[CW3SF]

Originally Posted by JSH

He charged me for 2 hours dyno time, so he obviously edited the tune based on logs.

It made a road log today and it's got more boost, more MAP, no neg. advance, tons of fuel pressure, low MAT, etc. so ?

"It made 50 more hp than it did before we did the crushed pipe delete"

One of the issues now is that 965 dyno is a DynoJet and the 906 dyno is a Mustang, so we're all jacked up now. Worse yet, the Dynojet is a three-hour round-trip drive, so that's out for me. Need to find a local Dynojet.

Mofab in Parker. And the tuner Nick knows the platform very well.

[Z OH 6]

Originally Posted by JSH

One of the issues now is that 965 dyno is a DynoJet and the 906 dyno is a Mustang, so we're all jacked up now. Worse yet, the Dynojet is a three-hour round-trip drive, so that's out for me. Need to find a local Dynojet.

Would have been good info to post for everyone instead of wondering where your power went. The 50 hp "gained" by the crushed pipe is nonsense though because you still haven't made any more power than you did before you swapped the pulley and TB, regardless of the dyno used. You keep leaving out bits of info when you make your posts, then you change random variables making it difficult for anyone to follow what's going on.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by Z OH 6

Would have been good info to post for everyone instead of wondering where your power went. The 50 hp "gained" by the crushed pipe is nonsense though because you still haven't made any more power than you did before you swapped the pulley and TB, regardless of the dyno used. You keep leaving out bits of info when you make your posts, then you change random variables making it difficult for anyone to follow what's going on.

I think you missed what I said: It made 850 with 112/2.75 on the Mustang, we did the crushed pipe delete, and it made 906 on the same dyno with the same tune, so it's hard to rebut his position that the pipe was ~50 hp. We haven't dyno'd the current build on the Dynojet, so we can't compare power.

Having said all that, the tune needs more work, and it probably needs more low side.

[Z OH 6]

Originally Posted by JSH

I think you missed what I said: It made 850 with 112/2.75 on the Mustang, we did the crushed pipe delete, and it made 906 on the same dyno with the same tune, so it's hard to rebut his position that the pipe was ~50 hp. We haven't dyno'd the current build on the Dynojet, so we can't compare power.

Having said all that, the tune needs more work, and it probably needs more low side.

Did not miss what you said, I think its possible you gained some power but not 50whp. That's insane. That being said, if you had actually gained 50whp, even if you were on a Mustang dyno when you did it, you would be much closer to your original Flowjet dyno numbers, since you would have gained 50whp, which I seriously doubt you did. A Mustang dyno eats up more power for sure, I think KingLT1 estimated it to be 7%, if your original 965whp were correct, that would be about 67whp loss on a Mustang dyno meaning that if you had tested on that same day you would have dyno'd around 900whp. Now you're making 906whp so certainly you couldn't have gained 50whp. Something is off somewhere all I'm saying, either your original 965whp wasn't correct which some have speculated, or you didn't really gain 50whp from the crushed pipe removal. I believe it's a little of both. I could see 20whp gain from the crushed pipe removal at your power level but not 50whp, that just doesn't even pass the logic test. For all I know your tuner could have manipulated the correction factors to show more power being made just to prove to you that he didn't waste your money by suggesting that was the bottleneck.

[JSH]

The car's been dyno'd enough at this point. What matters is how the car runs on the road and strip. I've never found much value for the (engine or chassis) dyno after the tune is in the ballpark, which I believe it is now, and we can make those edits with tires on pavement.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by JSH

What should I change the throttle body scalar to in HPT (from 103 to 112mm)?

For those interested in 112mm scalar, NW says:

"I would start with the stock value. If it needs to be raised any it would be minimal."

[Katech_Mike]

Originally Posted by JSH

One of the issues now is that 965 dyno is a DynoJet and the 906 dyno is a Mustang, so we're all jacked up now. Worse yet, the Dynojet is a three-hour round-trip drive, so that's out for me. Need to find a local Dynojet.

If you're trying to have A-B numbers you need to go back to the same dyno. Not the same type of dyno. The same exact dyno you ran on originally.

[Z OH 6]

Originally Posted by Katech_Mike

If you're trying to have A-B numbers you need to go back to the same dyno. Not the same type of dyno. Some same exact dyno you ran on originally.

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by JSH

For those interested in 112mm scalar, NW says:

"I would start with the stock value. If it needs to be raised any it would be minimal."

They have been saying that since they released the 103mm. I have found the car drives better raising that table.

The logs you sent me show the car is making good power. The crimp delete definitely improved flow as the MAF went up 300hz and my logger shows the car is making more power.

I think you just went from happy dyno to non-happy dyno and that is why I don't put any stock in dyno numbers. When my scanner shows the car is making more power, it almost always translates to gains at the track or with a dragy.

There is still some left in it. 12.0 is a little rich for race gas tune and it should take a little more timing. I am running 24 degrees in my Brothers C7Z on E50 @ .84. It's making 18psi and 60-130's in the 4's with a Manual trans.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by Katech_Mike

If you're trying to have A-B numbers you need to go back to the same dyno. Not the same type of dyno. Some same exact dyno you ran on originally.

No, not trying to see A-B numbers. It's not that important, as I said.

[Z OH 6]

Originally Posted by JSH

No, not trying to see A-B numbers. It's not that important, as I said.

Then what was the point of this whole thread? Clickbait?

[JSH]

I can't figure out how to make the AEM channel stay in the list. It disappears when I crank it and scan. The WB will only turn on in service mode or with engine running. It does not turn on with Accessories on.

Originally Posted by KingLT1

They have been saying that since they released the 103mm. I have found the car drives better raising that table.

The logs you sent me show the car is making good power. The crimp delete definitely improved flow as the MAF went up 300hz and my logger shows the car is making more power.

I think you just went from happy dyno to non-happy dyno and that is why I don't put any stock in dyno numbers. When my scanner shows the car is making more power, it almost always translates to gains at the track or with a dragy.

There is still some left in it. 12.0 is a little rich for race gas tune and it should take a little more timing. I am running 24 degrees in my Brothers C7Z on E50 @ .84. It's making 18psi and 60-130's in the 4's with a Manual trans.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by Z OH 6

Then what was the point of this whole thread? Clickbait?

It's evolved from dyno hp to tuning the car. That's obvious.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

The crimp delete definitely improved flow as the MAF went up 300hz and my logger shows the car is making more power.

I'm real sure this finding proves a bunch of people here to have been wrong about my crimp.