Why so you could find a random timeslip to post as why his time wasn't really his time?
2011 GT 5.0, AED tuned 437HP/424TQ
- Thread starter Bad500Chris
- Start date
Why so you could find a random timeslip to post as why his time wasn't really his time?
No no no, so he can find some PURELY THEORETICAL math to explain why the timing lights were OBVIOUSLY rigged.
all dynos are different. here is one that was on a local dyno that had a tune, CAI, and catback.
Opposite end of the spectrum here, that dyno reads low and everyone on here would say so. when a dyno reads high no one says shit they just repeat it to their buddies as gospel.
an the person that tuned it may also not be very good aswell. there are so many Variables why numbers from one car are different frome another. different types or CAI, different types of Exhaust, different types of tunners, different types of dyno's. the Fact is that 5.0 mustang in this thread from this tuner from AED, with these mods, on this dyno made those numbers, wheather you wanna believe it or not.
So just to give some info here on BMEP, from the website you gave.
"Note that BMEP is purely theoretical and has nothing to do with actual cylinder pressures."
"For a long-life, naturally-aspirated, gasoline-fueled, two-valve-per-cylinder, pushrod engine, a BMEP over 200 PSI is difficult to achieve and requires a serious development program and very specialized components."
Though this had a serious developement program and is not a 2 valve.
Also not a pushrod engine. And I think that gets overlooked way too often.
True, but I did not want to give him too many facts at one time.
Surely you jest, lol:lol:
No no, it's true, any more than 3 facts per post and troll's heads tend to explode. Or they log off in shame.
and I am supposed to be the immature one in this thread? you win the prize.
You jumped on that train a few pages ago. Nice try tho? KTHX!!
HP = (TQ * RPM)/5252
HP is simply TQ at RPM.
This is MY dyno, and it is within 1/2% of our Dynojet 224. Most people are disappointed with the low #'s we get on the dyno. (typical)
FYI Dynojets are NOT calibratable by the end user. Nor can you change the Air temp / Humidity settings to change the #'s.
However, there is some variance in these 2011 5.0 numbers. Here is why:
I normally use an Optical pickup pointed at the crank dampner to log RPM. The 5.0 is a bit of a tight fit and with the plastic undercarriage panel blocking the balancer, I do not use the Optical (laser) pickup. Instead I use a digital datalog RPM output to sync a preset Engine RPM to the dyno roller. This means RPM is actually measured at the tires, and therefore has some variance due to a number of reasons. Not the least of which is the rubber band effect of the drivetrain and the expansion of the tires (although minimal with radials). The result is RPM readings that do not exactly match what the engine is actually turning. IE, it says peak power is at 6500, but the motor could actually be turning 6700RPM at peak power. This means RPM for HP and TQ is off, and if you use the formula above, you will see slightly higher TQ numbers, however HP #'s are dead on (although at a slightly lower RPM).
As a tuner I'm more concerned with gains back to back as well as AVG power across the RPM band. Peak numbers are nice to post, but I could care less about them. The gains from back to back parts/tuning changes are REAL and measurable.
Numbers are just numbers. Dynos are tuning TOOLS, and my inertia drums is an EXCELLENT tool for realizing power gains thru tuning.
A few things to note about these particular motors.
1. TiVCT when programmed correctly is like running an infinitely variable LSA as well as ICL and ECL on the camshafts. This means low end TQ + high RPM power all in one PKG. This also means the more airflow mods that are done, the more power that can be extracted from TiVCT tuning (currently not programed to its full potential with mail order tunes due to variances between setups). Stock cam timing is great for stock parts, but as airflow changes, so does optimum cam timing. This is where a custom tune will shine over a mail order tune. (hence the power achieved by this 5.0)
2. Ford used torque management to control power output of these motors. If the tuner does not turn off torque management, power gains from parts / tuning will NOT be realized. This is unlike Fords older ECU's. The new programing calculates TQ output and will close the Throttle Body to keep power at the programmed level. And it is very effective! An inexperienced tuner will not know to turn off TQ management (unlike older ECU's) and not see any real gains from tuning, as the above Dynojet graph suggests. Hell, even the SCT tune does not turn off TQ management.
BTW, at 3600lbs without driver, these cars need far more than 420RW to run 10's!
