My final Whipple Numbers w/ intercooler
Rob,
they could have inflated the numbers dont know. Every dyno will be different thats a given we all know that. I to was following the article closely. There is an individual on another forum who has the JDM tune with the 42lb injectors I'll try to get him in here. I'm curious as well because my Whipple goes in in April.. Tungsten Grey auto like yours. I'm with Scott as long as you are happy with the car thats all that matters.
they could have inflated the numbers dont know. Every dyno will be different thats a given we all know that. I to was following the article closely. There is an individual on another forum who has the JDM tune with the 42lb injectors I'll try to get him in here. I'm curious as well because my Whipple goes in in April.. Tungsten Grey auto like yours. I'm with Scott as long as you are happy with the car thats all that matters.
Taking it to the track could be one test---see how well it mph's.
Since your numbers have been historically lower (from the very beginning) then many others I have seen, is it possible the supercharger itself is bad? On another board there was a guy experiencing the same situation but it was a KB.
Most people post dyno numbers from a dynojet, so if you want to compare numbers you could seek out one just to see.
Lastly, do you have an auto or a manual? You should be around 470rwhp if auto, and 490rwhp manual SAE at 12psi boost with normal intake air temps.
In the end, I agree with everyone else, something is not adding up. If the runs where datalogged, I would be interested to see what your timing was a WOT and if your knock sensors pulled any timing.
Since your numbers have been historically lower (from the very beginning) then many others I have seen, is it possible the supercharger itself is bad? On another board there was a guy experiencing the same situation but it was a KB.
Most people post dyno numbers from a dynojet, so if you want to compare numbers you could seek out one just to see.
Lastly, do you have an auto or a manual? You should be around 470rwhp if auto, and 490rwhp manual SAE at 12psi boost with normal intake air temps.
In the end, I agree with everyone else, something is not adding up. If the runs where datalogged, I would be interested to see what your timing was a WOT and if your knock sensors pulled any timing.
Thread Starter
Team Mustang Source



Joined: August 3, 2005
Posts: 1,652
Likes: 3
From: Mustang/Tuttle, Oklahoma
http://www.youtube.com/profile_video...rsrsecserv&p=r
here's the link........only the indoor dyno vids are from yesterday.......the others are from last June when Doug came to Yukon, Ok. I posted this on the BMMC page too.
here's the link........only the indoor dyno vids are from yesterday.......the others are from last June when Doug came to Yukon, Ok. I posted this on the BMMC page too.
Just Picked Up My Car Today, Paxton 2200 Ho, 10 Lb Pulley, Ford Racing Headers, Ported Heads, Diamond Forged Pistons, Manley Forged Rods, Stock Crank Polished And Balanced, Gt-500 Fuel Pump [must Have]. 2006 Shelby Gt-h.........493 Horses, 476 Lbs. Torque.
+1, I brought it up in the first post but haven't read the entire thread to see if its been fully answered or not?
Rob,
Something that hasn't been asked yet, and I know the Granetelli turbo car had the same thing happen, are the charge motion plates open? Or do you have them deleted? Didn't see them in your sig, so was just wondering if they stayed open.
Something that hasn't been asked yet, and I know the Granetelli turbo car had the same thing happen, are the charge motion plates open? Or do you have them deleted? Didn't see them in your sig, so was just wondering if they stayed open.
Whole new intake with the whipple, kb, saleen. these are eliminated.
Hey guys,
The dyno we were using was a Dynojet 248 but the software it was running was the old version 6.0.3. Still I truly dont think that was an issue, as long as it was a dynojet then that was fine. The bad thing about using the older software was that it didn't have a Boost monitor available for it, like I have with my dynojet and using the analog module. I didn't watch the boost as I watch the a/f and RPM on the monitor when running the dyno and tuning. This can be easily found out from a passenger riding along with Robbie when ever he gets a chance.
As for timing it was in the 16-17 degree range which when using 91 octane fuel, somethat that hasn't been talked about here, is on the high side. At the end I did put 18-19.5 degree's in it only to watch it taken out by the knock sensor and even see the power drop off by 2-3 hp. Remember guys this is an Automatic car, on manual Whipple cars with the 500hp kit I've seen 450-475 rwhp right out of the box but there again these are manual's, auto's are considerably lower.
When compared to the MM&FF car I think its right inline when using 91 octane fuel. We did do back to back pulls so if 30-45 minutes of cool down time was allowed it may have made 10-15 more rwhp mainly because these s/c's are prown to heat soak, ask any Cobra or Lightning owner with one. especially at the track.
