How does this dyno look?

comatose

Member

Jul 24, 2005

57

0

6

Columbus, Ohio

Jul 30, 2005

#1

• Jul 30, 2005

• #1

As you can see in my sig, I have a few bolt on parts. I just had my car dyno tuned today. What do you think of the results?

 

Attachments

• Mustang-Dyno-(Opt).webp

  62.9 KB · Views: 369

Crzyhrse

Active Member

Dec 23, 2004

0

2

38

Seattle, WA

Jul 30, 2005

#2

• Jul 30, 2005

• #2

What happened at 4,500 RPM's?

 

trinity_gt

10 Year Member

Jan 31, 2003

3,125

81

99

Canada

Jul 30, 2005

#3

• Jul 30, 2005

• #3

The numbers seem...a bit...stock-like, despite your mods. My 02 GT made 228.5 to the wheels bone stock. Looking at your chart, I'm tempted to suspect you might have a mixture issue. Was the Diablo used to tune with the 87mm MAF installed?

In your sig your say "3.5 {inch} pipes" ... you mean tips, right? You don't have 3.5" pipes under the car, right?

 

hotmustang331

Active Member

Apr 29, 2004

2,967

3

48

Bastrop,TX

Jul 30, 2005

#4

• Jul 30, 2005

• #4

hmm, thats odd. Its either the dyno is jacked up, or your car is going haywire lol. How did the car sound on the dyno? And does it FEEL like it does that jumping?

 

twogts4us

15 Year Member

Apr 1, 2004

4,188

12

79

Dunedin, FL

Jul 30, 2005

#5

• Jul 30, 2005

• #5

Crzyhrse said:

What happened at 4,500 RPM's?

Click to expand...

Earthquake?
Get rid of the MAF

 

billfisher

Active Member

Jul 17, 2005

1,296

4

38

huntsville, AL

Jul 30, 2005

#6

• Jul 30, 2005

• #6

Dude that MAF is killing you. I mean KILLING. too big without supercharging. think of it like the larger the less sensitive. I am not trying to be an expert. I went with 75 with trepidations. bigger is not better. no real way to overcome you are not going to have the volume of air that sensor needs N/A. sorry

 

twogts4us

15 Year Member

Apr 1, 2004

4,188

12

79

Dunedin, FL

Jul 30, 2005

#7

• Jul 30, 2005

• #7

billfisher said:

Dude that MAF is killing you. I mean KILLING. too big without supercharging. think of it like the larger the less sensitive. I am not trying to be an expert. I went with 75 with trepidations. bigger is not better. no real way to overcome you are not going to have the volume of air that sensor needs N/A. sorry

Click to expand...

Not that I don't agree with you, but are you taking MAF size or TB size?
Stock MAF on his is 80mm (yours too, I believe).

 

comatose

Member

Jul 24, 2005

57

0

6

Columbus, Ohio

Jul 30, 2005

#8

• Jul 30, 2005

• #8

As far as the squigglys after 4500, I have no idea. The car didn't sound unusual in any way, it didn't flutter at all when those readings were taken. They did about 8 pulls and they all had a similar pattern. I'm stumped.

As far as the MAF, I find it hard to believe that going from my stock 80mm MAF to an 87mm one could upset the engine so, or be too big without a supercharger. Could the MAF be faulty? If it was, wouldn't I notice other symptoms? The idle is absolutely perfect.

twogts4us - Why should I get rid of the MAF?

 

comatose

Member

Jul 24, 2005

57

0

6

Columbus, Ohio

Jul 30, 2005

#9

• Jul 30, 2005

• #9

trinity_gt said:

The numbers seem...a bit...stock-like, despite your mods. My 02 GT made 228.5 to the wheels bone stock. Looking at your chart, I'm tempted to suspect you might have a mixture issue. Was the Diablo used to tune with the 87mm MAF installed?

In your sig your say "3.5 {inch} pipes" ... you mean tips, right? You don't have 3.5" pipes under the car, right?

Click to expand...

On Horsepower TV they dyno'd a GT that only had an x-pipe & cat back upgrade & it pulled 229hp (not sure of the torque). My car did slightly better with some mild intake mods & only a catback exhaust mod. I thought I had a decent torque gain, which is what really counts (I thought). I think it's pretty close to the mark, but I don't know. The mixture isn't on the chart, but I believe it is at 12.5:1 (I hope I recited that correctly, still learning ). The diablo was used to tune with the 87mm MAF installed. You are right, those are the tips, not the pipes. I'm not exactly sure what the Flowmasters are, but I want to say 2.5??? I'll change my sig...Thanks!

