• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

my dyno numbers..any good???

  • Thread starter Thread starter 96darkhorse
  • Start date Start date Dec 7, 2003
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
9

96darkhorse

Founding Member
Oct 2, 2001
693
0
16
wilmington, california
Dec 7, 2003
#1
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #1
dynoed the stang at superior automotive engineering in anaheim, cali., this sat....

first pull------ 223.8 hp/ 283.7 tq
second pull-------225.5 hp/ 292.0 tq
shutting off at 4800rpm
mods are in sig

ohh yeah... i also had bad o2 sensors.....would i dyno better if i had good sensors?..thanks
 

WhiteDevil

New Member
Feb 4, 2003
2,717
0
0
San Diego
Dec 7, 2003
#2
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #2
Yeah those numbers seem pretty good. Wow thats a lot of timing.
 

Joes95GT

New Member
Jan 23, 2003
3,132
1
0
Delaware
Dec 7, 2003
#3
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #3
Those numbers are right on. Why did you shut it down at 4800? You probably would have saw more power until about 5200.

Joe
 

94tang

20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 24, 2003
297
4
19
East TN
Dec 7, 2003
#4
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #4
How do you get by with that much timing?........18*....
 

984.6gt

Founding Member
Jul 10, 2002
2,806
0
46
Sugar Land
Dec 7, 2003
#5
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #5
I would think a 302 with Longtubes would put down at least as much as a stock 99GT? Got any pics of the chart.
 
9

96darkhorse

Founding Member
Oct 2, 2001
693
0
16
wilmington, california
Dec 7, 2003
#6
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #6
i have the print out chart....i wish i had pics of the chart but i dont....i dont know the exact reason why they shut off at 4800.... my rpm gauge is reading wrong.... the guy said that when his comp reached 4800rpm my gauge said 6000 rpms..... my oxygen sensors are causing my rpms to read higher... so my tach is off by like 1000 rpms
 
9

96darkhorse

Founding Member
Oct 2, 2001
693
0
16
wilmington, california
Dec 7, 2003
#7
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #7
it runs real strong at 18*, and have no problems with at as long i run atleast 91 octane...my job has a scanner so ill scan the chart as soon as i can
 
9

96darkhorse

Founding Member
Oct 2, 2001
693
0
16
wilmington, california
Dec 7, 2003
#8
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #8
yeah the power wasstill going up when he shut it off at 4800rpm... torque was declining
 

GTJake

Founding Member
Oct 28, 2002
3,049
0
56
Ann Arbor, MI
Dec 7, 2003
#9
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #9
You may see more power at a lower timing mark. Most dyno's show that stock headed cars make the most power at 14*. You should play with the timing on the dyno to see if you can find a difference. Get those O2's replaced and go back and play with that timing.

Jake
 

FastmanGT

Founding Member
May 22, 2002
587
0
0
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Dec 7, 2003
#10
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #10
Changing your O2s will not increase WOT power. When you hit WOT your computer goes straight to pre-programmed Air/Fuel/Spark tables. However, chaning your O2s will give you better gas milage and part-throttle response and power.
 

stang_gt_1994

Founding Member
Mar 21, 2002
2,723
0
0
Powder Springs, GA (30 min. from Atlanta)
Dec 7, 2003
#11
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #11
I made max HP at 4800 RPM with about the same mods. Anything past 4800 and you won't make any more power with a stock H/C/I. BTW 984.6gt, do you ever have anything nice to saw about our 302's> I guess not.
 

WhiteDevil

New Member
Feb 4, 2003
2,717
0
0
San Diego
Dec 7, 2003
#12
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #12
Man how i wish i could get some LONG tubes. I know GTJake is makin more power than me and thats like our only difference. I hate those ****ty little BBk shorites.
 

