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

disheartening dyno :(

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 4, 2007 | 09:54 PM
  #1  
97SS0594's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,651
From: baycity, mi
disheartening dyno :(

my car is a 355, comp503 cam, vigilante 3600, ferra valves with a 5 angle valve job, 3.42 gears, AS&M 54mm throttle body, jet hott long tubes, prety much a full built on car. the car made 257rwhp and 255 trq with a 14.6 a/f ratio. the car made power till 5800. this was done on a mustang dyno something doesnt add up as the car went low 12 NA, there is some issues i need to work out like my injector duty cycle hit 94% but i am a little upset, i was atleast expecting 320-330 rwhp.
Old Apr 4, 2007 | 09:59 PM
  #2  
96 mikez28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 152
From: keego harbor, michigan
Somethings not right there
Old Apr 4, 2007 | 10:08 PM
  #3  
89TramsAmGTA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 454
From: So. Cal
I would think low 12's would equal the high 3xxrwhp range. I agree that something is amiss.
Old Apr 4, 2007 | 10:43 PM
  #4  
97SS0594's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,651
From: baycity, mi
on the way home, it is running alot more clean. i down shifted at 60 hit the gas and the car damn near did a doughnut im running a 275/40/18 out back too and a realy sticky cooper.
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 08:43 AM
  #5  
chrism400's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 890
From: Dayton, OH
Check your fuel pressure. Was that converter locked or unlocked? What happened at 5800?
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 09:40 AM
  #6  
afr lt1's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 194
From: long island
was it one of those mustang dyno's or maybe it wasn't S.A.E. corrected.
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 09:44 AM
  #7  
ulakovic22's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,872
From: Lantana, TX
Your A/F is way too lean, should be around 12.5-12.7. Your injectors shouldn't be hitting 94% duty cycle with only 257 rwhp, heck that's stock so I would see what the issue is there. I would say fuel distribution problems are causing the low numbers.
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 11:21 AM
  #8  
BUBBA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 3,499
From: PORTLAND, OR, MULTNOMAH
2 things: Mustang Dynos supposedly provide much lower numbers.
A/F should be around 12.9-13.1

Is your PCM tuned? If not it should be.
Don't rely on bench racing. The ets and mph tell the story.JMHO
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 11:31 AM
  #9  
97SS0594's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,651
From: baycity, mi
they said it wasnt sae corrected. they knocked 10% off for the weather or some crap.
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 11:43 AM
  #10  
BUBBA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 3,499
From: PORTLAND, OR, MULTNOMAH
As mentioned: do not rely on the dyno, especially if it is not one where the operators don't know what the hell they are doing.

You didn't mention tune. If not tuned you are not maximizing your mods.
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 12:34 PM
  #11  
stereomandan's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,620
From: Saginaw, Michigan
Go down to hardcore motorsports in Clio if they are still around and use their Dynojet. My numbers were right on from them.

Dan
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 01:12 PM
  #12  
ABA383's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,903
From: Littlestown, PA
Yeah, you have got to get the tune right especially the wayyyyy lean condition of 14.6:1...Weren't the dyno guys concerned with this? I wouldn't drive it much until you get the fuel issue worked out...What was your fuel pressure at WOT...12.6:1 is good and safe Some use 13:1...I'm at 12.8:1...Is the car tuned for you mods?

...and a Mustang Dyno which has been set up right will read lower than the Dynojets...I agree that numbers alone don't mean squat, you A/F ratio is very concerning...

--Alan
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 01:50 PM
  #13  
97SS0594's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,651
From: baycity, mi
i was watching the A/F meter at WOT and it was right around 12.8 i dont know why the sheet said 14. at idle it was between 14 and 15 at idle.
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 02:26 PM
  #14  
SS RRR's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 1998
Posts: 3,144
From: Jackstandican
Don't worry about your peak numbers. Worry about the curve characteristics. Especially on a Mustang dyno and ESPECIALLY on a Mustang dyno w/ an auto.
Old Apr 5, 2007 | 02:27 PM
  #15  
BUBBA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 3,499
From: PORTLAND, OR, MULTNOMAH
Bay City, eh? Lansing, origninally.

If the sheet was reading wrong, then what else was it not doing correctly.

12.8 sounds right for WOT. Your tune may be spot on, but would most likely be improved with mail order tune.

If you can, or care, next time use a Dynojet, because it is easier to compare your numbers with others with similar mods using the same measuring devices.
JMHO



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:02 PM.