cheftjpeck

Well, I have to say, I went and did 2 pulls today for my car and it was drastically improved from the other day. I have determined the other place did not know how to pull an auto. This guy went through the gears and he locked in 4th for the test....i have posted my old numbers and todays numbers....HUGE difference...old were 258hp and 263 torque on a dynajet...today on a mustang dynamometer they are 300.8 hp and 304. tourque...also....FREDS TUNE is not lean....12.63 was the avg.....took at header...temp today is 59 the other day it was 75...

[IMG]local://upfiles/42783/E68D1DB90F774D86B3384CC9923F3543.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]local://upfiles/42783/3F17AD1B960A4C3BB04FBCB246E0A854.jpg[/IMG]

WhiteStallion06

well im glad we got that all cleared up .... congrats man i knew there had to be something wrong there .

06SSGT

Wow. Mustang dynos read lower than Dynojets so your numbers are actually better than that. Nice!

Johnnie D

Mustnag dyno read TRUE numbers....good job....thats more like it

cheftjpeck

yeah...I actually felt allot better about these numbers....it does not make sense why or how the other place screwed up my #'s so bad...the only thing I can say is that the other place ran my car differently for the test....this guy seemed to take more time to peak up...then punch it...he also shifted through the gears at first...i talked to him about 4th gear lockout and he claimed to just test in 3rd...1:1 ..I explained that according to many of you all he needs to lockout in 4th...so I assume he did to produce these numbers which are on a Mustang Dynamometer. ..perfect weather for pulls today also....under 60 and no humidity

Daniel60

pay the 50 bucks and get the Brenspeed tune you will get even more horsepower. I have tried both and Brenspeed is far superior just like Brenspeed has better customer service.

ecrawf01

i'm not sure what you mean about 4th gear lockout, but i think you need it in 4th gear because 4th is 1:1, not 3rd like old aods.

cheftjpeck

have 2 of brenspeeds tunes already thx

UrS4

Cheftjpeck,

Thank you for the new information. I am sure you are resting easier now that Fred's tune is not too lean. I guess the cats on these cars can make a drastic difference.

It is interesting how some people put up similar numbers when they have an A/F measured at the tailpipe of 12.5, while some have a similar A/F at the cat, and now you have a nice safe A/F measured at the header. I guess by the A/F readings you had of high 14s at the tailpipe, low 14s at the cat and now mid 12s in the header that the A/F changes quite a bit in a short distance of exhaust pipe. By this logic though all those people that have their tunes running 12.5 at the tailpipe or cat are running really rich and they are not putting down their true potential.

How much did it cost to have a bung welded into the header?


Thanks again for the info.

Someday I will have to get a bung welded in and maybe I will retry Fred's tune or Brent's or both.

However, my current custom tune puts down better numbers than Fred's and has an A/F of 12.4 at the cat (factory O2 bung) so it may be running a little rich.

vsop

Actually Mustang Dynos numbers can read anything. Which is why I will never use one.
You can make them read any number you want. The whole thing about a mustang dyno reading lower then a Dynojet is BS.
Plus a mustang dyno can give wrong numbers just by the dyno tech entering a single wrong number when setting up for the car.
Notice how they have a weight listed for the car on the sheet, that actually has an effect on the dyno numbers.

I get so tired of people posting things they know nothing about. Love how the partyline works with internet boards


And yes Coastal is a Great shop and I trust their work. I just stick with Dynojets for my numbers (But I go to a guy I trust, who I can count on).

Cheftjpeck - Glad to see you got some good numbers down now. I had a hard time trusting the last ones.. I dynoed mine yesterday morning.
Here are my result thread https://mustangforums.com/m_2377098/tm.htm

Did you ask if these numbers are SAE corrected..? I don't see it anywhere on the sheet. I know mine were a .95 correction factor. so the 321.79 on the sheet was actually putting down just under 339rwhp & 357rwtq to the rollers with weather conditions at the time of the pulls.