|
Author
|
Topic: 347 Dyno Numbers, first time. Want feedback!
|
jaybquick
¯
Member # 4286
|
posted
 
 
Here is the dyno chart.
Here is the text printout of the Dyno.
--- Test Data ---
Speed (RPM), Torque (Ft-Lbs), HP (HP)
2000.00, 0.00, 0.00
2100.00, 0.00, 0.00
2200.00, 0.00, 0.00
2300.00, 46.42, 22.65
2400.00, 139.27, 67.96
2500.00, 232.11, 113.26
2600.00, 231.01, 116.00
2700.00, 229.91, 118.74
2800.00, 229.36, 122.31
2900.00, 229.36, 126.70
3000.00, 229.37, 131.09
3100.00, 233.64, 138.05
3200.00, 237.92, 145.01
3300.00, 244.04, 153.45
3400.00, 252.01, 163.37
3500.00, 259.98, 173.29
3600.00, 263.43, 180.73
3700.00, 266.89, 188.16
3800.00, 271.15, 196.35
3900.00, 276.21, 205.29
4000.00, 281.28, 214.23
4100.00, 285.39, 222.91
4200.00, 289.51, 231.59
4300.00, 291.90, 238.98
4400.00, 292.57, 245.08
4500.00, 293.24, 251.18
4600.00, 294.21, 257.67
4700.00, 295.18, 264.15
4800.00, 295.88, 270.42
4900.00, 296.32, 276.49
5000.00, 296.75, 282.55
5100.00, 295.03, 286.50
5200.00, 293.31, 290.45
5300.00, 290.46, 293.12
5400.00, 286.47, 294.52
5500.00, 282.49, 295.93
5600.00, 277.66, 296.00
5700.00, 272.83, 296.07
5800.00, 267.91, 295.82
5900.00, 262.90, 295.25
6000.00, 257.90, 294.68
6100.00, 254.48, 293.87
6200.00, 251.07, 293.06
6300.00, 199.49, 234.12
6400.00, 99.75, 117.06
This was in smog legal trim through a bassani x with cats, facory cat back with welded in flowmasters (Crappy as Hell I know). I have the parts in the sig and the RPMII intake is fully gasket matched. I have a 75mm t-body and Pro-M MAF matched to my 24lb injectors and a stock A9L ecu.
I think my future upgrades needed are the new 3" header back flowmaster kit, and a larger cam. Here are my current cam specs.
Crower
Part Number/Work Order Number 15512
Engine Application 302 FORD H.O.
Grind Number 222HR228
ADVERTISED CAMSHAFT SPECIFICATIONS:
INTAKE: Duration: 282º Lift: 0.496 Clearence Hot: 0
EXHAUST: Duration: 286º Lift: 0.512 Clearence Hot: 0
LOBE SEPERATION 112º
Duration at .050" Intake: 222
Exhaust: 228
LOBE LIFT Intake: 0.31
Exhaust: 0.32
With my 1.7 rockers lift increases to. .527 intake and .544 exhaust
Any feedback on upgrades that I should do would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
Check out this thread too for a cool event and shop.
http://www.californiafords.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000835
[ January 20, 2005, 06:52 PM: Message edited by: jaybquick ]
--------------------
91 Mustang GT ET: 11.92@115
66 Mustang ET: 11.43@119
01 Audi S4 ET: 10.8@131
05 Audi S4 ET: 11.9@116
08 Audi S5 ET: 11.9@118
Posts: 416 | From: Lathrop | Registered: Mar 2004
| :
|
|
The Nick
¯
Member # 2244
|
posted
Those numbers seem somewhat low for a 347 w/ 185s, etc... I think you definitely need a larger cam. What compression is it running?
--------------------
Fast, Cheap or Reliable. Pick two and live with it.
Posts: 1215 | From: The Delta | Registered: Dec 2002
| :
|
|
jaybquick
¯
Member # 4286
|
posted
9.2:1 CR so I can put a blower on it in the future. Also it was run on a Mustang dyno which is about 10% less than a dynojet from what I have read, it was also using the SAE standard which is also lower than the STD. Thanks
--------------------
91 Mustang GT ET: 11.92@115
66 Mustang ET: 11.43@119
01 Audi S4 ET: 10.8@131
05 Audi S4 ET: 11.9@116
08 Audi S5 ET: 11.9@118
Posts: 416 | From: Lathrop | Registered: Mar 2004
| :
|
|
twisted54
¯
Member # 1981
|
posted
What's up Jay...I bet with a bigger cam and an O/R pipe you'd make lots more power... ![[patriot]](graemlins/patriot.gif)
--------------------
2013 Black on Black 5.0 with Boost N Things - CORN FED 🌽
Posts: 3421 | From: ebay | Registered: Oct 2002
| :
|
|
BlueOvalRacing
¯
Member # 1531
|
posted
My 331 had the same hp, but 50 ft lbs more torque with roughly the same cam (Lunati 51014), 1.6 rockers and 10.2/1 compression. I have 185's also, with a ported Explorer intake and a 65mm TB.
