Dyno results of AFR's and Diablo Chip

[Green Machine]

Here's what my 94 GT put down with AFR 165's and a Diablo chip.

I've got the std bolts on's Eldelbrock Performer,65mm TB, Shorty headers, Full Bassani exhaust with cat'd x-pipe.

I need to return, and let them retune the chip. It's make about 7 hp, but
it stumbles at 2200 rpms in 1st,2nd, and 3rd gear with light throttle applied. However, if you mash it good, it pulls really hard. You can tell
the hp is there.

On a regular dyno jet I was making 233 rwhp. With the in ground dyno it applys more real world weight to the vechicle. The tuner sez I would be making 308 rwhp if you take the 233 X 23% on hp and torque. Don't know how true that is, but I can tell there's a bunch more ponies under the hood.

Sorry guys - can't seem to attach the file. However, the 1st run was
243.4 rwhp @ 5350rpm 265.9 rwtorque
2nd run was 251.0 @ 5350rmps and torque was 273.2

 

[Joes95GT]

What kind of cam are you running? If you have some kind of aftermarket cam, you should be in the 275-285 horsepower range. You have a lot left in that motor. Do you question anything when you were putting everything back together? Double check the rocker geometry and vacuum leaks. What kind of injectors are you running? If they are the stock 19's they could be clogged (my car studdered when I had a clogged injector) or it could be running really rich in the lower RPM's making it a boggin type feel. Can you smell gasoline at all? Just trying to start you off.....

Joe

 

[blackmagic94]

Yeah do you have the stock grind in there, it seems low numbers to me, i dynoed 268/311 to the wheels with stock heads. I think that i would have made 300-310 rwhp with the AFRs

 

[WhiteDevil]

Are those numbers SAE or at some kind of high elevation?? Cause i made more than that with stock heads and cam and computer!! Maybe i read it wrong

 

[Rootus]

That doesn't seem right -- I can't imagine the stock HO cam giving up that much power. With a similar setup, but with a better cam, I put down 273 rwhp and 325 rwtq. (that was with a messed up exhaust, after I put on my long tubes I got 3.5 mph in the 1/4, so I'm probably right at 300 rwhp now).

Dave

 

[Green Machine]

Afr

Sorry, I forgot to include that I left the stock cam in, and kept the
19lb injectors.

We're in central fla with 78 degree humidity.

The tuner reminded me that the same run on a Dyno Jet dyno would have made 308 rwhp and 300 + in rw torque.

With the Diablo chip, it stumbles at 2200 rpms in 1st, 2nd and 3rd. He explained that I need hotter plugs and an ignition to get rid of the extra fuel left because I didn't upgrade to a larger cam.

So which msd ignition do I need with my 5.0 ?

Thanks Dewman

 

[9250stang]

So it was a mustang dyno??

 

[jjd975]

Sounds like a mustang dyno. I numbers will go up for sure but I dont think they will top 300.

I would get some 24lbs injectors and a cam personally. At the very least try some 1.7 rockers to help take advantage of all that airflow. If you keep the stock cam you can always degree it in to help the top end.

 

[Fast94Cobra]

I'm confused as to what kind of dyno this was... I dynoed at 233/298 SAE on a dyno jet and was pretty disappointed.

 

[jjd975]

LOL. Your numbers are more than likely hurting from that elevation you have.

Between that and the 3400lbs your trying to push down the track I can see why the ETs are high.

 

[Fast94Cobra]

I dynoed the car in north carolina and got those numbers. Thats where i go to college, actually leaving really early tomorrow morning to drive back! I can't wait to get some track times in nc (300 ft) as opposed to denver (5800 ft). I'll definitely post the results, see what kind of difference a mile of altitude makes! I'm hoping for at least a full second, otherwise i'm just a horrific driver.

