This is topic Plasma Booster Dyno and Track Results in forum Tech Talk at Northern California Ford Owners  .


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://californiafords.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=002466

---

Posted by bunchmyfunky (Member # 360) on :
 
Here are the results from the Plasma Booster. Please take the time to read the entire article. It should answer just about all your questions. The article is on the leftside -tech department first one at the top called Fire Away.

www.fordmuscle.com
 

---

Posted by 99gt-UJSTLST (Member # 584) on :
 
hey what type of plugs were you runing

I was thinking of getting this for my car but have not decided it will be this or the new plugs think they call uridium
 

---

Posted by Andrew WOT (Member # 1249) on :
 
Great article, thanks.
 

---

Posted by bunchmyfunky (Member # 360) on :
 
Javier, I'm running NGKs TR-55s gapped somewhere in the low 40s.

Andrew, Thanks this was the first time that I had seen the article also. Jim and Chirag did a great job on it. Thanks guys
 

---

Posted by hidnn.o.s. (Member # 1219) on :
 
Congrats
 

---

Posted by 281n/a (Member # 1465) on :
 
damn mark you need a dyno tune that 244rwhp seems low compared to a lot of bolt on gt's add some longtubes and a dyno tune chip you will see about 260-265rw great article
 

---

Posted by bunchmyfunky (Member # 360) on :
 
244rwhp running 12s can't complain about that. I doubt I would see those kind of gains with a custom chip, I think 5rwhp at most. I do have an OR H pipe going on next week, so we will see if that helps.
 

---

Posted by shade-tree (Member # 298) on :
 
where those SAE corrected dyno results?
 

---

Posted by bunchmyfunky (Member # 360) on :
 
yup those are corrected numbers
 

---

Posted by st5150 (Member # 51) on :
 
Great story. I like the track test -dyno- re-track test idea. Looking at the dyno graph, you probably have 2-4 rwhp to be gained by leaning out your air fuel ratio half a point up top. Did you play with the timing at all on the dyno?
 

---

Posted by bunchmyfunky (Member # 360) on :
 
We didn't change the timing, it was set to 14degree's.
 

---

Posted by yesIdid (Member # 58) on :
 
The #s look right (RWHP) Mark. You have to subtract around 10 rwhp for the 4.10s. You're probably in the 255 range .

Nice article Jim...
 

---

Posted by LX Pony (Member # 2216) on :
 
I thought In the MMFF article that they got bigger gains by moving the timing back...supposedly it needs less timing to be effective? Either way, that's one quick 4.6!
 

---

Posted by Bullitt208 (Member # 441) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by LX Pony:
I thought In the MMFF article that they got bigger gains by moving the timing back...supposedly it needs less timing to be effective? Either way, that's one quick 4.6!

---

That's a shocker! MM&FF got unrealistic gains on a product they tested.

[ December 19, 2002, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: Bullitt208 ]
 

---

Posted by 4.6 EATIN GM'S (Member # 1633) on :
 
do they make it for the 96 to 98 motors too?
 

---

Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
Great article!
Drew's gonna be famous!

....man I want to get my hands on your cams Mark.
Those power curves show a lot of potential!

[ December 19, 2002, 04:02 PM: Message edited by: 93PONY ]
 

---

Posted by FasterDamnit (Member # 442) on :
 
Oh yes. Bump them up 400-500 and then lean above 4k by about 1 point (MAFterburner!). What do you think, 4mph?

JKL
 

---

Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by FasterDamnit:
Oh yes. Bump them up 400-500 and then lean above 4k by about 1 point (MAFterburner!). What do you think, 4mph?

JKL

---

quote:

---

Hey BUNCH: Merry Christmas bro!

---