Dynoed my pacecar again (with better results)

795.0pacecar

lover of pudgy polygamists

Jul 11, 2003

480

0

17

Senoia, GA

Sep 23, 2008

#1

• Sep 23, 2008

• #1

I haven't dynoed my car since 06 when I had those crappy procomp heads, and needless to say, trickflow heads are worlds better than cheap knock off crap. I work at a shop that is also a speed shop on the side for high end cars like BMWs, so we have an in ground dyno that I have free access to, so I finally decided to drive my mustang to work and see what it makes.
Well it put down 305-rwhp and 332-rwtq. Not too shabby imo, and I surely wasn't disappointed this time lol. My car put down 55rwhp more with trickflow heads than it did with the pro comp 210cc heads. There were no other changes.

And here is an awful cellphone picture of my car.

 

Attachments

• img04725267109oz5.th.webp

  6.2 KB · Views: 137

DMAN302

My mom says thanks for the pearl necklace.

Nov 8, 2003

2,120

2

59

windsor, Canada

Sep 23, 2008

#2

• Sep 23, 2008

• #2

Good numbers, but I can't help but notice how late the TQ comes on and how fast it falls off...are you carbed?

 

85_SS_302_Coupe

it sucks (I know) to be on the receiving end

15 Year Member

Nov 11, 2003

6,945

1,598

223

Northern KY

Sep 23, 2008

#3

• Sep 23, 2008

• #3

He's EFI, check the sig. I don't know if a carb setup would necessarily be THAT short of a torque curve...might just be something with the tune.

 

DMAN302

My mom says thanks for the pearl necklace.

Nov 8, 2003

2,120

2

59

windsor, Canada

Sep 23, 2008

#4

• Sep 23, 2008

• #4

DOH...sorry lazy reader.

 

795.0pacecar

lover of pudgy polygamists

Jul 11, 2003

480

0

17

Senoia, GA

Sep 23, 2008

#5

• Sep 23, 2008

• #5

It either the tune or the intake is too big. The dyno A/F wouldn't work so I didn't get a reading. It is sort of a strange torque curve though. I'm just happy to have broken 300rwhp with this tired old engine before I start building the new engine I have planned.

 

85_SS_302_Coupe

it sucks (I know) to be on the receiving end

15 Year Member

Nov 11, 2003

6,945

1,598

223

Northern KY

Sep 23, 2008

#6

• Sep 23, 2008

• #6

795.0pacecar said:

It either the tune or the intake is too big. The dyno A/F wouldn't work so I didn't get a reading. It is sort of a strange torque curve though. I'm just happy to have broken 300rwhp with this tired old engine before I start building the new engine I have planned.

Click to expand...

I know the feeling....i'm hoping and praying i break 300 but i doubt it.

 

M

Makdaddymac

New Member

May 28, 2005

323

1

0

orlando

Sep 23, 2008

#7

• Sep 23, 2008

• #7

yah 300 is the fair goal for a bolt on guy, wish i could see it too but i am no where close to it!! i would almost guranetee if i would have raked out the dough for some tricks or afr's but my good deal gt40 will do for a fun street car.......
but i bet i can hit 12's with my mods........which is my overall goal....

last and final mod/goal years down the line.....REBUILD/maf conversion and BOOOOOSSST!!!!(turbo all the way)!!!!!!

good number 79!!!! thumbs up

 

85_SS_302_Coupe

it sucks (I know) to be on the receiving end

15 Year Member

Nov 11, 2003

6,945

1,598

223

Northern KY

Sep 23, 2008

#8

• Sep 23, 2008

• #8

For years, ever since i got into Mustangs, i always said i'd be content with a 12 second car. Now that i'm there i can officially tell you that's total BS..lol. Now i'm saying i'll be happy with 11s, since much more than that and i'm gonna have to really shell out some cash.

