Ok, I found it. This is when I had the engine initially tuned. The dyno did not have a wideband.
Kurt
Kurt
sn95 PCM consistency and PIA factor. Why are the inconsistently a PAIN?
- Thread starter Pokageek
- Start date
GTA_V6_Mustang
Active Member
Good replies. I dont want to be so selfish as to make this thread about mebut while we're here: Me personally? My injectors have been changed out so it know its not those. The cam has been changed out to a more friendly cam so I know its not that, .. vacuum leak? Possible. I know the build quality of the engine is excellent because it drove fine before the Long tubes.
But lets go back to the theory of what changed before you had trouble..Well, here it is, the drive-ability was excellent UNTIL the long tube headers and 42# injectors. Now, I dialed back on the injectors and its a little better BUT the car is acting nearly the same way. So its either the LT's OR a mechanical thing of some sort. I am having someone look into it now.
Out of sheer curiosity did you use o2 sensor extensions or did you try to extend the wires of the o2 sensor itself. Because your not supposed to mess with the wires on the sensor itself. I know mine had the wires of the sensor itself extended and it caused nothing but issues with my l/t's. I then put some new o2's and o2 extensions and have since had no issues.
Good point. The 02's are on pre-made "extensions" .. I THINK, BUT I will check and be sure!
You can just get O2 sensors for a 93' Ford Explorer V6, and then you don't need extensions.
Kurt
Kurt
Meaning they did not have a wideband so you have no clue what your air/fuel is , you obviously are low on HP for your setup from what I can see and you are obviously way lean on the nitrous tune in the midrange RPM
So there for your wonderful calibrated meter is OFF on its calibration as most of them are as I have said numerous times and you are leaving horsepower and most likely some driveability on the table because you either refuse to get a tune or just dont give a crap but hey its your car do what you want with it
My point being you should not try to tell other people that tuning their car is a not needed when you have done nothing but prove what I have been saying the whole time.
Not going to argue with your stupid A55 anymore so do everybody a favor and quit giving bad advice to people who are on here asking for help and like the OP he has already tried your way and it did not work for him .......
BlackVert
15 Year Member
um, he does have a tune. he is also putting down close to 400 horses at the wheels naturally aspirated, and most likely his car is alot faster than is mine (which is not really saying all that much because i did not build a race car).
perhaps you should double check your assumptions to make sure they are accurate.
The guy who dyno tuned the car on motor has been tuning cars for 30 years. He didn't need a wideband. When you've tuned cars for 30 years, you'll be able to pick up on how an engine is running without a bunch of fancy tools. We picked up 17hp and 10ft lb of torque by adjusting fuel pressure and base timing. On the nitrous pull, the car is a hair lean at the mid range, but still puts down over 600 ft lbs of torque, and the power/torque curve is stable. I might add, that is in a useless range of the powerband anyway. The engine makes power consistent with the setup. I might be leaving a few horses on the table by not having a custom cam and a perfect dyno tune, but I'm happy with it. The port work is a little off too. The driveability is great, and I think that's what is so great about Mustangs. You don't have to drop $700 on a dyno tune to enjoy your car. I think a lot of people blame their MAF when the problem is elsewhere. I think my advice is pretty good.
kurt
kurt
And no sooner than I say power consistent with the setup, someone posts up.
http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/808324-finally-got-car-tuned-today.html
95 Mustang with almost an identical engine setup, and almost identical hp numbers. Just got dyno tuned. It's even the same color. I have a slightly bigger head than jromeo, but that's it.
Kurt
http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/808324-finally-got-car-tuned-today.html
95 Mustang with almost an identical engine setup, and almost identical hp numbers. Just got dyno tuned. It's even the same color. I have a slightly bigger head than jromeo, but that's it.
Kurt
Adaptive negated the effect of the fp change in a matter of days...
That's not a slam on you Kurt, it's just the truth.
I don't know how much of this post I'm making is really anything that hasn't been said before, but it seems like the over-all performace of the red headed stepchild sn95 5.0 computer will be a hot topic forever.
