• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

Dyno disappointment!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter '94ChickStang
  • Start date Start date May 15, 2007
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 7
Next
1 of 7 Next Last

'94ChickStang

Member
Sep 27, 2004
301
0
17
northern ca
May 15, 2007
#1
  • May 15, 2007
  • #1


I finally got my car tuned today.....unfortunately I haven't picked it up yet so I only know what the guy told me on the phone. Working while your car's getting tuned SUCKS!!!

He says 275 rwhp, 312 tq (see signature)....I dont know the a/f yet because I got off the phone fast. I was hoping to get @ least 20 more hp!!

This place works almost exclusively on Mustangs so do you think it's a case of a different Dyno? It's a DynoJet Dynamometer, Ive heard "Mustang Dyno's" show lower #'s, anyone know if they have different names or something? I'll confirm when I get there, but maybe they forgot to put something in the car?? I dont know, but I'm dissatisfied.
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
May 15, 2007
#2
  • May 15, 2007
  • #2
wow, i would also have expected more like 300hp and 340tq. there must be something not quite right ... from your sig, it looks like you have the right parts

hopefully the graph will tell us something

lol ... i have been working while my motor was being installed, for the last 5 months!
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
May 15, 2007
#3
  • May 15, 2007
  • #3
Why 340 TQ? Is this a 331 block or something?
 

'94ChickStang

Member
Sep 27, 2004
301
0
17
northern ca
May 15, 2007
#4
  • May 15, 2007
  • #4
I really hope it's some sort of misunderstanding or they just forgot to put something in....either way it's wasting my time b/c the place is 60 mins away because I wanted it to go to a good shop.
 

'94ChickStang

Member
Sep 27, 2004
301
0
17
northern ca
May 15, 2007
#5
  • May 15, 2007
  • #5
Pokageek said:
Why 340 TQ? Is this a 331 block or something?
Click to expand...

Stock bottom end...
 
S

stangman94

New Member
Sep 7, 2006
39
0
0
May 15, 2007
#6
  • May 15, 2007
  • #6
Where did you get your car tuned at?
He might not of done an aggresive tune because that is more risky on your engine.
 

drakesdad

Member
Jul 29, 2005
961
0
16
Oregon OHIO
May 15, 2007
#7
  • May 15, 2007
  • #7
-FMS 65mm TB/ProM 95mm MAF




That's a big MAF you have there....
I would think you would be higher as well
 

'94ChickStang

Member
Sep 27, 2004
301
0
17
northern ca
May 15, 2007
#8
  • May 15, 2007
  • #8
stangman94 said:
Where did you get your car tuned at?
He might not of done an aggresive tune because that is more risky on your engine.
Click to expand...

I don't want to say anything bad yet as I dont have every piece of the puzzle....
 

'94ChickStang

Member
Sep 27, 2004
301
0
17
northern ca
May 15, 2007
#9
  • May 15, 2007
  • #9
drakesdad said:
-FMS 65mm TB/ProM 95mm MAF




That's a big MAF you have there....
I would think you would be higher as well
Click to expand...


true! I was told by ProM (or whatever they're called now) that they no longer make the 80mm and now it's a 95mm....but the old 80mm used to open to 95mm anyhow, it was just 80 @ the connection?? I took their word for it
 

drakesdad

Member
Jul 29, 2005
961
0
16
Oregon OHIO
May 15, 2007
#10
  • May 15, 2007
  • #10
'94ChickStang said:
true! I was told by ProM (or whatever they're called now) that they no longer make the 80mm and now it's a 95mm....but the old 80mm used to open to 95mm anyhow, it was just 80 @ the connection?? I took their word for it
Click to expand...

Ask Grady or Jt what they think of that.......if the Maf is reading a certain amount of air in.....and the 65mm is only letting it's full capacity in.......I don't know.....may be an issue....but let someone with a better understanding fill in.... ....I don't know how much is being compensated for......

Will
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
May 15, 2007
#11
  • May 15, 2007
  • #11
We can eliminate that as an issue. I had the 90mm lightening one on mine and the 65mm FR TBand I got 290+ rwhp and 310rwtq WITH CATS on the car with the engine in my sig.
 

drakesdad

Member
Jul 29, 2005
961
0
16
Oregon OHIO
May 15, 2007
#12
  • May 15, 2007
  • #12
Pokageek said:
We can eliminate that as an issue. I had the 90mm lightening one on mine and the 65mm FR TBand I got 290+ rwhp and 310rwtq WITH CATS on the car with the engine in my sig.
Click to expand...

good enough Keith......wasn't sure
 

gcomfx.com

Founding Member
Oct 22, 2002
3,690
0
56
Republic, MO
May 15, 2007
#13
  • May 15, 2007
  • #13
I also have a 90mm MAF with a 65mm T/B. I have yet to get the engine broke in and on the dyno to see how bad it's hurting the combo, but I'm sure it's a little on the small side.
 