Posts: 1159 | From: Pioneer | Registered: Jul 2002
| :
|
|
S4OSHUS
¯
Member # 2918
|
posted
definitely need a bigger cam and off road x pipe. i guess due to the low compression also.
my old 347 with the custom cam and 10.5 compression put down 383 to the wheels with no tune and shorty headers. that thing will definitely wake up with a blower!!
[ January 20, 2005, 07:53 PM: Message edited by: FRDFURY ]
--------------------
2001 audi s4 avant stage 3. 460 whp e85
2001 audi S4 stage 3 sold!
91 lx 347 sold!
90 lx notchback sold!
99 cobra sold!
Posts: 695 | From: FRISCO | Registered: Jun 2003
| :
|
|
jayl
¯
Member # 185
|
posted
those are good numbers for the compression.....i bet you would put down 330+ on a dynojet.....
--------------------
Facebook.com/TeamTemporary
8.5's TTFBitch!
Posts: 3821 | From: Hayward | Registered: Mar 2001
| :
|
|
CDT
¯
Member # 5004
|
posted
what was the air/fuel?
--------------------
Custom Dyno Tuning
510.331.0608
Home of Flat Fee Tuning For All Cars, Trucks and SUV's, EFI & Carb, SCT, AFR, Dynatech, STS Turbos, N2O Refills
Posts: 1053 | From: Hayward | Registered: Nov 2004
| :
|
|
CDT
¯
Member # 5004
|
posted
looks like an auto, is it?
--------------------
Custom Dyno Tuning
510.331.0608
Home of Flat Fee Tuning For All Cars, Trucks and SUV's, EFI & Carb, SCT, AFR, Dynatech, STS Turbos, N2O Refills
Posts: 1053 | From: Hayward | Registered: Nov 2004
| :
|
|
jaybquick
¯
Member # 4286
|
posted
A/F ratio held 12.5 to 13.0 the whole way.
No it is not an Auto, it is a T5.
I think it will wake up a lot with more cam and a better exhaust system too, I appreciate the confirmation.
What about a switch to longtudes?
One more thing you can see in the torque curve from 4000 to 5000 that it has a tiny dip. You can hear the motor ping at the same RPM. I pulled 4 degrees timing out and it lost 10 hp and 10 tq so my timing is not too advanced. I am thinking that with the band aid Pro-M MAF vs. a full tune to compensate for the 24s is causing the over advance at this RPM due to the fact the ECU is being tricked by the MAF that the Airflow is lower than it is. What do you guys think. I plan on swithcing to DFI in the future. Thanks
--------------------
91 Mustang GT ET: 11.92@115
66 Mustang ET: 11.43@119
01 Audi S4 ET: 10.8@131
05 Audi S4 ET: 11.9@116
08 Audi S5 ET: 11.9@118
Posts: 416 | From: Lathrop | Registered: Mar 2004
| :
|
|
CDT
¯
Member # 5004
|
posted
I am surprised, its not an auto, maybe you have some clutch slippage, you see how itis flat at first then goes up.. You should ask them for the trace graph viewer printout.. A full tune will always be better than tricker boxes.
--------------------
Custom Dyno Tuning
510.331.0608
Home of Flat Fee Tuning For All Cars, Trucks and SUV's, EFI & Carb, SCT, AFR, Dynatech, STS Turbos, N2O Refills
Posts: 1053 | From: Hayward | Registered: Nov 2004
| :
|
|
jaybquick
¯
Member # 4286
|
posted
I doubt the clutch is slipping since I can scratch third pretty good and at 120 mph when shifting to 5th gear it holds fine at WOT. ![[Whoo Whooooo!]](graemlins/woowoo.gif)
--------------------
91 Mustang GT ET: 11.92@115
66 Mustang ET: 11.43@119
01 Audi S4 ET: 10.8@131
05 Audi S4 ET: 11.9@116
08 Audi S5 ET: 11.9@118
Posts: 416 | From: Lathrop | Registered: Mar 2004
| :
|
|
X97headswap
¯
Member # 5210
|
posted
No offense, but those numbers do seem pretty low. A built 281 will put down similer #'s. It's frusterating to think that an ls1 with 346 ci can put down 400+ rwhp with stock heads and a cam a hair bigger than that. Sorry to bring that up, I now thats not what you probably wanted to hear. I'm sure when you get it figured out, you'll make mad power. I would love to have a stroker though, I'm jealous.