 

Crzyhrse

Active Member

Dec 23, 2004

0

2

38

Seattle, WA

Jul 31, 2005

#10

• Jul 31, 2005

• #10

I've never been on a Dynojet, but can you get a decent tune on a Dynojet compared to a Mustang Dyno? Both times I had my Mach dynoed and tuned in, I've used a Mustang Dyno. I've never been to a Dynojet.

 

comatose

Member

Jul 24, 2005

57

0

6

Columbus, Ohio

Jul 31, 2005

#11

• Jul 31, 2005

• #11

One thing I forgot to mention was that this is an auto GT. Don't the autos lose a bit of hp to the wheels?

 

jstreet0204

Active Member

Jun 26, 2003

939

0

36

Winston Salem, NC

Jul 31, 2005

#12

• Jul 31, 2005

• #12

comatose said:

As far as the MAF, I find it hard to believe that going from my stock 80mm MAF to an 87mm one could upset the engine so, or be too big without a supercharger. Could the MAF be faulty? If it was, wouldn't I notice other symptoms? The idle is absolutely perfect.

twogts4us - Why should I get rid of the MAF?

Click to expand...

The Pro-M MAF has a different tansfer curve than the stock MAF. You need to either have the Pro-M curve programmed into the tune, or use the stock MAF. I disagree that the MAF is too big, You just need the right curve.

 

jstreet0204

Active Member

Jun 26, 2003

939

0

36

Winston Salem, NC

Jul 31, 2005

#13

• Jul 31, 2005

• #13

Here is a good article that explains the MAF curve.
http://www.superstang.com/maf.htm

 

MyEarsHurt

New Member

May 21, 2004

918

0

0

Jul 31, 2005

#14

• Jul 31, 2005

• #14

I thought that when the dyno chart started getting wiggly it meant your engine is missing? I could be wrong, but I think I have heard that around here somewhere. If thats the case, do you have the original plugs? plug wires? That could be part of the problem....dont know for sure though, someone confirm with me if I am right

 

forpit2000gt

Founding Member

Jun 30, 2002

2,490

0

0

Columbia, SC

Jul 31, 2005

#15

• Jul 31, 2005

• #15

Looks pretty close for an auto w/4.10s. The mods you have don't add a whole lot. The tuner will give you more hp by adding timing than all the other mods you have. Most straight drives with your mods won't see more than 235-240 rwhp. Without seeing an A/F it is hard to say if there is more in it. Was the car going into OD???

 

billfisher

Active Member

Jul 17, 2005

1,296

4

38

huntsville, AL

Jul 31, 2005

#16

• Jul 31, 2005

• #16

what ????

twogts4us said:

Not that I don't agree with you, but are you taking MAF size or TB size?
Stock MAF on his is 80mm (yours too, I believe).

Click to expand...

stock 4.6l ford MAF is 70mm - doh!

 

billfisher

Active Member

Jul 17, 2005

1,296

4

38

huntsville, AL

Jul 31, 2005

#17

• Jul 31, 2005

• #17

80mm is cobraR and 4V cobra use 80mm. I simply suggested the sensitivity for a mild combination can cause problems. What I didn't take into account before my post is that it was happening a high RPM's where sensitivity is not an issue.

 

billfisher

Active Member

Jul 17, 2005

1,296

4

38

huntsville, AL

Jul 31, 2005

#18

• Jul 31, 2005

• #18

read this article it explains surges and other mixture inconsistencies caused by BAD maf's

http://www.mustangworks.com/articles/electronics/InductionBlues.html

 

jstreet0204

Active Member

Jun 26, 2003

939

0

36

Winston Salem, NC

Jul 31, 2005

#19

• Jul 31, 2005

• #19

billfisher said:

stock 4.6l ford MAF is 70mm - doh!

Click to expand...

Stock MAF on 99-01 is 80mm, and 85mm on 02-04.

 

Crzyhrse

Active Member

Dec 23, 2004

0

2

38

Seattle, WA

Jul 31, 2005

#20

• Jul 31, 2005

• #20

jstreet0204 said:

Stock MAF on 99-01 is 80mm, and 85mm on 02-04.

Click to expand...

How can a GT have a 85mm MAF and a Mach 1 only has a 80mm MAF stock? My C@L is an 85mm MAF.