St. Louis Dyno day results...
OMG I've turned into ski!!!
Mach 1 Member
Joined: October 13, 2004
Posts: 985
Likes: 6
This is OneMeanMarine's or Mark's runs.This was one we made a baseline pull with his stock intake, run001, then his intake 002 and then my tune, stock Ford MAF and 87 tune because all he has was 87 and he knew it. Still, he made a nice gain over stock with the 87 tune, good A/F and CAI.
I'll post the rest later...
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_001.drf
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_002.drf
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_003.drf
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_004.drf
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_005.drf
I'll post the rest later...
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_001.drf
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_002.drf
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_003.drf
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_004.drf
http://users.wildblue.net/bamachips/...unFile_005.drf
Are you saying the net gain between stock and CAI w/tune is a 2-1/2 HP loss and only a 3 TQ gain?
What brand CAI was this?
Mach 1 Member
Joined: October 13, 2004
Posts: 985
Likes: 6
Maybe this is the wrong thread for this but I was hoping that this was going to show some good representative numbers for an independent dyno of a car (or cars) with:
I had trouble with the DynoJet software so can someone summarize stats for the above if it did happen?
I would appreciate it since I had trouble reading the dyno files.
- Stock run - stock air box - no tune.
- GMS - CAI w/GMS MAF - no tune.
- GMS - CAI w/stock MAF and 87 tune.
- GMS - CAI w/stock MAF and 91 tune.
I had trouble with the DynoJet software so can someone summarize stats for the above if it did happen?
I would appreciate it since I had trouble reading the dyno files.
Bullitt Member
Joined: October 30, 2006
Posts: 492
Likes: 1
Maybe this is the wrong thread for this but I was hoping that this was going to show some good representative numbers for an independent dyno of a car (or cars) with:
I had trouble with the DynoJet software so can someone summarize stats for the above if it did happen?
I would appreciate it since I had trouble reading the dyno files.
- Stock run - stock air box - no tune.
- GMS - CAI w/GMS MAF - no tune.
- GMS - CAI w/stock MAF and 87 tune.
- GMS - CAI w/stock MAF and 91 tune.
I had trouble with the DynoJet software so can someone summarize stats for the above if it did happen?
I would appreciate it since I had trouble reading the dyno files.
Fords4Ever: great post... I've got the same concerns. It would be extremely helpful to see a completely stock 2006GT (87 octane) baseline dyno... then, ONLY adding the GMS CAI w/ GMS MAF (no tune, 87 octane) on the exact same car, same dyno settings and showing dyno results... this should end all the finger-pointing/name calling and show the true gain of the GMS CAI w/ GMS MAF.. should it not? Doug, et al., can you help us?
Cobra R Member
Joined: November 12, 2004
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Well you guys you cant have it every different way. We didnt run a tank of gas then change, then run a tank of differnt gas then change, then run a different tank then change. this dyno day was for us to see what was going on and to update are tunes, not to make every pull known with every octane of gas in are cars, with gms maf, stock maf, you get the idea. I did a gms with there maf and stock tune, that was one of yours requested. I also did a gms cai stock maf, and updated tune with proper a/f listed. This was all done with 93 octane gas, no others. Most of the other cars were modded to some point other than a cai and axlebacks, I think there was one other car with pretty much same set up but he had a mixed tank of gas, so not really going to get that exact either. Most everything we did on the gms has been posted. If you have any specifics I suggest you call or talk with doug. Or get your car dyno'd and there you have it.
Bullitt Member
Joined: October 30, 2006
Posts: 492
Likes: 1
Well you guys you cant have it every different way. We didnt run a tank of gas then change, then run a tank of differnt gas then change, then run a different tank then change. this dyno day was for us to see what was going on and to update are tunes, not to make every pull known with every octane of gas in are cars, with gms maf, stock maf, you get the idea. I did a gms with there maf and stock tune, that was one of yours requested. I also did a gms cai stock maf, and updated tune with proper a/f listed. This was all done with 93 octane gas, no others. Most of the other cars were modded to some point other than a cai and axlebacks, I think there was one other car with pretty much same set up but he had a mixed tank of gas, so not really going to get that exact either. Most everything we did on the gms has been posted. If you have any specifics I suggest you call or talk with doug. If you really need that much info I suggest you go to the dyno and do all the swapping of parts and swapping gas tanks etc to get your results. Dont mean to sound mean but come on guys this was just to check to make sure we had a good tune. If you want to make sure you have one get a dyno day together and test till your hearts content, so that we here at tms can bash every posting you have so that everyone goes crazy, LOL. Just a comparison of this thread. If you are a non believer of the posts, put your money where your mouth is, get it dynoed and witnessed and video,and post your results. Good luck
Thread Starter
Legacy TMS Member
Joined: July 28, 2004
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
First off I would like to say this again....
