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

Tweecer users inside Please

  • Thread starter Thread starter final5-0
  • Start date Start date Jul 30, 2005

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Jul 30, 2005
#1
  • Jul 30, 2005
  • #1
I've been fooling around with some air flow values and was hoping some of you would plug in the values from your d logs and we could do a little compairson.

Now I know this is not all that accurate but ...............

It seems to me that the value of about .31 to .32 multiplied by your maximun air flow value gives an approximate rwhp value.

I thought it would be interesting to see what we come up with if the rest of you post up the following info:

rwhp
maximum air flow@xxxx rpm

btw .... my values are 293rwhp & 934.36kg@5730rpm

Later
Grady
 

5.0_GT_kid

20+ Year Stangneter
Apr 18, 2004
1,155
1
39
Largo, Florida
Jul 30, 2005
#2
  • Jul 30, 2005
  • #2
I'm interested to see what the results are as well Grady.
 

WhiteDevil

New Member
Feb 4, 2003
2,717
0
0
San Diego
Jul 30, 2005
#3
  • Jul 30, 2005
  • #3
hmm i never really thought about it that way. Ill fire up my Laptop when i get home and see if i can find a couple data logs in it.
 

94GTLaserRC

Squint as you approach, lest you be blinded by my
15 Year Member
May 7, 2002
11,178
13
89
Ernan Says "here it comes... dushbag"
Jul 30, 2005
#4
  • Jul 30, 2005
  • #4
Subscribing
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Jul 30, 2005
#5
  • Jul 30, 2005
  • #5
94GTLaserRC said:
Subscribing
Click to expand...

Come on RC

Don't just subscribe

Put your numbers up

We wanna see

Later
Grady
 

94GTLaserRC

Squint as you approach, lest you be blinded by my
15 Year Member
May 7, 2002
11,178
13
89
Ernan Says "here it comes... dushbag"
Jul 30, 2005
#6
  • Jul 30, 2005
  • #6
My Laptop has been down for awhile.

Sorry..


Just subscribing!

RC
 

WhiteDevil

New Member
Feb 4, 2003
2,717
0
0
San Diego
Jul 30, 2005
#7
  • Jul 30, 2005
  • #7
Well doesn look like im getting my lap top tonight. But from memory i think the highest i ever say was 944kg/hr. But my average peak is mid 930s.
 

Zero Signal

Active Member
Feb 24, 2003
2,633
2
46
Tucson, AZ
Jul 30, 2005
#8
  • Jul 30, 2005
  • #8
That's most likely purely circumstantial. Your torque is a function of efficiency and air flow. I don't remember the equations for it anymore though.

I would share some datalogs but I don't have a dyno sheet to test the idea. That and they're on the laptop which has a dead battery.
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Jul 31, 2005
#9
  • Jul 31, 2005
  • #9
WhiteDevil said:
Well doesn look like im getting my lap top tonight. But from memory i think the highest i ever say was 944kg/hr. But my average peak is mid 930s.
Click to expand...

Well John

I was thinking that was about the range of your air flow cause we talked briefly about it in a thread a while back on the Corral.

At 944kg we get a range of 293 to 302rwhp
At 935kg we get a range of 290 to 299rwhp

Since you rwhp is 298, the numbers are in the ball park so to speak.

Even though this little method can be used for a combo's peak rwhp, what really motivated me to think along these lines is the fact that ................

anything you do to show a gain in air flow is a gain in rwhp and having said that ....................

John, remember in a thread a few days ago you said the TFS elbow showed an increase in air flow of about 20kg.

20kg X .31 = 6.2rwhp

Is that value out of line for your gain from the elbow switch .....................

I don't know but I think its close lets talk about it

Later
Grady
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Jul 31, 2005
#10
  • Jul 31, 2005
  • #10
Zero Signal said:
That's most likely purely circumstantial. Your torque is a function of efficiency and air flow. I don't remember the equations for it anymore though.

I would share some datalogs but I don't have a dyno sheet to test the idea. That and they're on the laptop which has a dead battery.
Click to expand...

John

I agree with your thoughts about how many things could effect an accurate result from using this little method.

As an example, the first thing that came to me was your wot fuel ratio. If your too fat or lean, it goes without saying that your gonna see different air flow values after you put it closer and I guess one could mistake those adjusted values for a loss or gain.

For the most part though, if everything has stayed the same in the combo or tune and you do a mod that shows an increase in air flow, an increase in rwhp should follow right along behind it.

Later
Grady
 

a50sn95

Founding Member
Oct 12, 2001
368
0
16
Elk Grove, CA
Jul 31, 2005
#11
  • Jul 31, 2005
  • #11
1406.952 x .31=436.139.
EA (EEC Analyzer) says 597.
Oh, I don't have a dyno test to verify, so take these with a grain of salt, for now....
 

WhiteDevil

New Member
Feb 4, 2003
2,717
0
0
San Diego
Jul 31, 2005
#12
  • Jul 31, 2005
  • #12
final5-0 said:
Well John

I was thinking that was about the range of your air flow cause we talked briefly about it in a thread a while back on the Corral.

At 944kg we get a range of 293 to 302rwhp
At 935kg we get a range of 290 to 299rwhp

Since you rwhp is 298, the numbers are in the ball park so to speak.

