DYNO SAYS......
ORIGINAL: 98LS1
They told me it was calibrated to take into effect the weight of the car and so forth. They said it would be lower than a dynojet. They said a stock GT would post around 215 on thier machine.
I've been told that you can program a Mustang dyno to dyno actual road conditions or just to measure the hp. More than likely, yours was set to just measure the hp, much like a dynojet. Still pretty decent numbers.
ORIGINAL: Red 5
ORIGINAL: 98LS1
They told me it was calibrated to take into effect the weight of the car and so forth. They said it would be lower than a dynojet. They said a stock GT would post around 215 on thier machine.
ORIGINAL: 98LS1
I've been told that you can program a Mustang dyno to dyno actual road conditions or just to measure the hp. More than likely, yours was set to just measure the hp, much like a dynojet. Still pretty decent numbers.
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
It is competely impossible to be making 350 RWHP with your listed mods. You dont even have anything done to your intake side according to your cardomain pictures.
350 RWHP requires headwork and an intake manifold. You would know if you had either of these done.
Full boltons is usually good for about 275 RWHP. I can see 300 RWHP with cams and a super good tune (as well as a factory freak to start with), but just barely 300 RWHP.
I reference this with what is reported to be the fastest N/A 2v car on the planet :
http://forums.modulardepot.com/flyshow.php?&showid=150
BTW you might be able to pull that 11.96 bs on cardomain, but it isnt gonna happen here. MD ran an 11.96 on cammed/blower car making 425 at the wheels, and that was with drag radials and control arms.
It is competely impossible to be making 350 RWHP with your listed mods. You dont even have anything done to your intake side according to your cardomain pictures.
350 RWHP requires headwork and an intake manifold. You would know if you had either of these done.
Full boltons is usually good for about 275 RWHP. I can see 300 RWHP with cams and a super good tune (as well as a factory freak to start with), but just barely 300 RWHP.
I reference this with what is reported to be the fastest N/A 2v car on the planet :
http://forums.modulardepot.com/flyshow.php?&showid=150
BTW you might be able to pull that 11.96 bs on cardomain, but it isnt gonna happen here. MD ran an 11.96 on cammed/blower car making 425 at the wheels, and that was with drag radials and control arms.
ORIGINAL: 98LS1
Well, in that case sounds like you have a hell of a freak my friend. I think MD and JD only put down a little over 270rwhp with full bolt ons.
Oh yeah, RedStangGT2000 & grabbem88 should start thier own Pi$$in match post.
ORIGINAL: RedStangGT2000
YOUR WRONG I have told you what i've done and yes 350 HP so fug off.
Once I add Nitrous who knows[
]
YOUR WRONG I have told you what i've done and yes 350 HP so fug off.
Once I add Nitrous who knows[
]
ROFL.
As I said, that BS might walk on car domain, it isnt gonna walk here. We know what a mustang will and will not make. I can give you facutal sources all day long if you want.
BTW i like how you said about swapping cams again "They didn't mess up I just went a little bigger". There isnt anywhere to go with a 4.6. Virtually all of the camshafts that will work with a stock motor/cams are identical. The only choice is wiether you want to do valvesprings or not. No set of stock engine cams are going to make more than 5-8 more RWHP than another set. The major differences only happen with high RPM setups, and setups with head/intake work. At that point you start to trade down low torque for top end HP.
As I said, dont bull**** on here. The people on here have acutally done the things you are talking about. I am frequently in Quincy, IL btw, if you wanna drive there sometime in the spring/summer


