2006 ix rs
stock uncrushed bpv
hks 272's
buschur dp
ebay o2
AEM uego wired to ECU
perrin silicone intake
stock turbo, injen LICP
hallman

ambient temp was in the 20*f

This will be my thread for updates and progress, the runs were started at different RPM for me to see how it performed at various starting points, in the end they all tightened right up to be what i think is fairly consistent. They are literally back back runs. Obviously the shape of the curve says it needs more tuning, but this is the progress I make when I have frozen tundra for roads. Im still rich in the majority of the good power area. Ive been leaning it out since, but havent done a bunch of logs to put in the VDR. Please take note, I am still very much yet a novice tuner. I did take out 1 degree in a couple cells at the topend, and a couple near cruise since the logs, and that is reflected in my img

Constructive criticism is highly appreciate especially from those who can

 

u running stock fmic and stock cat back with cat?

 

looks pretty good. lots more torque to be had tho. next time post the dynojet numbers so people can see your real numbers.. the VD uncorrected numbers read a little low so people will mistake the results as not so hot..

 

I will change the cf for the next ones.

I did leave out the magnaflow ti and test pipe on accident. As well as the pte 1000cc injectors. Forgetful me.

 

Oh yes stock fmic too...mobile theme needs edit button

 

ok thanks for the info.

 

Great numbers. When I use VDR, I use the Mustang dyno setting. I think that Dyno Jet numbers are way out of wack when it comes to track times. Also your boost profile is the same as mine. I though there was a problem with my car, however now that I have seen your curve it must be normal. @25psi I am right at 300/300 on the Mustang Dyno .95correction.

 

but this isnt VDR.. its Virtual Dyno. also the dynojet setting is dead on with a real dynojet so whats false about it? it was tested/ confirmed atleast over a dozen times on here now.

 

First, the dynojet setting on VD reads just like a real dynojet, which is the industry standard. And if you look at the "track times vs dyno #" thread, VD dynojet numbers give that same traps at the same car weight.

Next, OP, something looks off with your boost curve. You should look into that.

 

it almost looks like something isnt sync'd up cam wise (requesting timing with the 272's?)...or mivec?

im totally inexperienced with tuning evos (tuned other cars) but just some thoughts.

 

Im curious what your mivec map looks like?
If you have time please post it up.

 

Yes when I was tuning my galant the VDR/Virtual Dyno stuff was within a few %. I am not debating that. For me now I just prefer the Mustang Dyno setting. Everyone on the forums is just to hardcore about the highest number humanly possible. Take is as you will, not going to debate any further.

Did not mean to clutter up this thread.

 

Guys i thought something was wierd with that curve too. With wastegate only boost I cannot get it below 20 on the top end. It does seem to creep. I was told the eBay o2 was ported, but then again I was told the car was tuned and it clearly wasn't. I wonder if it has an adj exhaust cam.. johnny five disassemble.

 

Oh ok. I thought you were saying it wasnt accurate.

Its fine that you wanna use MD numbers, as a lot of Cali guys like to. But if you didnt know, Dynojet is the INDUSTRY standard and that is why most poeple use it. Its not at all because they are "just to hardcore about the highest number humanly possible". Thats ridiculous.

Another reason that everyone uses the "dynojet" setting is that its used by most people and it makes it easier to compare numbers.

 

I don't know of a single dyno jet in my area, stm,innovative, efi logics, andprobably more uses.the mustang. It's not just.a.correction factor in a software program, its a local representation of what's commonly available most.cases. just my thoughts. Im gonna POP the cam cover off and scope that out real quick.