Dynoed pulley/intake/catback; Questions...

[LuDamiKE81]

I would say get the idlers, and if what these SvtP guys have stated doesnt work, go to another shop because they hit the nail on the head. I wouldnt let anyone tune my car that doesnt know what my spark plug gap with a pulley should be. But i hear what your saying about mistakes, but at some point it has to stop. Good luck im sure youll get it figured out.

 

[kilrb]

If you can't find that parameter try fuel rail pressure. Once you save it you can email it over or post the link, it should be saved as an excel file to be viewed as a spreadsheet.

Ok, I haven't used this website for posting up files, so hopefully it works. The first link is to a 3rd gear run. The second link is a 2nd gear run, just in case it helps at all. I couldn't get a second 3rd gear run in...

4shared.com - online file sharing and storage - download 1.csv

4shared.com - online file sharing and storage - download 2.csv

 

[kilrb]

Doing a little bit of searching on the board, and inspecting of the datalog has been interesting. I'm not really too sure about several of the parameters, but the timing was interesting to me. From about 4k up, the advance was around 16.5. From what I have read on here, that's pretty tame...

I mentioned before that when the guy dyno tuned my car, it was getting late into the evening, and he had a problem with his tailpipe sniffer. When he finally got everything back up and running, he got the A/F curve on track, and then bumped the timing up. At the time, I didn't ask what he set it at, because I honestly didn't know even half-ass where it should be. When he bumped it up, the next dyno pull didn't yield any more hp or torque, and so he dropped it down "some". I'm not sure how much he went up or back down. I don't know if maybe the car was getting a bit heat soaked from the multiple pulls it had made, and the car's computer was pulling timing from his prescribed settings, and that's why it didn't make any difference... Although there are a couple of stations around with 92 octane, 95% of them only have 91. What's safe as far as timing with 91 octane? I'm more interested in being conservative and not blowing anything up than I am in wringing out the last 5 or 10hp on the car...

 

[96stanggt]

If you can in the future try to start the pull a bit lower, you started around 4400rpms. Good eye on the timing, that is very mild even for 91 octane. Generally 19-20* would be plenty safe for 91 octane, especially on a mild upper pulley only car. What's odd is your timing bounces around, it's not linear at all. It hits 16.75 then drops down to 16.25, then back up to 16.5 then 16.75 again, etc. Another thing that's odd is your FPDC and MAF counts are rather high for a car that's making such little power. Your actual AFR is almost half a point richer than the commanded AFR in the tune, and that's assuming he was using a bung in the exhaust by the headers to measure the AFR. If he was using a tailpipe sniffer then the car is actually a good bit richer than what the sheet shows, which means you're car could be a whole point richer than what is commanded. If that's the case he likely didn't spend much time dialing in the MAF transfer function to make sure the car is seeing what the tune is commanding. Your temps, both coolant and charge were fine, so unless he has the ACT retard set stupid low you weren't pulling any timing.

Have you checked those plugs yet man?!?!?!!?

 

[SpectorV]

I had mine dynod with 2.93/borla catback/jlt CAI style intake.

I had my tune done by Ed (formerly with RWTD) and mailed to me. I loaded it on a tuner, did initial non WOT (normal driving) data logs and he inspected said I was good to go for the dyno. I got on the dyno and my WOT pulls were 440/480 with 15.25psi (cold day) but my A/F was 10.9 (nice and steady just rich).

I have a new tune now but I have yet to try it out. You REALLY should put new plugs in the car (cheap copper is fine) gap them good (what like .33-.34?) I would use NGK TR6 coppers~ I have Iridium and gaped them at .38 (you can run a slightly higher gap on Iridiums and they came .38.. and I dont like gapping them in fear of messing up the ends)

Drive the car with a couple three WOT pulls then inspect the plugs for detonation (and listen for it) you probably are ok there just something to do to be safe. I had detonation that went away with a new tank of gas so mine was gas related, other wise its tune related. You can also make SURE your injectors/pump/and maf counts are not maxed out, you best not run the car WOT in the cold until you are SURE you are safe even when then tune is looking good in normal temps.

My max timing is 23 degrees on 93 oct as well. If you have an SCT tuner you can check all that stuff via data logging.

About your belt size, remember different idlers will have different needs for belt sizes. BF's idlers have the old style and the new style, and they are .5 inches difference in belts to be used with them (if using the normal 3 x 100mm idlers and 1 x 92mm idler). You need to run the idler bracket as well. Just do the pulley set from BF.

