Gonna strap it to a Mustang Dyno

[BlackIceLSC]

I'd like to see the car run on a different dyno, I'm having a hard time believing those numbers.

I sort of feel the same. Not discrediting you or your car but those are more like flywheel horsepower on a 20 year old engine, not RWHP...I've seen some slight increases with a set of pulleys, but those must be made of wizard magic.

what track do you race at?

if you scale the car and make a run, it will pretty much give us/you the "real world" numbers....of course, DA, barometer, water grains, etc will factor.


http://www.wallaceracing.com/et-hp-mph.php

and the flywheel to rear wheel calculator


http://www.mk5cortinaestate.co.uk/calculator4.php


Based on the first calculator, your 260.5 hp at the rear wheels should be about 325 at the crank....that's a 45 hp gain from pulleys? hmmmm

if that is the case, you should run about a mid 13.50 @ 101-ish mph if the car weighs about 3850 + 200 lbs driver

 

[Lvnmarks]

Here is mine from when my 94 was stock (80k miles) except a stall converter, shift kit and no mufflers.

90° & high humidity.



I'm wondering if that dyno wasn't calibrated correctly.

 

[germansheperd]

I sort of feel the same. Not discrediting you or your car but those are more like flywheel horsepower on a 20 year old engine, not RWHP...I've seen some slight increases with a set of pulleys, but those must be made of wizard magic.

what track do you race at?

if you scale the car and make a run, it will pretty much give us/you the "real world" numbers....of course, DA, barometer, water grains, etc will factor.


http://www.wallaceracing.com/et-hp-mph.php

and the flywheel to rear wheel calculator


http://www.mk5cortinaestate.co.uk/calculator4.php


Based on the first calculator, your 260.5 hp at the rear wheels should be about 325 at the crank....that's a 45 hp gain from pulleys? hmmmm

if that is the case, you should run about a mid 13.50 @ 101-ish mph if the car weighs about 3850 + 200 lbs driver

Jeff Chambers is a WIZARD when it comes to pushing buttons on his laptop when cars are strapped to his dyno. Im a track whore I run all over. I guess that's the number I have to get to see if the dyno was correct then.

 

[germansheperd]

Mods were: Steeda Underdrive pulleys, 3.73's, Circle D converter, J-Mod, and wizardry tuning.

Exhaust was full and is unmodified with stock converters and mufflers.

 

[MarkVIIIMarc]

IF the car is tuned well enough...never discount a good tune.

Any loss in driveability after the tune?

 

[Lvnmarks]

Maybe I'm missing something I guess, I'm not a tuner but with those supporting mods I can see freeing up 2-5hp on the underdrive set up and maybe a gain of 1-2% efficiency through the stall converter. Unless you are driving an Eco-boost a well rounded tune won't produce that much gain.

Then again, I'm still trying to find the ailerons on my car. Looking forward to track times.

 

[driller]

I understand wizard tuning. I know Lonnie always thought I wouldn't benefit much from a dynotune over his Mark VIII tune. We were both surprised when I left with 15+ HP more than when I went in.

That and the typical first mods always bring out the most HP. The HP gains afterwards are definitely harder to gather.

 

[germansheperd]

I understand wizard tuning. I know Lonnie always thought I wouldn't benefit much from a dynotune over his Mark VIII tune. We were both surprised when I left with 15+ HP more than when I went in.

That and the typical first mods always bring out the most HP. The HP gains afterwards are definitely harder to gather.

I always tell folks find a well known reputable tuner and take your car there for a Dyno tune. I promise you after a few hours more power will be found. Worth every penny.
Well i finally got the car home. We had to touch up some transmission functions. The car wouldn't shift past 6300, now its all good. Hopefully next month i can get it on a track somewhere.

 

[Jamesvinar]

If you cant get to a dyno i recommend marty from mos speed shop

 

[germansheperd]

IF the car is tuned well enough...never discount a good tune.

Any loss in driveability after the tune?

No loss in driveability at all. Throttle response is quicker, shifts quicker (J mod?), and shifts higher.

 

[KStromberg]

My silver bolt-on car made 268rwhp with kooks, no cats, 4.10s, 3800 stall, cobra intake, and jmod. You dont make that power and wont be anywhere near 13.6s like I was either. Your car will run 14.5 and trap speeds will prove 230rwhp. Gotta love those rainbows and butterflies tuners. Flush that dyno graph down the toilet.

 

[steve]

People need to remember these dynos are just a tuning tool. There are so many variables you can't compare numbers with others as there are probably at least +/-10% variability. Once you start changing gears and the TC the numbers even are off more. It is used at that day and time on that car to see how making changes impact the numbers i.e. are they going up are down, what do the curves look like, a/f ratio. The value of the number it self has less meaning if comparing to others. As was said the track will validate the tune and numbers.

 

[germansheperd]

Posted graph and Dyno sheet over at LVC Mark VIII performance section. I can't seem to post anymore pictures here.

 

[germansheperd]

My silver bolt-on car made 268rwhp with kooks, no cats, 4.10s, 3800 stall, cobra intake, and jmod. You dont make that power and wont be anywhere near 13.6s like I was either. Your car will run 14.5 and trap speeds will prove 230rwhp. Gotta love those rainbows and butterflies tuners. Flush that dyno graph down the toilet.

Your car ran 13.6 with those mods?

 

[KStromberg]

Your car ran 13.6 with those mods?

Yessir.

 

[germansheperd]

Hmmmm this may be interesting.

 

[Slowmkviii]

Thoes numbers could be flywheel
Yes I know it was on a chassis dyno but I have been in shops that convert rwhp to flywheel.
I'm guessing cause it looks better to the customer
207 rwhp seems a bit low for a tune but it is a mustang dyno.

 

[germansheperd]

Thoes numbers could be flywheel
Yes I know it was on a chassis dyno but I have been in shops that convert rwhp to flywheel.
I'm guessing cause it looks better to the customer
207 rwhp seems a bit low for a tune but it is a mustang dyno.

As in 'Alternantive Dyno News'?

 

[Thomas A]

1994 Mark VIII 10 Years Old ~100k Miles for comparison:

100% Stock:
7-11-03 86K Miles
Best ET: 15.863
Best MPH: 89.86

+4.10 Gears, J-Mod, Trac-lock, MMX Driveshaft, Apten Chip, 190lph Pump, BFG Drag Radials:
08-13-04 99K Miles
Best ET: 14.857
Best MPH: 93.95

DynoJet Numbers from April 2005 = 236rwhp / 254rwtq
Probably could have squeezed a 14.6 out of it with good track/weather conditions.

I'll be real interested to see what you run at the track. I've read that a Mustang dyno will read about 10%-12% lower on average than a Dynojet, would would put your numbers right around 300rwhp on a DynoJet. I've never heard of anyone picking up that those kind of gains just through tuning on a stock naturally aspirated car. Were these runs made on pump gas?

 

[germansheperd]

My 1997 Mark VIII 20 years old - 32k on the clock:

100% Stock:
11/16 32k miles
Best ET: 14.90
Best MPH:94

The goal is to be back on the track in March weather permitting.
I can't speculate what a DJ would read but I cant see a MD 260 rwhp being 300 on a DJ........MAYBE upper 280's?
I had straight 93 Shell V-power in the tank.

Either way the next time slips will tell the good, bad, and the ugly.