95snoozer

Active Member
Dec 14, 2002
2,572
1
48
RCR
Dec 7, 2003
#13
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #13
O2s have nothing to do with WOT

will not make a difference
 

stang_gt_1994

Founding Member
Mar 21, 2002
2,723
0
0
Powder Springs, GA (30 min. from Atlanta)
Dec 7, 2003
#14
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #14
And it making your RPM different on you tach has nothing to do with o2's.
 

95snoozer

Active Member
Dec 14, 2002
2,572
1
48
RCR
Dec 7, 2003
#15
  • Dec 7, 2003
  • #15
<html>
<head>
<title>-R-G-B-</title>
</head>

<body bgcolor="#000000" leftmargin="0" topmargin="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0">
<object classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=4,0,2,0" width="100%" height="100%">
<param name=movie value="rgb.swf">
<param name=quality value=high><param name="SCALE" value="exactfit"><param name="BGCOLOR" value="#000000">
<embed src="rgb.swf" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%" height="100%" scale="exactfit" bgcolor="#000000">
</embed>
</object>
</body>
</html>
 

StangJonGT

Founding Member
Jun 2, 2001
1,329
0
36
Seattle
Dec 8, 2003
#16
  • Dec 8, 2003
  • #16
Nice numbers, I can't wait to get back into the 302 game...

Jon
 
G

Green 94 5.0

Founding Member
Mar 25, 2002
2,601
12
79
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Dec 8, 2003
#17
  • Dec 8, 2003
  • #17
984.6gt said:
I would think a 302 with Longtubes would put down at least as much as a stock 99GT? Got any pics of the chart.
Click to expand...
actually, assuming a 15% drivetrain loss, he is making as much as a stock 99 gt. his flywheel hp would be 259.3.
 

Venom351R

Founding Member
Apr 27, 2002
4,548
41
98
MAINE
Dec 8, 2003
#18
  • Dec 8, 2003
  • #18
stang_gt_1994 said:
I made max HP at 4800 RPM with about the same mods. Anything past 4800 and you won't make any more power with a stock H/C/I. BTW 984.6gt, do you ever have anything nice to saw about our 302's> I guess not.
Click to expand...


I have an aftermarket intake but Cam and Heads are stock and my Max output was just at about 5000 RPM so I agree w/ you on that one.
984.gt never has anything positive to say when he comes over in the 5.0 section, hes just a 4.6 troll. Gee you would think that a 98 GT would beat a 95 5.0 but its pretty apparent that the 96-98 4.6 motors were very underpowerd.
 

StangJonGT

Founding Member
Jun 2, 2001
1,329
0
36
Seattle
Dec 8, 2003
#19
  • Dec 8, 2003
  • #19
Most '99-up dyno in the 225 range; the main difference is the torque here. Much more with the little 302.

Jon
 

Venom351R

Founding Member
Apr 27, 2002
4,548
41
98
MAINE
Dec 8, 2003
#20
  • Dec 8, 2003
  • #20
StangJonGT said:
Most '99-up dyno in the 225 range; the main difference is the torque here. Much more with the little 302.

Jon
Click to expand...


5.0= Torque
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Holley Sniper review - The good, the bad, and learn from my frustration
  • LX Dave
  • Aug 14, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
34
Views
60K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 2, 2026
Robin Rhino
R
F
Engine Strange drivability issues and can only pull koeo codes
  • Foxy420
  • Aug 7, 2019
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
27
Views
5K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Aug 11, 2019
jrichker
M
Electrical 92 GT 306 Vortech - Did I fry my ECU???
  • Mrg2783
  • Apr 15, 2018
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
17
Views
4K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Apr 16, 2018
Mrg2783
M
S
Any Possible Guidance?
  • Spedyr6
  • Feb 28, 2016
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
42
Views
5K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Apr 11, 2016
Spedyr6
S
Finally got my turbo retuned - dyno numbers
  • rio95
  • Jun 21, 2011
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
22
Views
5K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 13, 2014
Gearbanger 101
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific 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?