 

[kilrb]

Ok, so I checked two things. When I lifted the hood after driving to work, the belt installed currently is a Gates; it has the name on the belt. Second, and more importantly, I pulled a plug, and it measured out right at .038, like they told me. I have never pulled a plug with a couple hundred miles on it. Is the corrosion on the tip normal? The plugs are NGK TR6 plugs. I haven't heard back from the guy who tuned my car, and I plan to call him tomorrow. Should I re-gap the plugs prior to going in and having him re-tune? When I go in, is there a minimum timing I should be shooting for while being conservative on 91 octane? Would it help if I datalog again from a lower rpm for you guys? Thanks again for all the help.

 

[kilrb]

96stanggt, I'm still eagerly awaiting your comments on the timing. I went ahead and pulled all the plugs last night, and re-gapped at .034". I still haven't heard back from the shop. I'll be calling them this afternoon to figure out when they can get me in. At this point, I'd like to get it running right at this shop, since I have already paid for it, but if it's going to take me going to another shop or doing a long-distance tune through data-logging, I'm going to do what it takes...

On a side note, does anyone have a spare screw for the cover over the spark plugs? I'm 90% sure the cover had two screws in it (based on pictures of the engine bay before I bought it) when I bought it, but one was missing when I went to check the plug gap the other day. I figure it's not a major problem, but Ford has the screws on back order, and I'm not sure how long it's going to take to get one. I called the shop that changed the plugs, and they are looking, but I doubt they'll find it. I'm sort of irritated that they didn't tell me it wasn't there when they put it back, regardless of whether they lost it or it was missing when they began working on it...

 

[96stanggt]

That porcelain looks extremely white for being in there a couple hundred miles, not sure what the deal with the corrosion is. Would say being that white you might be a touch lean, but the graph indicates otherwise. As for timing I would strive for at least 19* on 91 octane.

Why are you still screwing around with this shop? You've already seen they do things half ass and aren't as experienced as you thought.

 

[kilrb]

That porcelain looks extremely white for being in there a couple hundred miles, not sure what the deal with the corrosion is. Would say being that white you might be a touch lean, but the graph indicates otherwise. As for timing I would strive for at least 19* on 91 octane.

Why are you still screwing around with this shop? You've already seen they do things half ass and aren't as experienced as you thought.

Thanks for the input on the timing. As for why I'm still screwing around, I have already paid for the tune, and if I can get things worked out for the money I have already spent, I'd like to do that. That doesn't mean I'm willing to just turn them loose without knowing what they are doing, but I figure at the very least, I can get it back on the dyno, see what it does with the plugs re-gapped and the correct belt. If the A/F needs re-adjusted, they can do that, and we can try bumping the timing up. If that doesn't get me anywhere, I'll go to another shop in town who basically does nothing but Mustangs and Lightnings. I just had a phone conversation with him, and I quizzed him on a few things, and got a good impression. For instance, he said they would have gapped my car at .032.

 

[96stanggt]

Thanks for the input on the timing. As for why I'm still screwing around, I have already paid for the tune, and if I can get things worked out for the money I have already spent, I'd like to do that. That doesn't mean I'm willing to just turn them loose without knowing what they are doing, but I figure at the very least, I can get it back on the dyno, see what it does with the plugs re-gapped and the correct belt. If the A/F needs re-adjusted, they can do that, and we can try bumping the timing up. If that doesn't get me anywhere, I'll go to another shop in town who basically does nothing but Mustangs and Lightnings. I just had a phone conversation with him, and I quizzed him on a few things, and got a good impression. For instance, he said they would have gapped my car at .032.

I can fully understand that, as I've been there myself before. Took me a couple years and several trips and lots of money spent to learn my lesson. Luckily they were good people and tried to make it right. As long as you're keeping your eyes open and staying involved hopefully they'll fix the issues.

 

[90goldtsiawd]

Man OP you have a lot more patience with that shop than I would. For me there's just been way too many red flags to let them touch my car even one more time. Sometimes you just have to cut your loss and move on to a place you know you won't have to question their knowledge. Dropping a couple hundred bucks now to go have another shop tune the car could end up being a lot cheaper than paying for a new motor.

 

[kilrb]

Man OP you have a lot more patience with that shop than I would. For me there's just been way too many red flags to let them touch my car even one more time. Sometimes you just have to cut your loss and move on to a place you know you won't have to question their knowledge. Dropping a couple hundred bucks now to go have another shop tune the car could end up being a lot cheaper than paying for a new motor.

I agree with you 100%. The only problem I have is, I really don't know any of the other shops in town any better...

 

[90goldtsiawd]

You might want to broaden your search further than just what's in your town. Some guys travel across the country to use the right tuner. Not saying that's what it needed but people have already mentioned some reputable shops in this thread you should check out and ask for more recommendations.

 

[LEATHAL VENOM]

It sounds like you may have a combination of things going on contributing to your lower numbers. I have a similar setup to yours - 2.80 upper pulley, whipple tensioner, JLT RAI, and a Steeda Catback - I had my car dyno'd a couple of weeks ago and it made 473hp/490tq.

