I will be updating this thread throughout my tuning experience. This is the first time I've attempted to do a full tune on my own. KevinD does everything on this car, including the engine build and tune on E85. I've been wanting to get to this for quite a while, but only had time recently. I got really tired of driving 30m out of my way to get E85, so I decided to finally make the switch over to 93. Details of my build can be seen in my signature.

After the first night over about 4 hours, I was able to get my injectors dialed in with the lows and mids within 3%. Over the past two nights, I've been messing around with the fuel map only, trying to get my AFRs in line, leaving the timing ultra conservative and boost map low.

A note about the tire size, I'm still running the 225/35/17s the previous owner installed. That will be remedied soon. That is the reason for the tire diameter.

EDIT: Originally, I included a comparison pull from the E85 tune. Due to the incompatibility, I'm showing only the results from my 93 tuning.

Please share any thoughts, criticisms, concerns. I'm hoping to get my AFRs dialed into 12 during spool up, 11.5 at peak, tapering to 11 at redline. We'll see how close I can get. So far, I'm having trouble getting the AFRs to do what I want. After that, I will work on the timing. After I have found where my limit is, I will start turning up the boost. I find it very interesting that the boost curve creeps up to 24psi. I have the WGDC set to 20 across the board from 3500 on.



-Acree

 

EDIT: Saved.

-Acree

 

i'd do some searches on here for VD and settings. Enough people seem to swear by it on here I think something has to be screwy in your settings to need that weight setting.

 

Mustang dyno afaik have different load adjustment by the user on the real thing. I dynoed my car at stm and was unable to get md vd to be spot on like dyno jet users claim. Also ive always noticed a significant difference in shape of curve despite peaks being close

 

So when last tuned you made 615 in Mustang mode??? Or was it on a mustang dyno, if so whos? You should not have to compensate with your vehicle weight to get VD to read correctly, You should enter everything as your car is. Perhaps post up a log in Dynojet mode as im used to seeing that a lot more often.

Also the blacks do not like to run under 25 PSI they just want to creep up there everytime you try to run lower.


Also just noticed your on 10.5:1 pistons very interested to see how much your able to push the 93.

 

Due to the disparity, I'm going to simply show VD numbers only. There's no sense in trying to compare two incomparable things.


It was ON a mustang dyno. The dyno is the one used by EvoD for every dyno tune they do now. I'm also very interested to see where I can push 93 oct to.

-Acree

 

I taught my self to tune as well. Take your time and make small adjustments. You might shoot for a little lower in pumpgas just for some cushion. Post up some logs.

 

I've found when using VD, using the VD mode, not Dynojet, it was within 3hp of a true Dynojet. Tried it on two different cars with similar results. The actual dynojet mode added like 30-40hp