Venom351R

Founding Member
Apr 27, 2002
4,548
41
98
MAINE
May 15, 2007
#14
  • May 15, 2007
  • #14
what were the temp like? A hot humid day will kill a car at the track and the dyno
 

Black95GTS

Active Member
Jan 8, 2004
1,644
3
38
Marlborough, MA
May 15, 2007
#15
  • May 15, 2007
  • #15
Post the graph!

Remember this: average horse power moves cars, peak horsepower moves dynos.

What were the goals that you told Ed when he did the cam? Your trq number looks solid but you are correct in that I would have expected more HP. I'd also get a bigger throttle body, at least a 70 to match the intake. How's your FP looking?

Adam
 

'94ChickStang

Member
Sep 27, 2004
301
0
17
northern ca
May 15, 2007
#16
  • May 15, 2007
  • #16
Redline_351R said:
what were the temp like? A hot humid day will kill a car at the track and the dyno
Click to expand...

It's been in the 60's and dry all week
 

'94ChickStang

Member
Sep 27, 2004
301
0
17
northern ca
May 15, 2007
#17
  • May 15, 2007
  • #17
Black95GTS said:
Post the graph!

Remember this: average horse power moves cars, peak horsepower moves dynos.

What were the goals that you told Ed when he did the cam? Your trq number looks solid but you are correct in that I would have expected more HP. I'd also get a bigger throttle body, at least a 70 to match the intake. How's your FP looking?

Adam
Click to expand...

I told Ed I was looking for 300rwhp but drivability was key...I've seen these combos get 290+ with a 65mm tb too. I'll post the graph tonight, I'm going to pick the car up in a bit so I'll get the a/f & ask about the fp too.

It's gotta be a missed part or a super conservative tune imo
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
May 15, 2007
#18
  • May 15, 2007
  • #18
Just a thought or two on the maf size

For the typical stock block na h/c/i combo ...............
70-75mm is most likely ... physically ... large enough to pass its generated airflow

Of course there is the electrical side of the meter to consider
and
Two things go along with that

accuracy
airflow capability (calibration) ... not being pegged by too much airflow

While that meter is big ... as long as all the above is in place ..........
I would not think the size is an issue here

Now ... About the lower than expected values

Lately ... I've seen a trend to move away from SAE calibration values,
which were more common in the past, to the STANDARD calibration.

Standard cal values are almost always higher and I suspect that is
why we see them more often these days.

Your pull may have been done with SAE

Lots of reasons you may be a bit lower but until you talk to the tech ...
We are just spitting into the wind here.

Tell us more when you find out

Grady
 

'94ChickStang

Member
Sep 27, 2004
301
0
17
northern ca
May 15, 2007
#19
  • May 15, 2007
  • #19
thanks Grady,

I would have got a 77mm or 80mm MAF if they were easier to get, but I didn't want to settle with the 75mm due to quality issues (or so Ive heard).

Im leaving right now to go, he did call me back and tell me the a/f was 12:1...is that a bit rich? I'll ask about the SAE value too...
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
May 15, 2007
#20
  • May 15, 2007
  • #20
Also look at your timing. Mine is ..was set to 15* with no pinging whatsoever.
 
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 7
Next
1 of 7 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Dyno day! # guesses?
  • clayton seiders
  • Aug 15, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
443
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 16, 2025
Scrapla347
N
Dyno Issue with 2015 GT
  • Nickos.Ford
  • Jul 11, 2025
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
1
Views
150
The Welcome Wagon Jul 11, 2025
Nickos.Ford
N
Engine Crankcase vent tube “relocation”?
  • Mcmahst
  • Nov 20, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
17
Views
671
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Dec 20, 2025
manicmechanic007
Y
2004 Roush - Dome Lights and radio not working
  • Yurei
  • Nov 10, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
413
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Nov 20, 2025
squeak93
5
Hello fellow Mustang fanatics.
  • 580HP*428Cj
  • Apr 2, 2026
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
4
Views
248
The Welcome Wagon Tuesday at 9:46 AM
josep4
J
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?