By looking at your dyno graph's I think you are getting some belt slip in the upper RPMS as mentioned in earlier posts, the flow is not smooth above 5000rpms - did your tuner hook up a boost input to tell how much boost the car is making? My car made 13.9#'s but boost started to drop off around 4800rpms and by 6200rpms it was only 11.6#. I am using a 74" gates belt with a whipple tensioner/idler - although I was getting boost drop which is normal for an unported eaton my dyno graph was not choppy up top.

The timing also seems really conservative at 16-17 degrees which will be costing you some top end power, the tuner that set my car up set max timing at 20 degrees.

Your a/f looks like it is around the mid 11's on the graph which is right were you want to be, the plugs gapped at .34 are also right were they should be.

The repeated dyno runs would contribute to the low numbers as an unported eaton is prone to getting hot but the numbers still shouldn't be that low.

Did your tuner tell you the fuel pump duty cycle and the max maf count? I wouldn't think either would be maxed but you need to know that either is not an issue.

I don't know if any of this helps but I thought I would throw my .02$ in as I have a very similar setup to yours. Good Luck getting it straightened out my friend :beer:.

 

[Bdubbs]

It sounds like you may have a combination of things going on contributing to your lower numbers. I have a similar setup to yours - 2.80 upper pulley, whipple tensioner, JLT RAI, and a Steeda Catback - I had my car dyno'd a couple of weeks ago and it made 473hp/490tq.

By looking at your dyno graph's I think you are getting some belt slip in the upper RPMS as mentioned in earlier posts, the flow is not smooth above 5000rpms - did your tuner hook up a boost input to tell how much boost the car is making? My car made 13.9#'s but boost started to drop off around 4800rpms and by 6200rpms it was only 11.6#. I am using a 74" gates belt with a whipple tensioner/idler - although I was getting boost drop which is normal for an unported eaton my dyno graph was not choppy up top.

The timing also seems really conservative at 16-17 degrees which will be costing you some top end power, the tuner that set my car up set max timing at 20 degrees.

Your a/f looks like it is around the mid 11's on the graph which is right were you want to be, the plugs gapped at .34 are also right were they should be.

The repeated dyno runs would contribute to the low numbers as an unported eaton is prone to getting hot but the numbers still shouldn't be that low.

Did your tuner tell you the fuel pump duty cycle and the max maf count? I wouldn't think either would be maxed but you need to know that either is not an issue.

I don't know if any of this helps but I thought I would throw my .02$ in as I have a very similar setup to yours. Good Luck getting it straightened out my friend :beer:.

You have some very nice numbers! What type of dyno did you use?

 

[LEATHAL VENOM]

You have some very nice numbers! What type of dyno did you use?

Tuning was done at Steeda Canada which uses a MD1750SE Mustang Dyno. The dyno is calibrated to put out SAE corrected numbers - my tuner told me there is approx a 12-13% correction factor between a dynojet reading and a Mustang Dyno reading and that the numbers I have would be similar to the numbers if I was to have the car dyno'd on a Dynojet. Most people want to hear the highest numbers naturally and Dynojet numbers are definately going to read higher than that of a Mustang Dyno.

Whichever dyno is used I think the big thing is to make sure the car is tuned properly. From what I have been told and what I have read the Mustang Dyno seems to be a better tuning tool as it gives more real world loading conditions vs the dynojet but I am no tuning expert.

When my car was tuned they installed a bung before the cats to get the a/f data as opposed to a tailpipe sniffer - I wonder if the OP's data may not be as accurate causing the tuner to make some less than optimal adjustments.

I was a little skeptical after I saw the numbers for the mods I have but after driving the car I could definately feel the power gain. If the weather holds I will be hitting the track next Friday and those number should tell me how much better the car is than before.

Sorry for the ramble. To answer your original question - Thank-you, a Mustang Dyno was used.

 

[kilrb]

I don't know if any of this helps but I thought I would throw my .02$ in as I have a very similar setup to yours. Good Luck getting it straightened out my friend :beer:.

Thanks. I do appreciate the input, Lethal.

I went in yesterday, and they put the car on the dyno, and un-touched it put out around 425; more or less the same as before. The tech began playing with the fuel, and made some more pulls, and began adjusting the timing. The final results were 444/443, which is quite a bit better than the first go-round. (dyno below) He ultimately went with timing peaking out at 19 in the high rpm's. I noticed the A/F ratio had some dipping between 5,200 and 5,700 for some reason, and the torque curve got kind of bumpy at the tail end. He offered to bump up the timing up another .5 degree, but I declined. I'm looking to stay conservative, and I don't mind giving up a few more ponies to stay in the safe range, in case I get some gas that's not quite up to the full 91 octane. I'm curious as to your thoughts on the torque:hp ratio... I notice a lot of cars on here have torque a good 20 or more points above hp, and others that are closer together. Any ideas as to why my torque isn't above the hp?