Even though this little method can be used for a combo's peak rwhp, what really motivated me to think along these lines is the fact that ................

anything you do to show a gain in air flow is a gain in rwhp and having said that ....................

John, remember in a thread a few days ago you said the TFS elbow showed an increase in air flow of about 20kg.

20kg X .31 = 6.2rwhp

Is that value out of line for your gain from the elbow switch .....................

I don't know but I think its close lets talk about it

Later
Grady
Click to expand...
Wow, i really do think that maybe in the ball park area. This is a really good way to make sense of the kg/hr numbers. And what the changes might mean.
 

95BlackTan50

Member
Oct 28, 2004
116
0
16
Jul 31, 2005
#13
  • Jul 31, 2005
  • #13
Grady,

During my last dyno run I had the following:

Peak HP = 212
RPM = 5676
MAF = 811.2634 kg/hr
Ratio = 0.2613

My numbers are probably different since I get more transmission loss between my engine and my wheels with my AODE.

I wonder if I would get 251 RWHP with a T5? (0.31 * 811.2634 = 251.49)

Anyone out there with a similar combo and a T5 that has 250 RWHP?

Interesting post Grady.

Barney
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Jul 31, 2005
#14
  • Jul 31, 2005
  • #14
95BlackTan50 said:
Grady,

During my last dyno run I had the following:

Peak HP = 212
RPM = 5676
MAF = 811.2634 kg/hr
Ratio = 0.2613

My numbers are probably different since I get more transmission loss between my engine and my wheels with my AODE.

I wonder if I would get 251 RWHP with a T5? (0.31 * 811.2634 = 251.49)

Anyone out there with a similar combo and a T5 that has 250 RWHP?

Interesting post Grady.

Barney
Click to expand...

You do bring up a point I had not thought about which is the type of trans used. Since we are talking rwhp, it does need to be considered.

A rule of thumb for drive line loss is 15% for stick & 20% for auto.

If we take your 212rwhp and look for fwhp I get about 265 fwhp.
265fwhp with a stick trans is about 225rwhp.

I feel pretty comfortable with the 225 value as an answer to your Q but it has nothing to do with our topic of discussion, lol.

This is where I confess to you all that math was not and still is not one of my strong points, lol.

Since there is a 5% difference of loss between the two drivelines I tried to adjust things by that amount but it was no glory as the numbers would not fall into place.

Another thing that is interesting is the difference between the .31 and the .26 number that you show to work in your combo. It is a 17% difference! Why that is so different from 5% is beyond me but it is over my head and I don't even have a clue, lol.

I would like to find others who use an auto trans and see it that .26 value would work for their combo like it does for yours.

If anybody sees where I missed something ...... set me straight

btw Barney

I did some testing with the Startup OL & Base OL fuel tables to see if you made a pull before things stabilized what might happen. You were 100% correct in your suspicions. I made the greatest load row in the base table match my stabilized table and everything was as it should be if you made a wot blast at say 30 seconds after starting the car.

Later
Grady
 

type911

Founding Member
May 15, 2002
169
0
0
Port Charlotte/ Boston
Jul 31, 2005
#15
  • Jul 31, 2005
  • #15
Not accurate for me.

last dyno = 380rwhp

1436x.31 = 445
1436x.32 = 459

I have blow by issues however.

I will be working on it this winter.

tired of replacing v/c gaskets
and breathers just throw oil on the headers.

smoke shows are supposed to be done in the rear right?
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Jul 31, 2005
#16
  • Jul 31, 2005
  • #16
type911 said:
Not accurate for me.

last dyno = 380rwhp

1436x.31 = 445
1436x.32 = 459

I have blow by issues however.

I will be working on it this winter.

tired of replacing v/c gaskets
and breathers just throw oil on the headers.

smoke shows are supposed to be done in the rear right?
Click to expand...

As for the .31 to .32 value, I have no idea where it came from or how it was determined. Maybe it is for na only but I just don't know.

I simply asked the guys on the Tweecer site if the air flow values could somehow be converted to horsepower and one of them replied with the magic value. I used that value on several combos and saw it seemed to be close and just thought I'd see what all of you had to say about it.

Later
Grady
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NEW FOX IMPUT/ADVICE
  • Madness7645
  • Jun 22, 2019
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
12
Views
3K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 25, 2020
Madness7645
N
SOLD Supercharged 1989 SSP Coupe $13,500 obo
  • notchlubber
  • Jul 17, 2018
  • Fox Body Mustangs For Sale (1979-93)
Replies
13
Views
13K
Fox Body Mustangs For Sale (1979-93) May 28, 2020
notchlubber
N
T
Fox No Boost And Stumped
  • TWEECD
  • Aug 12, 2017
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
12K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 31, 2017
TWEECD
T
The Blower Thread
  • 84Ttop
  • Feb 4, 2015
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2 3 4
Replies
67
Views
30K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 21, 2021
phattridzs
P
B
  • Locked
Expired 00/03 Cobra Clone Fully Built Street/track Monster Kenne Bell
  • BOSS GT
  • Aug 20, 2013
  • SN95 Mustangs For Sale (1994-04)
Replies
4
Views
12K
SN95 Mustangs For Sale (1994-04) Oct 29, 2013
BOSS GT
B
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?