Going to the dyno tomorrow

'69Stang · Apr 18, 2008

Mod's are in the sig for the 2006 GT. The tune is a 91 octane. Will a 93 octane make a difference?
I'm hoping for about 290 rwhp on a Dynojet.

PSYKOSTEVO · Apr 18, 2008

290 is not unreasonable, but also not to be expected. It will really boil down to how good your tune is.

93 octane will only help if you need it to run the timing that you want. More timing/higher octane/less fuel should equal more power.

steedman07 · Apr 18, 2008

You should definitley get there on a dynojet, as they are about 10% higher than a Mustang dyno..I made 292 rwhp w/ an auto..UDP,Steeda CAI, magnapacks, and a custom 93 octane tune on a MD dyno..

'69Stang · Apr 19, 2008

Dyno results

OK, made 292 RWHP at 6100 rpm's and 307 RWTQ at 4500 rpm's. So right about where it probably should be.

I'm think about adding new coil packs (Accel) and an OR/x pipe with a 93 octane tune. That would hopefully get me over 300 RWHP.

Went to the track after the dyno session, that was not good...

Towelly · Apr 20, 2008

'69Stang said:
OK, made 292 RWHP at 6100 rpm's and 307 RWTQ at 4500 rpm's. So right about where it probably should be.

I'm think about adding new coil packs (Accel) and an OR/x pipe with a 93 octane tune. That would hopefully get me over 300 RWHP.

Went to the track after the dyno session, that was not good...

Don't waste your money on coil packs. If anything, I'd say take the money you would have spent on the coil's and get yourself gears. If you have gears, save for a blower. Coils would be useless on a N/A car.

steedman07 · Apr 20, 2008

Towelly said:
Don't waste your money on coil packs. If anything, I'd say take the money you would have spent on the coil's and get yourself gears. If you have gears, save for a blower. Coils would be useless on a N/A car.

+1..save for gears and some form of F/I..Basically you have done all you can do hp wise n/a before dumping $$$ for heads/cam/stroker..Get a s/c or turbo, and dont waste ur money on little piddly things...I just put on an O/R X-pipe and netted nothing on the dyno after tuning for it, my hp went down 12rwhp because it was 90 degres in the shop...Sounds badass though with Magnapacks

'69Stang · Apr 20, 2008

Next steps

No on the coil packs, huh? Others on the board seem to like them and say they free-up horsepower. i don't know.

My big moves will be on the heads and cams. I don't want to go the F/I route, definitely want to keep it NA.

i was under the car checking out the exhaust (doing an oil change) and noticed an h-pipe. That is a factory h-pipe I take it - didn't know it came with one. I don't see why people change the original to an after-market. Am I missing something?

Redfire 05 · Apr 21, 2008

A lot of people say the factory exhaust is free flowing, but it actually has some restrictions. The restrictions are primarily in the headers and h-pipe. The next time you are under your car take a look at the welds on the catalytic converters. 2.25 inch pipe is welded between the converters and the rest of the 2.5 inch h-pipe. The pipe is also crushed on the passenger side where the 1st O2 bung is welded in. As far as teh headers go the exit from the factory exhaust manifolds are only 2 inches. So you can gain some power replacing either one. I have some low quality pictures I'll try to post later. The h-pipe is also only functional to around 3000rpm. The x-pipe is worth some power because it is able to mix exhaust flow at high rpms.

Hot Rod magazine picked up 9.9hp and 8.9 lb/ft peak with a BBK X-pipe. I think there is a link on the BBK homepage.

Also if your looking for some more power:

MMFF magazine also released a video (came with the magazine) on a 06 GT buildup in Dec. 06. They picked up 8hp peak from a BBK 62mm TB (gains were also good across the range).

You could also consider some headers. Short tubes will only give a few peak hp, though they are good for power down low (see mustang monthly article on BBK header install). But if you want good gains at peak you should go with long tube headers. Consider both before buying an X-pipe as the X-pipes are specific to shorty or long-tubes.

'69Stang · Apr 21, 2008

Redfire 05: Thanks for the info. Yea, I saw where the pipes pinched down near the catalytic converters. Surprised the h-pipe is no help above 3000 rpm’s though. Maybe they help below 3000 rpm’s?

Anyway, I think the shorty’s with an OR X pipe will be the way I go. Did you notice any performance improvement with the 62mm throttle body upgrade? I’ve seen mixed responses on this on the boards, though the magazines have reported that they work pretty well. Have you dynoed your vehicle? Thanks for the info.

