



Not bad for a rookie.

(Trying to watch the A/F meter and the tach was harder than it would seem - not really wanting to go over 8K while making sure the A/F didn't go lean. Of course the stock tach ends at 7K and I had to guess somewhere past that when to end the pull. Most of the time it ended up between 7800 and 8000.)

With a baseline of 363 HP, the tuning commenced and soon we started seeing better A/F ratios on the wideband along with some pickup in power.



Once we had it "dialed in", we let the car cool down before the final pull,

or two,

or three... :love-it:



I was pleased, the car pulled good all the way to 8,000 RPMs, felt good and sounded mighty good doing it. All there is to do now is fine tune the shift points and converter lockup at the track.

 

[germansheperd]

Wow a lot better. I see you were on a DJ this time instead of a MD?

 

[driller]

Wow a lot better. I see you were on a DJ this time instead of a MD?

Yes. Either way, I was more concerned with the tune than the dyno numbers but in the end I was really impressed with the consistent torque to 6K and the HP to 8K.

 

[germansheperd]

What did you change in your tune?

 

[driller]

Basically massaged the MAF curve, fuel tables and spark tables. I'd have to go back and look at the logs for specifics.

 

[mlschultz]

Congratulations JP looking good! :thumbsup:

 

[mag]

Did you tune with or without nitrous ?

 

[driller]

Did you tune with or without nitrous ?

No power adder, naturally aspirated.

 

[Mad1stGen]

Congrats JP !
What fuel was this on ?

 

[driller]

Congrats JP !
What fuel was this on ?

110 octane. Specifically Sunoco 110 from last outing at Atlanta Dragway. I had some VP 110 with me just incase.

 

[KStromberg]

Can't wait to see what it does at the track! How do these numbers compare to the last dyno session?

 

[driller]

How do these numbers compare to the last dyno session?

The torque numbers were close.

Last fall's dyno session peak numbers were 333 RWHP / 307 RWTQ on the Mustang dyno.



This session netted 374 RWHP / 305 RWTQ on the Dynojet dyno.



However, the RPMs were off on the Mustang dyno as you can tell by comparing the curves. (We made it a point to match the dyno rpm output to the actual engine rpm.) And I don't think they pulled quite as high RPMs on the previous dyno chart by looking at the end of the HP curve.

As I said, the numbers themselves were of no real consequence as it was the air, fuel and spark tuning that I was more interested with getting spot on. I would have to go back and look at the logs for specifics but the end result was a very good A/F throughout the power band all the way to 8,000 RPMs. Nice, flat, broad torque curve and very little drop in HP at the end of the pull.

For comparison, I found a screenshot of a dyno session on the previous build back when the torque converter wouldn't hold.

 

[KStromberg]

That is very interesting. I do know my open converter is costing me on the big end. Good lockup, good af, wild gears behind it now. Hmm. I mean 392rwhp and 335tq was 12.9 in my car on stock converter, closed up exhaust and 4.10 gears yet I don't think comparing yours to mine would be fair but if I was to "bench race" low 12s really don't seem to be out of the question at all for you. When I did calcs online when I ran 12.30s on pump gas I seem to remember that the car was actually putting down south of 400hp on that day. And that was with major lockup issues. What do you want to see for ET out of curiosity?

 

[driller]

That is very interesting. I do know my open converter is costing me on the big end.

I've been told I should run an open converter.

But I know for a fact when I tried it at the track by not locking the converter in the tune, the car was significantly slower.

I'll be playing with the converter lockup once we dial in the shift points. My gut tells me to lock it hard and fast but we'll approach it incrementally. What I have seen so far by what little testing I've had, when I cut the delay to lock after the 2-3 shift by 50%, the car liked it.

Good lockup, good af, wild gears behind it now. Hmm. I mean 392rwhp and 335tq was 12.9 in my car on stock converter, closed up exhaust and 4.10 gears yet I don't think comparing yours to mine would be fair but if I was to "bench race" low 12s really don't seem to be out of the question at all for you. When I did calcs online when I ran 12.30s on pump gas I seem to remember that the car was actually putting down south of 400hp on that day. And that was with major lockup issues.

I don't think it is a fair comparison between N/A power and boost power, especially with a centrifugal. That said, with the track numbers I ran last fall, those online calculators told me I was pushing my 4150 lbs down the track with 400 HP. :love-it:

What do you want to see for ET out of curiosity?

I believe the car has the potential to run mid 12s all day, any day and on a good day should be a low 12 second car.

I'm pretty confident if it had the 'tune' it has now from this dynotuning session, it would've been a 12.5 or so instead of a 12.7 last fall. There's 1 or 2 tenths and I'm already mid 12s.

Now add the effect of the 4.88 gears vs. the 4.30s. Shouldn't the sixty foot improve which should multiply out at the big end of the track as well as a higher trap speed due to the extended rpm range now being taken advantage of? That could be another tenth or two?

Finally, on top of that, who knows how much may be tweaked by optimizing the shift points and lockup schedule. If they're close now, maybe not much. But if they're a few hundred RPMs off??

And we haven't even begun to take weight off the car. :love-it:

My long term goal I guess is to be in a 12.0 index naturally aspirated class with dreams of being a 10.0 car with nitrous. I may be reaching for the moon or I may be selling myself short. Time will tell. :wink2-green

 

[KStromberg]

Never doubt anything. I was laughed off of the face of the planet at the thought of 10s on a stock engine. Now I'm almost there. Of course you know I fully support weight reduction. Lol. I keep telling people that my nrg seats are actually EXTREMELY comfortable. Actually surprisingly so. It still looks like a Lincoln on the outside. Get it dialed in, then dump weight. Just ask yourself, "Am I a purist". Lol.

I'd still be curious about E85. Massive tq gains are achieved on that stuff which usually hits its peak and then falls off long before knock ever occurs.

 

[driller]

I'd still be curious about E85. Massive tq gains are achieved on that stuff which usually hits its peak and then falls off long before knock ever occurs.

I'm still holding on to that idea. That may prove to be what I need at some point in the future. But for right now, my to do list is long enough.

 

[evilscientistmoose]

Never doubt anything. I was laughed off of the face of the planet at the thought of 10s on a stock engine. Now I'm almost there. Of course you know I fully support weight reduction. Lol. I keep telling people that my nrg seats are actually EXTREMELY comfortable. Actually surprisingly so.

Elaborate! Which seats are these? I'm about to can the 800-pound stockers in my (new) car, and am looking for options.

 

[tixer]

Elaborate! Which seats are these? I'm about to can the 800-pound stockers in my (new) car, and am looking for options.

This thread details all of Kirk's "weigh loss" program..
http://www.lincolnsofdistinction.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?43686-Free-ET&p=286636#post286636

 

[KStromberg]

The NRG seats are comfortable enough for me, but that's coming from a guy who enjoys the bone-rattling drone from my exhaust in a gutted interior car with no carpet or air conditioning. You might hate them. For the price, I find them to be a fair seat both cosmetically and in terms of comfort and it beats sitting in an ugly full aluminum kirkey seat. These are not "fia approved" seats. They do have spots to run harness belts so you can easily incorporate them into a caged setup. I asked a guy with an 8 second car who runs these seats and he said the track never gives him grief and he traps 160+ mph. I have mine mounted with custom flat stock steel footwork that my buddy made up and they are solid as can be.