 

[GTPhreak]

what do you mean by saying it will be higher with a "mustang dyno" (what is this?) vs. a dynojet dyno? my tq is the same as yours, and my motor is bone stock, on a 90* day, with very high humidity. it was on an above ground dyno. http://www.kwikkarauto.com/News/TXShoot2000/txshoot_fset.html

 

[SN95LEEN]

With the Diablo chip, it stumbles at 2200 rpms in 1st, 2nd and 3rd. He explained that I need hotter plugs and an ignition to get rid of the extra fuel left because I didn't upgrade to a larger cam.

Was this a burnt chip? Even if it wasn't custom, he should've known your entire setup b4 doing any burning, why is there an excuse that you need to change for the chip b/c of lack of ignition or cam?? He should've known you didn't have a cam in the first place, so why did he burn the chip's fuel tables w/a cam in mind????

 

[Green Machine]

Chip update

Here's a quick update. The dyno was a Mustang Chassis Dyno. I now understand that they normally lower numbers than the dyno jets.

The original runs I made I later found out was screwed up by the tuner. He had the MAF settings all out of wack. He adjusted it with a new downloaded file.

2 weeks ago I added a Bassani O/R x-pipe and took it to another Diablo chip dealer near my house. He poped the chip, and then asked how is this thing even running ?? The original tuner had it connected to the wrong port, and had basicly turned off most of the mods. It wasn't a custom tune as the tuner originaly stated.

He downloaded a new file, and woke it up, my torque was back big time, and the car ran a lot smoother . Since then I've discovered it stumbles at 2K, and the dealer is getting a new file in for me Friday.

Dave - I should have similar numbers i.e 280-290 rwhp (dyno-jet) as you mentioned. I 'm not sure how much the chip will do in combo with the all the mods. But, I'm planning to get a dyno run in soon to verify the numbers. Central Fla with 75 degree temp and 40% humidity is so much better than 90 degree temp and humidity.

 

[SmokinGT50]

A mustang dyno would only be a few, like 1-3% lower then a dynojet, not 23%

 

[94GTLaserRC]

Hey Steve!!

Green..Agree with the MINIMUM being rockers with those heads...obviously + cam = more power. On another note, you may want to consider changing out you Performer upper for the RPM or RPM II.

RC

 

[OinkAodeOink]

The car should run like stock, as far as the tune goes. Sounds like you have some tuning issues. Throw a decent cam on there, and get a good tune, some injectors and a maf, and you should be right up there.
Did Lugo do the tuning, head install, dyno time?

 

[Killercanary]

A mustang dyno would only be a few, like 1-3% lower then a dynojet, not 23%

That's not true. Case in point... my car with an edelbrock intake, shorty headers, offroad x pipe, pulleys, flowmasters, homemade CAI, bumper timing, FPR, etc went from running 15.2 at 90mph to 13.83 at 98.55mph with those mods. 99% of the cars here with VERY similar mods dyno in the neighborhood of 230-240RWHP. My car, on a mustang chassis dyno put down a WHOPPING 188rwhp Now, its obvious from the track times and what 99% of the people dyno with similar mods that I was no where near 188rwhp... that's what our cars will dyno stock. Now, the dyno pull was made in 3rd gear which probably didn't help much as its not a 1:1 relationship, but still ~230-240 compared to 188 is more than 1-2%. I questioned why they were dynoing in 3rd and they said that was the way it was supposed to be done and would NOT dyno my car in 4th gear, needless to say I never went back there again.

 

[zenboy99]

I did alot of research on aftermarket heads with stock cam and similar bolt-ons to your package. I talked to 5 guys that had either AFR-165's or Trick Flow heads who all made 270-280rwhp with the stock cam on a Dynojet. I have an old 5.0 Mustangs magazine that showed similar results with a stock cam and Edelbrock Performer package +280rwhp. Hope this helps you, PM me with any questions.

 

[Trick95]

My car put down 250 rwhp on a Mustang dyno and later went 110 in the 1/4.