Personally, I've seen daily driver sn95's in good mechanical condition have crap driveability with no mods. Hot start issues, seemingly poor throttle response, just sluggish performance in general. Timing retards, countless adders to fuel and spark tables; It's enough to make people hate these computers. In stock form, the domestic calibrations do feel lazy compared to the Fox stuff.
No doubt, a guy like Don has his head wrapped around CBAZA. It isn't easy for the enthusiast tuner to try and make work, especially without any factory documentation to describe the operation...
I think that for the diy tuner to have good, consistant driveabilty around town, running in full time open loop with adaptive disabled (along with fueling and calibration changes for the specific combo, of course...) is the easiest way to get it done. Hell, the factory even did it for some of their export markets. I can't argue with that and I've had good results doing so on my own junk.
Knowledge is power folks, and tuners who don't know or don't want to know CBAZA will always have lesss than optimum results when trying to tune these cars.
:OT:
RANT ON.
Frankly, I'm pissed that a strat doc hasn't been leaked to the masses for CBAZA. It's frickin' 15 years old already. Anyone who has it and won't pass it along is a tool... :crapola:
RANT OFF.
qikgts mentioned running in open loop...I did find that unplugging my O2 sensors fixed my problems with adaptive learning. The car seemed to run a little smoother with the O2's, but it was only for a short while before it started acting up again.
If you use BE you can simply load a L4C1 bin in and use it and disconnect the o2s if you wish , which you can find here
EECTuning.org • View topic - Stalling, bucking, and poor idle with a 95 Mustang (UK)
adjusting fuel pressure and base timing is not a tune ....371.5 yea ok , hes closer to 350rwhp than 400 and I am not impressed , my 306 is putting out only about 25-30rwhp less than his car with out of the box parts and smaller heads , as someone else posted the adaptive strategy in the factory tune would negate anything he gained in just a couple days of driving .....
and you shouldnt down play your car its nice and I am sure it would make more than 400rwhp if I got a hold of it
I have a chip, so adaptive is disabled. I put the car on a dyno 6 years later, and it made the same numbers.
Kurt
Kurt
So now you have a chip ,hmmm well you never said that before , and you are on here preaching to guys saying they dont need a tune , yet you have one, doesnt really make alot of sense IMO ..... if you have a chip why dont you take advantage of what you have and use it to your advantage to fix your lean issue on the nitrous
Oh, and that was 372rwhp on a 95 deg F day, and almost 100% humidity with only a 1% correction factor.
Kurt
Kurt
You just need to read more carefully. I said I had never had a chip tuned on the dyno. It's a mail order chip. I've been preaching all over this website to people the advantages of mail order chips. Whenever someone asks about mods on this forum, everyone says that you need to get the car dyno tuned for everything. You have to understand that we have people from Oregon, Canada, Montana, Alaska, etc. posting here. Getting a car dyno tuned might mean trailering a car 3 states away and paying over $1000 once you get to the closest qualified person. If you tell everyone that every mod requires a dyno tune, then it discourages people from doing anything. I paid $260 for my chip, and it fixed almost all the driveability issues, and the car made great power on they dyno. If you go to a dyno tuner, $260 will pay to get the car strapped into the dyno, and that's about it.
Now I'm not saying that I couldn't pick up a lot of hp by spending a day on the dyno with tuning software, I know that. Dyno tuning is a great thing, but it's not necessary to enjoy your car. Back to the original argument, you can do a lot with the computer that's already in the car. You can do a basic H/C/I setup, without messing with the computer at all. You can run bigger injectors, by running a recalibrated MAF. And you can't deny that, becuse people have been doing it for a decade and a half now.
And I don't care if you're not impressed with 490rwhp. I'm sure I could get a lot more by spending money I don't have to tweak the engine to the max. I don't have a record breaking engine, and I know that. And what's the point anyway, I'm already pushing the limits of a stock block anyway.
Kurt
Similar threads