You cannot go by the Max number on the dyno runs on the runs made with the STOCK tune because of the converter spike at 4800 rpm's but rather you can compare the gains through out the curve to show the increase in Hp and Tq.
The weird loop-de-loop inflates the numbers from the stock runs because the dynosoftware looks for the largest number during the run to put up as the max power number. Now, the way you CAN compare these runs is looking at the graphs and comparing the gains overall in the curve. This is why I put the cursor at different point to show you the overall gains at different RPMs.
OneMeanMarine's car was done exactly like you are asking, we did a stock baseline, run 001, then a intake run run 002, and then a tuned intake run with 87 octane fuel, run 004.
Then I put the cursor at 4814 rpm's and it shows a gain with the CAI and no tune of 222rwhp to 229rwhp 7rwhp 243 rwtq to 250 rwtq so 7 rwtq gain. The gain with the tune is uptp 240 rwhp and 262 rwtq so with this is shows a gain of 7rwhp and 7rwtq with just the intake and then 11rwhp and 19 rwtq with the intake and tune.
If you would like to compare them more at different points on the graphs just download the free software from dynojet.com and then download the files I've posted and then you can compare them anywhere on the RPM band.
Thanks, Doug.
You cannot go by the Max number on the dyno runs on the runs made with the STOCK tune because of the converter spike at 4800 rpm's but rather you can compare the gains through out the curve to show the increase in Hp and Tq.
The weird loop-de-loop inflates the numbers from the stock runs because the dynosoftware looks for the largest number during the run to put up as the max power number. Now, the way you CAN compare these runs is looking at the graphs and comparing the gains overall in the curve. This is why I put the cursor at different point to show you the overall gains at different RPMs.
OneMeanMarine's car was done exactly like you are asking, we did a stock baseline, run 001, then a intake run run 002, and then a tuned intake run with 87 octane fuel, run 004.
Then I put the cursor at 4814 rpm's and it shows a gain with the CAI and no tune of 222rwhp to 229rwhp 7rwhp 243 rwtq to 250 rwtq so 7 rwtq gain. The gain with the tune is uptp 240 rwhp and 262 rwtq so with this is shows a gain of 7rwhp and 7rwtq with just the intake and then 11rwhp and 19 rwtq with the intake and tune.
If you would like to compare them more at different points on the graphs just download the free software from dynojet.com and then download the files I've posted and then you can compare them anywhere on the RPM band.
Thanks, Doug.
Thread Starter
Legacy TMS Member
Joined: July 28, 2004
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Fords4Ever: great post... I've got the same concerns. It would be extremely helpful to see a completely stock 2006GT (87 octane) baseline dyno... then, ONLY adding the CAI w/ MAF (no tune, 87 octane) on the exact same car, same dyno settings and showing dyno results... this should end all the finger-pointing/name calling and show the true gain of the CAI w/ GMS MAF.. should it not? Doug, et al., can you help us?
Run one is with the stock baseline tune with 87 and run 2 is with his intake and still without a tune.
Here's the two runs. This shows the gains and the a/f ratio from both using 87 octane fuel. I put the pointer on the graph to show the best gains from it and it made 8rwhp and 10 rwtq at 5923 rpm's.
Bullitt Member
Joined: October 30, 2006
Posts: 492
Likes: 1
Appreciate you taking the time to re-explain these Doug... so it appears that both Sodaman's and Mark's data shows that using their CAIs, without a tune, pushed both of their a/f mixes to the lean side (Sodaman's was running around 15+, while Mark was running around 14+ (with just their CAIs, and no tune). Is this correct?
Thread Starter
Legacy TMS Member
Joined: July 28, 2004
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Appreciate you taking the time to re-explain these Doug... so it appears that both Sodaman's and Mark's data shows that using their CAIs, without a tune, pushed both of their a/f mixes to the lean side (Sodaman's was running around 15+, while Mark was running around 14+ (with just their CAIs, and no tune). Is this correct?
Member
Joined: January 5, 2005
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Doug,
I know you've been super busy. Any chance you could post my results? I was #10, the only MT.
I have replaced the bad MAF (temp readings 40 degrees high!) and am on second tank of 93. I've setup Live Link and am still seeing the rapid oscillation in timing you noticed. Any ideas on something else I could try?
thanks!
Dan
I know you've been super busy. Any chance you could post my results? I was #10, the only MT.
I have replaced the bad MAF (temp readings 40 degrees high!) and am on second tank of 93. I've setup Live Link and am still seeing the rapid oscillation in timing you noticed. Any ideas on something else I could try?
thanks!
Dan
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
