LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

Disapointing Dyno Numbers

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 12:27 PM
  #1  
3gc's Avatar
3gc
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 313
From: New York
Disapointing Dyno Numbers

I just got back from getting my car dyno'd after throwing a few mods on it. Came home with some disapointing numbers. I only gained 30hp and 30 ft lbs from long tubes, ORY, EWP, Under drive pullies and a tune. Does that seem right or do you think something is off?



...I feel like buying an LS1 right now lol.
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 12:38 PM
  #2  
BUBBA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 3,499
From: PORTLAND, OR, MULTNOMAH
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

Sounds good to me.
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 12:53 PM
  #3  
slomarao's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,705
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

The numbers are a little low. What was the a/f ratio? How many miles are on it?
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 01:20 PM
  #4  
vin1382's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 406
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

numbers are pretty close to being right on.
What exactly are you disappointed about?

your lines dont look good though as the rpms rise..and i cant see your air/fuel with that photo. maybe a missfire or something going on.
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 01:53 PM
  #5  
1SlowFormula's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,756
From: West Linn, OR
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

I say 30 HP increase is about right for those mods, but is it me or do those numbers look a little low??
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 02:21 PM
  #6  
BUBBA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 3,499
From: PORTLAND, OR, MULTNOMAH
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

Well, considering that stock would be around 240+-, a 30 HP increase would put it at around 270-280, so seems like 289 is pretty good. Am I missing somehing here?
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 02:26 PM
  #7  
1SlowFormula's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,756
From: West Linn, OR
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

Originally Posted by BUBBA
Well, considering that stock would be around 240+-, a 30 HP increase would put it at around 270-280, so seems like 289 is pretty good. Am I missing somehing here?
I guess your right, I am just used to looking at Mustang dyno graphs... They read a little higher...
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 02:46 PM
  #8  
jsetzer's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,182
From: Moore OK
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

Seems right. I made a bit more tq than you, but a few less ponies when I had long tubes. Time for heads / cam / n20 / supercharger.
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 02:48 PM
  #9  
BUBBA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 3,499
From: PORTLAND, OR, MULTNOMAH
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

Just curious, did your tuner know that you had a bored MAF? Don't know that it is necessarily beneficial for the PCM to get inaccurate readings of the air passing though a bored MAF sensor.
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 02:54 PM
  #10  
BUBBA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 3,499
From: PORTLAND, OR, MULTNOMAH
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

Actually, I believe the Mustangs read around 10-12% lower. Could be wrong about that.
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 03:27 PM
  #11  
rob97ss's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 251
From: Lake Grove.LI
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

Did Pampena do the tune or is that a mail order?
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 03:30 PM
  #12  
madwolf's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,577
From: DeKalb, IL
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

The reason you're disapointed is because you've set your expectations too high. It happens very often.
289 RWHP for a bolt on automatic is very good. You are getting knock retard though.
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 03:40 PM
  #13  
rock1501's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 838
From: ajax ontario canada
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

When my car was bolton only I ran a 12.6 with the same numbers that you have.The automatic LT1`s look like crap on the dyno but they run nice at the track and that is what matters
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 03:47 PM
  #14  
OBE1 95Z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 4,950
From: San Diego, CA
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

1.6 RR's could be a good investment to allow the HP to continue to climb in the higher rpm range; your HP falls off significantly beyond 5,250 rpm.
Old Nov 23, 2005 | 04:11 PM
  #15  
JBird33's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 237
From: Redding, CA
Re: Disapointing Dyno Numbers

Originally Posted by 1SlowFormula
I guess your right, I am just used to looking at Mustang dyno graphs... They read a little higher...
Actually Mustang dynos read lower...



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:22 AM.