• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

Dyno Results are in, Pics - Holley Systemax Kit :sad:

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ekliptix
  • Start date Start date May 8, 2004
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

Ekliptix

New Member
Apr 26, 2003
13
0
1
May 9, 2004
#21
  • May 9, 2004
  • #21
Thanks for the advice ppl.
I'll post the graph w/ A/F up when I get home later.

The A/F stays good after the sound changes and the power drops. It's a smooth drop, not choppy.
The sound is like a vibration, or turbulence of air being resisted.

This was on a Mustang Dyno that a Single turbo 5L coupe just layed 450whp down on as I arrived.

The RPM on the dyno chart was from the computer, not either of the tachs.

Driveability is great, I rev it to 5200 and it feels ok.
Like I said, yesterday I raced my old Mustang (335whp on a dynojet, 102mph trap). It begain to pull on me a little at about 65mph, but we were even untill then.

I'm going to:
1. Get normal copper plugs.
2. Borrow a 24lb Pro-M MAF if I can find one and try it out.
 

Ekliptix

New Member
Apr 26, 2003
13
0
1
May 9, 2004
#22
  • May 9, 2004
  • #22
Alright, here's the graph. The shape is not much like that on the Holley site.

 
C

CivicEater

New Member
Jan 29, 2004
579
0
0
May 9, 2004
#23
  • May 9, 2004
  • #23
stangbear427 said:
They are, if you drive a Honda. For a Mustang, just plain old Motorcraft or Autolite plugs work best. Anyone who tells you different is trying to sell you something, or convince themselves they didn't waste their money on them.

Ekliptix- Obviously I think you should take out the iridiums, you may be surprised what happens. .
Click to expand...


Would iridiums really hurt HP/TQ ?
 

25thmustang

Mustang Master
Sep 5, 2003
2,021
85
99
Montgomery, NY
May 9, 2004
#24
  • May 9, 2004
  • #24
The power does seem low but on a Mustang dyno it isnt as low as you think. I would say on a dynojet your over 260 rwhp, which isnt bad, but definately wants more RPM...

Also your other car made 335 rwhp and only traps 102??? There is something wrong there also, should be well over 110 traps!
 

Ekliptix

New Member
Apr 26, 2003
13
0
1
May 9, 2004
#25
  • May 9, 2004
  • #25
25thmustang said:
The power does seem low but on a Mustang dyno it isnt as low as you think. I would say on a dynojet your over 260 rwhp, which isnt bad, but definately wants more RPM...

Also your other car made 335 rwhp and only traps 102??? There is something wrong there also, should be well over 110 traps!
Click to expand...

5L's here w/ similar combos but using TF TW heads usually make ~280hp on a MD.

That 335whp (and 358tq) was on a dynojet w/ my full weight 93 hatch LX.
Stock intake/heads/cam at 6.5psi of boost. The 1/4mi was run at 3500' elevation.
 

stangbear427

Active Member
Nov 11, 2002
2,401
1
49
New England
May 10, 2004
#26
  • May 10, 2004
  • #26
CivicEater said:
Would iridiums really hurt HP/TQ ?
Click to expand...
Some cars are fine with Iridiums. When I worked at the shop, we had cars come in all the time that wouldn't even run on them, usually GM's. Lots of drivability issues in Fords we fixed just by swapping out the plugs for OEM's. Platinums, Splitfires, Iridiums, all gimmics. They shouldn't even be allowed to sell them for most applications, they can really mess things up. Pay way more money to basically hijack your own car?
 

Rick 91GT

Mustang Master
Nov 29, 1999
9,692
95
99
PA
May 10, 2004
#27
  • May 10, 2004
  • #27
You a/f ratio is all over the place, it should be a nice soild smooth line, not like a set of rolling hills...I think you have problems elsewhere, the MAF would be the first thing I'd check to.

I made 330-340RWHP with the Holley kit, (cleaned up the intake and exhaust ports), 8.8:1 comp, AFM cam, 75mm TB, 30# inj 43psi of FP vac off, 80mm Pro-M and I also use a 76mm C&L with no issues. Car trapped 114-116mph, 1.7 60ft's. What heads do you have? The 2.02 valve or the 1.94? The newer heads from what I was told (these are what I ran) are PT#300-575 2.02 x 1.60 valve and are much better then the older style heads....they flow decent and make good power, they respond very good to a basic clean up.

I ran Autolite 65's gapped at .040 per Holleys reccomendation...
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Top end Kit....Anderson or TF?
  • Jtowle2
  • Dec 14, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
9
Views
6K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Dec 16, 2020
revhead347
  • Locked
“Doing stuff the wrong way for the right reasons”: A related stupid story.
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • Apr 26, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 27, 2020
a91what
8
Shocked by Dyno Results - 1990 Mark VII with 5.0 HO
  • 88Mark7
  • Mar 12, 2018
  • Other Auto Tech
Replies
6
Views
7K
Other Auto Tech Oct 6, 2018
I Bleed Ford Blue
T
Fox No Boost And Stumped
  • TWEECD
  • Aug 12, 2017
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
13K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 31, 2017
TWEECD
T
B
99 Gt Turbo Project
  • BoostStang99
  • Feb 18, 2016
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
3K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Mar 13, 2020
alwayshi
A
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang 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?