[ January 20, 2005, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: X97headswap ]
Posts: 181 | From: Citrus Heights | Registered: Jan 2005
| :
|
|
Jeff S
¯
Member # 371
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by jaybquick:
I am thinking that with the band aid Pro-M MAF vs. a full tune to compensate for the 24s is causing the over advance at this RPM due to the fact the ECU is being tricked by the MAF that the Airflow is lower than it is. What do you guys think. I plan on swithcing to DFI in the future. Thanks
With an A9L processor the WOT spark has it's own table with ONLY "RPM" and "SPARK ADVANCE". Your timing is not affected by load. As long as the throttle position is high enough for the computer to go into WOT mode you timing will be whatever is commanded in the "WOT Spark" table(plus or minus any adders/subtracters for BP, ECT, ACT).
Which DFI setup were you thinking about?
--------------------
'90 Mustang LX: 8.53 @ 157.92 w/ 1.33 60' on DR's
'10 ZR1: FOR SALE
'14 E63 S: RENNtech ECU
'04 Gallardo: UGR TTG
Posts: 2121 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Aug 2001
| :
|
|
AJBlackGT
¯
Member # 3936
|
posted
Those numbers are low for a 347.
I put down 295/325 with my 306, and it will put down more since i just switched to a custom cam and longtubes.
Something is definately up, and or the tune is off quite a bit.
I would expect 330/370 at the wheels on a dynojet with that motor
--------------------
90 Notch
Posts: 1896 | From: Sacramento | Registered: Dec 2003
| :
|
|
Jeff S
¯
Member # 371
|
posted
What was your initial timing set to when it ping'd between 4000-5000rpm?
--------------------
'90 Mustang LX: 8.53 @ 157.92 w/ 1.33 60' on DR's
'10 ZR1: FOR SALE
'14 E63 S: RENNtech ECU
'04 Gallardo: UGR TTG
Posts: 2121 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Aug 2001
| :
|
|
jaybquick
¯
Member # 4286
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jeff S:
What was your initial timing set to when it ping'd between 4000-5000rpm?
Every setting, even as low as 8 degrees, I lost 10 hp and 10 tq when I retarded it.
I plan on using the White Racing adapter with the lates Gen 7+ ECU
[ January 20, 2005, 10:25 PM: Message edited by: jaybquick ]
--------------------
91 Mustang GT ET: 11.92@115
66 Mustang ET: 11.43@119
01 Audi S4 ET: 10.8@131
05 Audi S4 ET: 11.9@116
08 Audi S5 ET: 11.9@118
Posts: 416 | From: Lathrop | Registered: Mar 2004
| :
|
|
jaybquick
¯
Member # 4286
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by AJBlackGT:
Those numbers are low for a 347.
I put down 295/325 with my 306, and it will put down more since i just switched to a custom cam and longtubes.
Something is definately up, and or the tune is off quite a bit.
I would expect 330/370 at the wheels on a dynojet with that motor
Once again it was done on a Mustang Dyno with SAE settings. Not on a dynojet which should be about 10% higher and would equivilate to about 330.
Also I still have the STOCK aftercat until I have the money for the $600 3" header back.
I don't think there is anything wrong except a weak cam and crap exhaust. Do you guys agree?
--------------------
91 Mustang GT ET: 11.92@115
66 Mustang ET: 11.43@119
01 Audi S4 ET: 10.8@131
05 Audi S4 ET: 11.9@116
08 Audi S5 ET: 11.9@118
Posts: 416 | From: Lathrop | Registered: Mar 2004
| :
|
|
Jeff S
¯
Member # 371
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by jaybquick:
quote:
Originally posted by Jeff S:
What was your initial timing set to when it ping'd between 4000-5000rpm?
Every setting, even as low as 8 degrees, I lost 10 hp and 10 tq when I retarded it.
I plan on using the White Racing adapter with the lates Gen 7+ ECU
Did it ping with 8* initial? I'm curious as to what your initial timing was at since the computer only commands 24* at 4350rpm with 10* initial. You may have a bad BP sensor which would add 4*-12* timing if broken.
--------------------
'90 Mustang LX: 8.53 @ 157.92 w/ 1.33 60' on DR's
'10 ZR1: FOR SALE
'14 E63 S: RENNtech ECU
'04 Gallardo: UGR TTG
Posts: 2121 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Aug 2001
| :
|
|
Jeff S
¯
Member # 371
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by jaybquick:
quote:
Originally posted by AJBlackGT:
Those numbers are low for a 347.
I put down 295/325 with my 306, and it will put down more since i just switched to a custom cam and longtubes.
Something is definately up, and or the tune is off quite a bit.
I would expect 330/370 at the wheels on a dynojet with that motor
Once again it was done on a Mustang Dyno with SAE settings. Not on a dynojet which should be about 10% higher and would equivilate to about 330.