The funny thing with their car, project MILF, is the injectors that they " Require" for this. That's just not right as the Manual uses the same injectors as the automatics and in both configurations, with and without a intercooler. Injectors dont give Horsepower, they support it. The IAT sensor is being addressed as we speak but isn't a power adder, its only a safe guard which should be done on all Forced induction vehicles.
The car made 45-55 more rwhp over all along the curve and with minimul tuning changes, I actually removed some timing due to the increased amount of boost as should be. 480-490rwhp form an auto with just the simple intercooler and small boost increase isn't realistic, as shown with the magazine car.
Under the dynochart on the last page of the article, page 194, it says they gained 55.36 hp and 48 ftlbs of torque from their previous installation. We are right at the same gains but using the 91 octane fuel.
Thanks, Doug.
The dyno we were using was a Dynojet 248 but the software it was running was the old version 6.0.3. Still I truly dont think that was an issue, as long as it was a dynojet then that was fine. The bad thing about using the older software was that it didn't have a Boost monitor available for it, like I have with my dynojet and using the analog module. I didn't watch the boost as I watch the a/f and RPM on the monitor when running the dyno and tuning. This can be easily found out from a passenger riding along with Robbie when ever he gets a chance.
As for timing it was in the 16-17 degree range which when using 91 octane fuel, somethat that hasn't been talked about here, is on the high side. At the end I did put 18-19.5 degree's in it only to watch it taken out by the knock sensor and even see the power drop off by 2-3 hp. Remember guys this is an Automatic car, on manual Whipple cars with the 500hp kit I've seen 450-475 rwhp right out of the box but there again these are manual's, auto's are considerably lower.
When compared to the MM&FF car I think its right inline when using 91 octane fuel. We did do back to back pulls so if 30-45 minutes of cool down time was allowed it may have made 10-15 more rwhp mainly because these s/c's are prown to heat soak, ask any Cobra or Lightning owner with one. especially at the track.
The funny thing with their car, project MILF, is the injectors that they " Require" for this. That's just not right as the Manual uses the same injectors as the automatics and in both configurations, with and without a intercooler. Injectors dont give Horsepower, they support it. The IAT sensor is being addressed as we speak but isn't a power adder, its only a safe guard which should be done on all Forced induction vehicles.
The car made 45-55 more rwhp over all along the curve and with minimul tuning changes, I actually removed some timing due to the increased amount of boost as should be. 480-490rwhp form an auto with just the simple intercooler and small boost increase isn't realistic, as shown with the magazine car.
Under the dynochart on the last page of the article, page 194, it says they gained 55.36 hp and 48 ftlbs of torque from their previous installation. We are right at the same gains but using the 91 octane fuel.
Thanks, Doug.
Thread Starter
Team Mustang Source



Joined: August 3, 2005
Posts: 1,652
Likes: 3
From: Mustang/Tuttle, Oklahoma
Doug, I see you got my email about posting a response on this thread to answer some questions. Thank you!
I don't want anyone to misunderstand.......I'm not complaining at all, This thread was started to answer numerous pm's from members who have asked me about Whipple numbers because they are considering a whipple. Please don't let these numbers scare you off from buying a whipple, especially you manual guys. I'm very happy with it. I never thought an automatic could feel this powerful.
I don't want anyone to misunderstand.......I'm not complaining at all, This thread was started to answer numerous pm's from members who have asked me about Whipple numbers because they are considering a whipple. Please don't let these numbers scare you off from buying a whipple, especially you manual guys. I'm very happy with it. I never thought an automatic could feel this powerful.
So what kind of power did the other cars make..the turbo and the Rouscharger..?
Sorry haven't got back to you Jeff , just been busy and really upset with that horrible, large, ugly and BLUE air filter that I had to put on the car for the dyno run..
Don't have that chart with all those lines on it close to me, but think there was a five and a three and maybe another five but not sure, when I find that sheet will let you know,
I know you have always shown a lot of interest in that little red car of mine...but I have to address the apperance problem first,
Don't know how I let that BLUE filter get by me.
Don't have that chart with all those lines on it close to me, but think there was a five and a three and maybe another five but not sure, when I find that sheet will let you know,
I know you have always shown a lot of interest in that little red car of mine...but I have to address the apperance problem first,
Don't know how I let that BLUE filter get by me.
How about you start a thread? Myself and i'm sure other people would like to know the details!