Redfire 05 said:
A lot of people say the factory exhaust is free flowing, but it actually has some restrictions. The restrictions are primarily in the headers and h-pipe. The next time you are under your car take a look at the welds on the catalytic converters. 2.25 inch pipe is welded between the converters and the rest of the 2.5 inch h-pipe. The pipe is also crushed on the passenger side where the 1st O2 bung is welded in. As far as teh headers go the exit from the factory exhaust manifolds are only 2 inches. So you can gain some power replacing either one. I have some low quality pictures I'll try to post later. The h-pipe is also only functional to around 3000rpm. The x-pipe is worth some power because it is able to mix exhaust flow at high rpms.

Hot Rod magazine picked up 9.9hp and 8.9 lb/ft peak with a BBK X-pipe. I think there is a link on the BBK homepage.

Also if your looking for some more power:

MMFF magazine also released a video (came with the magazine) on a 06 GT buildup in Dec. 06. They picked up 8hp peak from a BBK 62mm TB (gains were also good across the range).

You could also consider some headers. Short tubes will only give a few peak hp, though they are good for power down low (see mustang monthly article on BBK header install). But if you want good gains at peak you should go with long tube headers. Consider both before buying an X-pipe as the X-pipes are specific to shorty or long-tubes.

Redfire 05 · Apr 21, 2008

Yeah, the H-pipes are good below 3000rpm, and in general they have a deeper tone than X-pipes. I definately noticed a more raspy tone at full throttle, though I liked it. As for the TB I cannot say I felt a huge improvement in power, but it had to have helped.

I did dyno my car, but not individually after each upgrade. The dyno run was on a mustang dyno (reads ~ 10% below dynojet) with an 88 octane Brenspeed tune, K&N CAI, BBK 62mm TB, Pypes X-pipe w/ stock cats (the kit that replaces only the h-pipe) and hooker axleback exhaust. I made 281hp @ 6200rpm (I should have run longer as it was still climbing) and 287lb/ft @4300rpm. For comparison a stock 07 Shelby GT made 251hp and 260 lb/ft right after me. They make about 5-10 rwhp more than a stock GT so with those mods I made ~ 30 -40 rwhp more than stock.

Link to dyno sheet http://heath.lumacrest.com/Personal Pictures/Cars/Dyno March 2008.jpg
ignore the min and average as it includes all vehicles that ran that day.

I've added JBA shorty headers, Steeda UDP and bumped the tune up to a 90 octane tune since then, but I havent' been back to the dyno. I did however, clock an (altitude corrected) 111 mph in the 1/4 mile this weekend. Unless my calculations are way off about 380 hp @ the flywheel.

steedman07 · Apr 21, 2008

380 flywheel hp is way off with the mods you described...

'69Stang · Apr 21, 2008

Redfire GT: Wow, 111 MPH is impressive. What altitude are you at?

Redfire 05 · Apr 21, 2008

'69Stang said:
Redfire GT: Wow, 111 MPH is impressive. What altitude are you at?

I rechecked the calculations and it is 110.3 mph. And given that I made a mistake earlier, it is possible that I made another one (although I triple checked this time).

The track conditions at the time of my run were as follows:
Altitude = 3300 ft
Barometric Pressure = 29.84 inches/Hg
Temperature = 85 degrees F
Humidity = 15%
Dew Point = 10 degrees F

Using any of the online density altitude calculators, that computes to a density altitude was 5101 ft. I used the NHRA calculator for 5100 ft to adjust the mph for sea level. My actual mph was 103.38.

For comparison my car w/ only the K&N filter did a best of 98.08 mph whereas the car magazines report bone stock 1/4 mph of ~ 103 mph. The density altitude that day was 4750ft converting to 104 mph. Unfortunately conditions here in the desert southwest aren't really ideal for impressive numbers, you have to use the NHRA calculator to compare to the numbers other people report.

Redfire 05 · Apr 22, 2008

steedman07 said:
380 flywheel hp is way off with the mods you described...

It's an estimate based on the weight of my car and the mph in 1/4 mile. But that is of course very subjective. But 380 shouldn't be that far off, here is what I figure.

Flywheel HP
Stock 300
CAI and tune adds 30
62mm TB 10
Steeda UDP 10
X-pipe, mid pipes and axleback exhaust 10
Headers 5

Total: 365 flywheel hp +/- a few

And 300 is generally considered to be a conservative flywheel rating for the Mustang.

Going to the dyno tomorrow

'69Stang

PSYKOSTEVO

Banned

steedman07

Member

'69Stang

Towelly

New Member

steedman07

Member

'69Stang

Redfire 05

New Member

'69Stang

Redfire 05

New Member

steedman07

Member

'69Stang

Redfire 05

New Member

Redfire 05

New Member

Similar threads

Going to the dyno tomorrow

Banned

Member

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency