A local mustang club was sponsoring a dyno day. It was a mustang dyno. The main reason why I dynoed was to check my A/F, which was good. Here are the results
Brookspeed 91 tune 283 RWHP/ 307 RWTQ A/F 12.6
Bamachips 91tq 301 RWHP/308 RWTQ A/F 12.9
These numbers seem a little high for a mustang dyno.
He said the bama was higher not only because it was a little leaner, but also there is more timing in this tune. He told me to add 1% in my Brooksspeed at the upper RPM range. I did this and the car feels faster.

The hp/tq curve on both pulls are nearly the same.

 

Thanks for the info

 

Good deal. I saw similar differences on my comparison. Brenspeed snd Tillman were 306 and Bama was 320.

 

Off topic but how do u like your exhaust setup? Loud/quiet/raspy/deep and throaty?

 

I like my exhaust set-up. Throaty and maybe a hint of raspiness. It's loud at startup and when you step on it. During normal driving it's fairly quiet. If you are looking for the 2v or 4v sound, this is not the setup. Sounds closer to a 60-70s muscle car without the cams.

 

Are the mufflers you have chambered or hollow? Im assuming hollow if you have raspiness. As I have a raspy setup as well. In the process of ordering magnaflows that are chambered so I can fiz my issues and get rid of the resonators.

 

They are straight thru.

 

Yeah but post up that graph, the bump had nearly 15RWHP. That was torque converter/shift related. Brent and I didn't have that happen in our tune. I remember our RWHP and RWTQ being slightly higher than both competitors all the way through the entire curve.

 

lol, well who's tune do you think im running Chris? lol yours. Sending u PM about off topic items.

 

I dynoed my car about 3mths ago on a dyno jet, and the brookspeed and bama tunes dynoed nearly identical numbers. I don't know why this time on the mustang brooksspeed dyoned 283/307 and bama dynoed 301/308. I have heard/read that brookssped tunes are more conservative to start; nonetheless, I use his tune quite often.

 

If they're identical tunes than what you ran back on the Dynojet, it was probably the tune conditions. I don't trust Mustang Dynos whatsoever. What Intake Air Temp and Engine Coolant Temp did you run them at? Some tuners who base their tunes off of SCT value files will find timing added in if the car is colder and obviously pulled if the car is getting too warm. If you ran one below this intake air temp or engine coolant temp threshold, it's possible one received and extra degree of timing or so because it was ran cooler.

I'm not talking about running it cold, either. It could have been 150-160 ECT and it could have added a degree, and then when you ran it the second time at lets say 180 ECT, it could have been where it was warm enough not to add.

We don't set up our files the same way as them, but this is something we see all the time.

Point blank... Ourselves, Bamachips, Brenspeed, VMP, and Brooks will all net you roughly the same RWHP/RWTQ as long as the run conditions are roughly the same. If not, there might be an adjustment needed, a variable in the dyno run itself or a dyno artifact, etc.

Try another dyno pull... get both IAT's and ECT's to match... get the ECT to roughly 180, and try and get the IAT's about the same on both pulls. I'll bet the results are nearly the same. The curve is the same because the tuner, for the most part, doesn't create the curve. Your motor is your motor. At its' full potential it's going to pull what its' going to pull. The only thing we can do is lower or raise the curve based on timing and AFR. We can change the curve with forced induction. We can hurt the curve with drivetrain issues or fuel/spark delivery issues. But when the car is healthy it's going to have the same curve from both tuners.

Eric Brooks is a good guy, and his tunes are great. I know his file would compete with Dougs with fair conditions.

Chris Rose

 

LOL I know, I'm busting *****! Checking my PMs now!

Chris

 

I am not too sure about the temps, but I think don't think air temps were temps were too far off from each other. I would say both days were in mid 60s. The tuner who was running they dyno commented on Eric's tune saying that he know his stuff. He said that the Bama tune looked a little more aggressive. He said I could add 1% in the upper rpm range on the brookssped tune, which I did and it seems a little more responsive.

 

I think any difference in the 15-20rwhp is negligible anyway. Just run the tune that feels better.

 

If you didn't have it set up to datalog, there's no way to know for sure... even if both days were the same temperature, you could still have an ECT or IAT separation of 20 degrees or more. It only takes maybe 10 degrees to add or remove a degree of timing. Just mentioning it to you... it's not even my tune in question. I just think if you datalog and re-test both in 100% identical conditions they'll be alot closer together.

 

I bet you are right, as both tunes perform nearly identical at the track.