***!!! Please read my post below first !!!***

It seems that BAMA needs to better explain their claim, which misled me to the conclusions posted below, there is a 21/34 gain, however it is in the low mid-range:



Which to further "egg-up" my face is exactly what I have been telling people for years about tuning a dead stock New-Edge--it IS 110% worth it regardless of the minimal peak gains...

================================================== ===========
As many of you know, I am pretty good at math and tuning even if I do say myself. So when I received this banner ad email from A/M today I was greatly curious as to how their canned "93 octane" tune could deliver a 21 rwHP gain on a dead stock new-edge. when the best I have ever done was 7 to 10 HP???

Here's the boast from the email:




Here are the results of the "stock" dyno run on a 2000 GT, from the video:



221 HP/260 lb-ft at the wheels; right "on-the-money" typical for a well-maintained stock new-edge GT.


Here are the results from the "93 octane" dyno run, also from the video:



229 HP/274 lb-ft at the wheels; again pretty much what I would expect from a canned "93 octane" tune.

Note that in both of these the charts backup the numbers.

Here's the final claim:



Huh? 21 HP and 34 lb-ft gained???

Must be some new kind of engineering, different from what they taught me at MIT, as I make it a gain of 8 HP and 14 lb-ft. I find it difficult to believe this is a "mistake". I sent them an email with this info, but it got kicked back as the ad apparently came from a "noreply" address.


For the record I will state that I agree 110% a tuner should be the first "mod" a new enthusiast considers--second only, perhaps, to opening up the exhaust...


------------------------------------------------------
I realise they are a sponsor, so feel free to delete this if you wish...

 

It doesn't say 'peak gained hp/trq', so I'm guessing their claim is that they did in fact gain that much more power at some point along the power band. Look at the 3500 rpm mark, for example.

 

Yeah, this.

 

Cliffy, I've caught that before.. especially when you watch that little bid skit.! Nice find, Im curious to see what you get from them, if you continue to dig deeper. )

 

Well, I just looked at the charts and they need to be more specific as to where the pronounced gains occurred. As suggested by others it looks as tough there are gains of that magnitude down in the low- and mid- mid-range.

Ironically this is just what I have been telling people for years, and why I have always said "open up the exhaust, then get a tune/tuner" as first mods...

Maybe something like this:

 

Nowhere does it say that gain is at the wheels? Maybe at the crank?

 

It gained it at the wheels. The issue is Cliffyk believes he is mislead by the ad and that there was a 21hp/34tq gain over peak numbers. The 21/34 is accurate, just the gains are in the middle of the power band. Peak gains are 8hp/14tq

 

I saw this e-mail too. I read it the way you saw it at first. They should be more clear because now there are going to be a bunch of people saying that they have this gain over their peak numbers. Since people don't know the difference.

 

LOL
This is precisely what I was talking about in another thread.

While it is not false to say you can gain 20hp (for example), but given that statement, most guys will think in terms of peak power figures. There are many ways to improve power in places other than peak. These advertisements should probably be more specific so as not to imply that max gains are seen at peak.

 

Does this mean my 3.73s, short throw shifter, FLSFCs, and UPR LCAs don't give me 50 more horsepower?