dyno pulls. 87 canned and jlt/bamachips

gmantheman

Member
Dec 30, 2007
483
1
16
Escondido, CA
Here are some dyno numbers before and after Bama Tunes and JLT. The first set of numbers I had an 87 canned tune. On the dyno pull with the intake/tune. I was using 91 octane. First run is with 87 per. tune, second run is 91 race tune, third and fourth is 91 tq tune. The race and tq tune are close through out the entire RPM range.
 

Attachments

  • Dyno after Bama and JLT.webp
    Dyno after Bama and JLT.webp
    35.6 KB · Views: 229
  • Dyno numbers 87 canned tune.webp
    Dyno numbers 87 canned tune.webp
    30.5 KB · Views: 209
I meant to upload the 87 canned tune. But between Doug's 87 tune and 91 tune, I did gain 5 hp. I was using 91 octane so that may have increased the hp on the 87 tune, but it made it rich or lean...I forget.
 

Attachments

  • Dyno pull  87 canned tune.webp
    Dyno pull 87 canned tune.webp
    42.5 KB · Views: 165
Pretty good #s!
I hope to hit 290 RWHP in a couple of weeks with Doug's 93 race tune. I hit 280 with his 87 tune in the hot summertime.

The race and tq tune are close through out the entire RPM range.

From my understanding, the only big difference between the torque and race tune is that the race tune has much better throttle response. There is a huge difference in the throttle response between Doug's 93 torque and 93 race tune, esp with with my automatic:nice:
 
Pretty good #s!
I hope to hit 290 RWHP in a couple of weeks with Doug's 93 race tune. I hit 280 with his 87 tune in the hot summertime.



From my understanding, the only big difference between the torque and race tune is that the race tune has much better throttle response. There is a huge difference in the throttle response between Doug's 93 torque and 93 race tune, esp with with my automatic:nice:
I have a manual and the throttle response is better with the race tune, but the tq tune results in better 1/8 mile times by at least .2 to .3 seconds.