 

bryce93lx

Member

Jan 20, 2006

88

1

19

Luke AFB AZ

Sep 24, 2008

#9

• Sep 24, 2008

• #9

Man haven't been on the boards lately i forgot how amazing your car is. Nice, nice job, my wife dosen't like foxes at all and she was eye humping it just as hard as i was.

 

EPIK

Member

Jul 3, 2004

796

1

16

LEFT COAST

Sep 24, 2008

#10

• Sep 24, 2008

• #10

Nice numbers bro.... Im hoping my coupe hits the 300rwhp mark. Im sure with my "too large" manifold, & crappy cam, I will have similar tq curve results....

 

795.0pacecar

lover of pudgy polygamists

Jul 11, 2003

480

0

17

Senoia, GA

Sep 24, 2008

#11

• Sep 24, 2008

• #11

Thanks guys. This car would probably be a dog if I didn't have a manual trans, based on that power curve.

 

25thmustang

Mustang Master

Sep 5, 2003

2,021

85

99

Montgomery, NY

Sep 24, 2008

#12

• Sep 24, 2008

• #12

Nice numbers and one of the best looking foxes out there...

Also once you run faster you never want to go back. After running 10.0 this past weekend, I'm hooked and want to continue going faster!

 

Dino Dino Bambino

15 Year Member

Jun 13, 2007

1,672

89

79

Cyprus

Sep 24, 2008

#13

• Sep 24, 2008

• #13

The peak numbers are nice, especially the torque, but the powerband does look rather narrow. It all seems to be happening from 3000-5500rpm with not much on either side.
Have you had the engine computer dyno tuned? It's possible the timing and fuel curves are some way below optimum.

 

grey5.0beast

Cookies should never be DUNKED!!!

Aug 3, 2004

0

1

0

atl ga

Sep 24, 2008

#14

• Sep 24, 2008

• #14

Nice numbers, but they are right, that's weird considering my car made 300 tq at 3k rpm and held it until 5 or so.

 

795.0pacecar

lover of pudgy polygamists

Jul 11, 2003

480

0

17

Senoia, GA

Sep 25, 2008

#15

• Sep 25, 2008

• #15

I agree that its probably in the tune, but since I'll be building a new engine shortly, I cant see spending the money to have it tuned. The curve really doesn't bother me at all, I'm used to driving mostly high rpm cars at work so it just feels like one of those.

Beast, keep in mind the intake you used flows about 85cfm less than mine, so yours definitly should make more torque than mine down low in any situation, its just a shame yours got wrecked, I really wanted to race you lol. We have a skid pad and dyno ($50 for 3 runs) where I work, so if you ever get another mustang or something and your down this way let me know.

 

9

92GreenGT

PEAT

Founding Member

Jul 18, 2002

2,085

1

46

Big Stone Gap, VA

Sep 25, 2008

#16

• Sep 25, 2008

• #16

I think if the HP vs TRQ was scaled the same on the sheet it would make everything look a lot different. Love your car, any details on the new power plant the future holds?

 

795.0pacecar

lover of pudgy polygamists

Jul 11, 2003

480

0

17

Senoia, GA

Sep 25, 2008

#17

• Sep 25, 2008

• #17

With out giving away too much since plans change, I am almost 100% certain it will be cleveland based and fuel injected.

 

795.0pacecar

lover of pudgy polygamists

Jul 11, 2003

480

0

17

Senoia, GA

Sep 27, 2008

#18

• Sep 27, 2008

• #18

I changed the scaling on of the graph today and it makes the curves look much better. Looking at it now I dont think there is any problem with the current tune although getting a tune would help to optimize the power potential and drive ability.

 

Attachments

• img04786293421md2.webp

  180.3 KB · Views: 114

Dino Dino Bambino

15 Year Member

Jun 13, 2007

1,672

89

79

Cyprus

Sep 28, 2008

#19

• Sep 28, 2008

• #19

Curves look better now that you've got a proper scale but with maximum HP at 5400rpm and maximum torque at 4600rpm, power delivery is still peaky.