Also I still have the STOCK aftercat until I have the money for the $600 3" header back.
I don't think there is anything wrong except a weak cam and crap exhaust. Do you guys agree?
With the exhaust and cam you have 330rwhp SAE sounds about right. Do you have any track times/mph?
--------------------
'90 Mustang LX: 8.53 @ 157.92 w/ 1.33 60' on DR's
'10 ZR1: FOR SALE
'14 E63 S: RENNtech ECU
'04 Gallardo: UGR TTG
Posts: 2121 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Aug 2001
| :
|
|
mtbaughs
Road Racer
Member # 4052
|
posted
Well I would guess that on a dyno jet dyno you'd be seeing around 310-315 to the rear which is common for a car like yours with a mild cam installed. I would think with the 185's you might see a touch more than that though. One thing to check with the dyno operator on is to make sure the torque settings on the mustang dyno were set up to the proper spec's...I.E. based on your cars weight and such. It's a common mistake made by operators who are new or under educated in how to run the dyno. I'm not saying they are but it is one other thing to check....basically if that checks out than really the only thing you are dealing with is that your cam isn't allowing what those heads are capable of flowing. The exhaust might help some but I think the cam is a much bigger issue.
Posts: 2019 | From: Boise, Idaho | Registered: Jan 2004
| :
|
|
jaybquick
¯
Member # 4286
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jeff S:
quote:
Originally posted by jaybquick:
quote:
Originally posted by Jeff S:
What was your initial timing set to when it ping'd between 4000-5000rpm?
Every setting, even as low as 8 degrees, I lost 10 hp and 10 tq when I retarded it.
I plan on using the White Racing adapter with the lates Gen 7+ ECU
Did it ping with 8* initial? I'm curious as to what your initial timing was at since the computer only commands 24* at 4350rpm with 10* initial. You may have a bad BP sensor which would add 4*-12* timing if broken.
JeffS- Yes it pings at 8 degrees initial. I have no codes for a bad BP sensor, however I have a couple spares on the shelf I can try. Thanks for the info. It runs great and this ping only happens in 3rd and 4th, ie heavier loads.
Track times, 13.4 @ 110mph with a 2.4 60ft. This was with a wasted posi and 245/50/16 rear tires and a stock RPMII intake. Now I have a 31 spline Eaton posi, 285/35/18 tires and a gasket matched Upper and Lower for the RPMII.
Mtbaughs, yes the Dyno operator put in the vehicle weight, he seemed knowledgeable about the dyno.
Thanks for the great info so far.
--------------------
91 Mustang GT ET: 11.92@115
66 Mustang ET: 11.43@119
01 Audi S4 ET: 10.8@131
05 Audi S4 ET: 11.9@116
08 Audi S5 ET: 11.9@118
Posts: 416 | From: Lathrop | Registered: Mar 2004
| :
|
|
Hungry Hippo
¯
Member # 537
|
posted
that is pretty low. my 302 made 307hp/320tq with a smaller cam and afr 165 heads 11:1 a/f too
--------------------
05 S4 Avant(wagon)
09 C6 H/C/I
Posts: 2959 | From: east bay | Registered: Nov 2001
| :
|
|
2stangs69-91
¯
Member # 1951
|
posted
hmmmm I would have expected better numbers even with the compression you are running. Did you CC everything and are sure about the compression you are running? i wouldn't waste my time with longtubes just yet they aren't smog legal any how. if I was you I would run it with a off road pipe just to make sure you don't have a melted Catalytic converter.
--------------------
69 Mustang on hold
1991 LX hatch getting a make over
1994 F150 4X4 351
2006 Yamaha V-max 1200 Modded
Posts: 3711 | From: Redding | Registered: Oct 2002
| :
|
|
jaybquick
¯
Member # 4286
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by 2stangs69-91:
hmmmm I would have expected better numbers even with the compression you are running. Did you CC everything and are sure about the compression you are running? i wouldn't waste my time with longtubes just yet they aren't smog legal any how. if I was you I would run it with a off road pipe just to make sure you don't have a melted Catalytic converter.
everything was blueprinted and the block was zero decked. I plan on switching the whole exhaust system out and then just swap back at smog time.
I am considering the new Flowmaster header back kit that is 3" all the way. This way I will have room for a blower down the road.
--------------------
91 Mustang GT ET: 11.92@115
66 Mustang ET: 11.43@119
01 Audi S4 ET: 10.8@131
05 Audi S4 ET: 11.9@116
08 Audi S5 ET: 11.9@118
Posts: 416 | From: Lathrop | Registered: Mar 2004
| :
|
|
|
Email this post to someone!
Printer friendly view of this Ford topic