Otherwise we'd see every cam/bolt-on Catfish running 10's. They have a hard time breaking into the 11's at that power level and weight!
HP is simply TQ at RPM.
This is MY dyno, and it is within 1/2% of our Dynojet 224. Most people are disappointed with the low #'s we get on the dyno. (typical)
FYI Dynojets are NOT calibratable by the end user. Nor can you change the Air temp / Humidity settings to change the #'s.
However, there is some variance in these 2011 5.0 numbers. Here is why:
I normally use an Optical pickup pointed at the crank dampner to log RPM. The 5.0 is a bit of a tight fit and with the plastic undercarriage panel blocking the balancer, I do not use the Optical (laser) pickup. Instead I use a digital datalog RPM output to sync a preset Engine RPM to the dyno roller. This means RPM is actually measured at the tires, and therefore has some variance due to a number of reasons. Not the least of which is the rubber band effect of the drivetrain and the expansion of the tires (although minimal with radials). The result is RPM readings that do not exactly match what the engine is actually turning. IE, it says peak power is at 6500, but the motor could actually be turning 6700RPM at peak power. This means RPM for HP and TQ is off, and if you use the formula above, you will see slightly higher TQ numbers, however HP #'s are dead on (although at a slightly lower RPM).
As a tuner I'm more concerned with gains back to back as well as AVG power across the RPM band. Peak numbers are nice to post, but I could care less about them. The gains from back to back parts/tuning changes are REAL and measurable.
Numbers are just numbers. Dynos are tuning TOOLS, and my inertia drums is an EXCELLENT tool for realizing power gains thru tuning.
A few things to note about these particular motors.
1. TiVCT when programmed correctly is like running an infinitely variable LSA as well as ICL and ECL on the camshafts. This means low end TQ + high RPM power all in one PKG. This also means the more airflow mods that are done, the more power that can be extracted from TiVCT tuning (currently not programed to its full potential with mail order tunes due to variances between setups). Stock cam timing is great for stock parts, but as airflow changes, so does optimum cam timing. This is where a custom tune will shine over a mail order tune. (hence the power achieved by this 5.0)
2. Ford used torque management to control power output of these motors. If the tuner does not turn off torque management, power gains from parts / tuning will NOT be realized. This is unlike Fords older ECU's. The new programing calculates TQ output and will close the Throttle Body to keep power at the programmed level. And it is very effective! An inexperienced tuner will not know to turn off TQ management (unlike older ECU's) and not see any real gains from tuning, as the above Dynojet graph suggests. Hell, even the SCT tune does not turn off TQ management.
BTW, at 3600lbs without driver, these cars need far more than 420RW to run 10's!
Otherwise we'd see every cam/bolt-on Catfish running 10's. They have a hard time breaking into the 11's at that power level and weight!
Last edited:
^^^Good info from the man himself.
yes it is an he is very much the man when it comes to tunning :beer:
updated page 1 with track video from this weekend.
Time:
11.97 @ 114.9 mph with a 1.72 60'
Sacramento Raceway.
This is an improvement of a full second from stock. This car ran a 12.9 bone stock on the street tires.
Mods:
C&L intake
Lethal O/R X pipe
AED Tune
DRs
Driver mod
(lol dealer-plates)
100% stock suspension, 3.55 gears, and a manual transmission
Weight of the car at the track was 3690 with 1/2 a tank of gas and the driver.
Time:
11.97 @ 114.9 mph with a 1.72 60'
Sacramento Raceway.
This is an improvement of a full second from stock. This car ran a 12.9 bone stock on the street tires.
Mods:
C&L intake
Lethal O/R X pipe
AED Tune
DRs
Driver mod
(lol dealer-plates)
100% stock suspension, 3.55 gears, and a manual transmission
Weight of the car at the track was 3690 with 1/2 a tank of gas and the driver.
Last edited:
So...just some dinner-napkin calculations, but that puts you somewhere in the 430-440hp range...
Well if you ask the chevy lovers they would say it should be 10s an that 11.9 is too slow. Even thoe at that weight it would take about 520hp an 500tq to hit 10s.
what kind of times did you net, curious? from stock to modified?
:beer:
Users who are viewing this thread
