EvoJoeIX

iTrader: (16)

I read and gave my opinion on that cars numbers....

It seems like all your after is trying to justify your numbers, so ill let you be. Have a good day

localtoys73

iTrader: (24)

if the dyno is a tuning tool as you call it then dont come here posting (heartbreaker dyno, low low reading dyno) If it reads 15% less then the dynojet down the street then it is like every other mustang dyno. Im sure the car drives great but with those numbers even on a mustang dyno I would have gone with an fp red.

emotart

iTrader: (15)

Oh sorry, I forgot that clearly you know everything about my set up, tune and the dyno I was on. There were Caliber SRTs that should make 330whp making 300whp, a Civic SI that should be making close to 190whp making 160whp. Is there a problem with every car that dyno'd? The dyno was consistantly reading 10-12% low all day. This is a fact unlike your opinion. Opinions are like *******s, everyone has one and they stink.

I was sharing this so people could see the power curve. I have already said there are some limiting factors in the setup that will really let the car shine, but it isn't drastically worse than any other stock motor 3076 that I have seen.

EvoJoeIX

iTrader: (16)

Glad someone else gets it

EvoJoeIX

iTrader: (16)

And what are you rambling on about what cars "should" be making and what they actually make? What numbers come up on the screen is what it makes.

I can sit here all day and say my car SHOULD make 650whp, but it wont.

EVERYONE has a 500whp car until they actually get on a dyno

emotart

iTrader: (15)

So if I go down the road to the DynoJet and make 400whp and 350wtq then its ok because its on par with other 3076 cars even though I have done nothing to change the setup? Ok make sense...

EvoJoeIX

iTrader: (16)

Why not stop playing the number game and go do it. See what it actually makes

But my statement still will stand that the numbers are weak

emotart

iTrader: (15)

The cars should have been making those numbers based on forum results of the same mods, which is how you are basing your opinion of my car. Call the kettle black much? When I get to the track I'm sure the times and ET will show that the dyno read low, but I'm sure you'll try to say something else is wrong. Internet tuners/bench racers are awesome.

Also, I did not want to run an FP turbo. I personally know multiple people that have had their Reds fail prematurely. My car is a blast to drive and has so much more top end than I did with the stock turbo. I'm definitely not angered by making power after 5.8k now.

EvoJoeIX

iTrader: (16)

Im basing what numbers it should be making stictly on turbo size. Im not going off of what other peoples cars made....YOU ARE

Internet tuner/benchracing? I never once said anything about the tune on the car or refered to racing at all.

The only thing people cant dispute, is trap speed. Thats where you see the power of a car

jameswwt

Great sharing...

Evoryder

iTrader: (55)

Prob needs tweaking...for some reason the AF doesn't sit well with me. 93 oct and 28 psi should go for 11.0 not 10.5. Also why are you letting off so early. You said it pulls all the way to 8k(which it seems like it's doing) but you let off mid to high 6k rpm?

Good luck.

emotart

iTrader: (15)

Where do you see that? The last line is 7280rpm and my scanner chopped off the sides. The AFR dips below 10.5 up top which the dyno won't read, that's why it looks like the green AFR line goes away, which I pointed out in my first post. Also, this is a very conservative tune. I'm sure it could be pushed more, but i didn't want that. I wanted a safe, fun car and thats what this has turned out to be.

emotart

iTrader: (15)

So you are looking at the flow rate of a turbo and ignoring everything else about the tuning process? Cam, IC, hell even intake selection (as Buschur proved) all effect the numbers. I'm sure the stock location is hurting tons, whereas if I went to a T3 setup I'd see some major gains. Also, as I have said numerous times, this is tuned conservatively so drivability and reliability were of more concern than pushing the car and making a number that would vary from dyno to dyno anyway. I worried about the consistencies not the maybes. Drivability and reliability are going to be consistent with my car, but what it puts down on a Mustang, Dyno Pack, DynoJet, Virtual Dyno and so on will always be different.

awdboosted

iTrader: (30)

I dyno with 2.0L and GT3076R on 93. Here is a comparison for you.

Supporting Mods:
Cosworth M2
1050FIC
Walbro 255HP
AMS FMIC
2.5 IC pipes
AEM EMS 1
Full 3inch exhaust
Shearer Header with GT3076R .63 exhaust housing
20-22 psi

emotart

iTrader: (15)

^ Was that a T3 set up? You are also running more aggressive cams and a better FMIC, so you should be making more than me, not to mention that is a DynoJet vs a Mustang dyno. If I was on a DynoJet, I would have been closer to 400whp and 355wtq. The power difference could be from the flow of the AMS IC and the more aggressive cam. I'm also on the stock ECU vs your AEM EMS. Mivec is clearly helping your spool and helping the power. There was a thread where the guy turned Mivec off then on to show the difference in spool and power. Mivec on was much earlier spool and a bit more power.

If you want to compare things we need to stop comparing apples to oranges. If someone that has similar mods as me and was on a Mustang dyno, you are more than welcomed to post your results.