I'll try to pull a data log to post up, and this time, I'll start at a lower rpm. If you guys find issues with it, I'm thinking about going to the other shop and expressing my concerns, and letting them try their hand at it for an hour. It's not that much $$, and it could be educational.

On a side note, they had a 2010 SS Camaro they just put a procharger on that kicked out 670 to the wheels at 5k before they shut it down. I guess they were concerned with making much over 600 with the stock bottom end... They are going to up the pulley to get it into the low 600's to be safe. God only knows what it would have made had they taken it to redline... It was a bad mo-fo.

 

[LEATHAL VENOM]

I'm curious as to your thoughts on the torque:hp ratio... I notice a lot of cars on here have torque a good 20 or more points above hp, and others that are closer together. Any ideas as to why my torque isn't above the hp?

Kilrb

I am not sure their is an exact answer to that other than all cars are different. The majority of cars that I have seen with closer hp/tq numbers usually have a mid pipe which helps provide upper rpm hp but doesn't seem to help with the peak torque numbers as much. I know you mentioned your car doesn't have a mid pipe on it yet so I'm not sure why your hp/tq numbers are so even but I can say I have seen other guys post very close hp/tq numbers.

Even though your numbers still seem a bit low you are definately closer to where most of us would expect a 2.8 upper/intake/exhaust car to be. It sounds like your tune is a bit conservative, as well if you had done repeated runs on the dyno without ample cool down time the heat from the eaton would be robbing you of some higher numbers. I think the generally excepted norm for a 2.8 upper/intake/catback car is around the 450-470hp range so you are not that far off.

I'm sure you have probably already double checked this but what type of pulley are you using and are you sure it is a 2.80 - the only reason I suggest that is because I have heard of guys ordering one size and getting another, if you did not measure it when you bought it maybe you have a 2.90/2.93 pulley which would make your numbers normal. If you aren't 100% sure it may be worth checking - just a thought.

The only other things I can think of is if your clutch is starting to slip but usually you will see this on your dyno graph as little dots or breaks in the lines on your graph but I don't see that from the graphs you have posted. The other possibility could be a cylinder running on lower than normal compression - I'm not suggesting you have a compression problem just throwing out some things that would effect your numbers but that being said your numbers aren't that far off after this last dyno.

Kilrb I think the main thing is that the car is tuned properly - numbers are only numbers and the real measurement for me is the seat of the pants gain after doing a modification. Your torque curve hangs in a lot longer on this last graph and the graph seems much smoother than before. Although I have heard many guys say they don't use a tensioner with their 2.8 upper I think the potential for belt slip is definately there. If you haven't already found out I would ask your tuner to hook up a boost input so you can see max boost and then see when the boost falls off and what it falls off to. If boost is falling off substantially then a tensioner should be in your future.

Let us know how you make out.:beer:

 

[kilrb]

Well, the crazy Kansas spring weather has finally cleared up and allowed me an opportunity to get the car out and run a datalog. In the meantime, I installed the Hilton boost overlay, and calibrated it with an aftermarket gauge at 15psi, so it should be accurate at max boost. I'm showing 14psi from 4,000rpm up. I'm assuming it's normal to be a bit below max boost below that point. Although it's tough to watch the boost gauge attentively while under full throttle, it looks to me like it loses around 2 full psi by redline. Is this normal as well? Below is a link to the datalog. I notice that although the car was supposed to have been setup for 19 degrees of timing, it never got above 18. Is there something environmental that would have caused this? The car was definitely totally warmed up prior to the pull.

And to answer everyone's question; yes, if there's more work to be done on the tune, I'll be seeking it somewhere else.

4shared.com - online file sharing and storage - download 3.csv

 

[96stanggt]

Your datalog doesn't look that bad, but few things to point out....

The FPDC is rather high for a car with your power level, it's hitting 92-94% at some points. The tune is commanding 12.0 AFR yet seeing a good bit richer than that, which means they probably have the MAF transfer function in the tune incorrect. If so the computer will ask for more fuel than is necessary thus making the pumps work harder than the they have to. Really not a huge deal since you still have some safety room and your AFR is safe, but just again show's they're not tuning the car correctly. And yet another reason if it was me I wouldn't go back to them for future tunes.

Your timing isn't seeing full MBT spark that you said your tuner called for. If I had to guess he set it to ask for 19* too high in the rpm range and the car didn't have enough rpm to see full timing. Even on 91 octane you have room safely to add more timing, especially down low. You're at 14.75* from 2600-3200rpms, less than 17* till 4k, then climing to 18* by 5k and holding it there. You can easily go 16* from 2500-3500, 18* by 4000, 19* by 5k, then 19-20* from 5k to 6500.