06 GT N/A Dyno With Brenspeed cams
08-08-2012, 12:40 PM
#23
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 30
According to Drag Times there is hope. DA according to their calculator was
1660.
A far cry from the actual 33.
1660.
A far cry from the actual 33.
Stock and Mildly Modified Naturally Aspirated Engines
12.784 @ 111.108 MPH
Extensively Modified Naturally Aspirated Engines
12.89 @ 110.293 MPH
Extensively Modified Supercharged and Turbocharged Engines
12.947 @ 109.671 MPH
12.784 @ 111.108 MPH
Extensively Modified Naturally Aspirated Engines
12.89 @ 110.293 MPH
Extensively Modified Supercharged and Turbocharged Engines
12.947 @ 109.671 MPH
08-14-2012, 11:03 PM
#25
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 30
Went back tonight after 4 hours of rain lol
The rev limiter change would. not. take.
It FINALLY took and I ran a new best of 12.837 @ 109.09 MPH in 77 degrees and 90% humidity. I did this with a worse 60' of 1.901 and spinning 2nd COMPLETELY since the track was wet. LIke, literally. Rained 45 minutes prior and it never dried up. I never spin 2nd so may try Friday again when it has been dry since I SPUN to a 1.901 so if I could repeat my 1.852 or 1.873 60' times and not spin 2nd, I see a 12.700 or faster in the same conditions.
Corrected was 12.6XX @ 110.70 or some **** like that but I don't bank on them too much because simply put, I did't run those times. I am happy since it is IN the car, just need to try when a little cooler and no rain.
I did this by reloading the Tillman tune which was NOT taking my damn rev limit change. Took about 7 tries. Not so frustrated anymore haha
My ultimate goal in cooler temps is 12.4XX or faster.
The rev limiter change would. not. take.
It FINALLY took and I ran a new best of 12.837 @ 109.09 MPH in 77 degrees and 90% humidity. I did this with a worse 60' of 1.901 and spinning 2nd COMPLETELY since the track was wet. LIke, literally. Rained 45 minutes prior and it never dried up. I never spin 2nd so may try Friday again when it has been dry since I SPUN to a 1.901 so if I could repeat my 1.852 or 1.873 60' times and not spin 2nd, I see a 12.700 or faster in the same conditions.
Corrected was 12.6XX @ 110.70 or some **** like that but I don't bank on them too much because simply put, I did't run those times. I am happy since it is IN the car, just need to try when a little cooler and no rain.
I did this by reloading the Tillman tune which was NOT taking my damn rev limit change. Took about 7 tries. Not so frustrated anymore haha
My ultimate goal in cooler temps is 12.4XX or faster.
08-15-2012, 04:10 PM
#27
Went back tonight after 4 hours of rain lol
The rev limiter change would. not. take.
It FINALLY took and I ran a new best of 12.837 @ 109.09 MPH in 77 degrees and 90% humidity. I did this with a worse 60' of 1.901 and spinning 2nd COMPLETELY since the track was wet. LIke, literally. Rained 45 minutes prior and it never dried up. I never spin 2nd so may try Friday again when it has been dry since I SPUN to a 1.901 so if I could repeat my 1.852 or 1.873 60' times and not spin 2nd, I see a 12.700 or faster in the same conditions.
Corrected was 12.6XX @ 110.70 or some **** like that but I don't bank on them too much because simply put, I did't run those times. I am happy since it is IN the car, just need to try when a little cooler and no rain.
I did this by reloading the Tillman tune which was NOT taking my damn rev limit change. Took about 7 tries. Not so frustrated anymore haha
My ultimate goal in cooler temps is 12.4XX or faster.
The rev limiter change would. not. take.
It FINALLY took and I ran a new best of 12.837 @ 109.09 MPH in 77 degrees and 90% humidity. I did this with a worse 60' of 1.901 and spinning 2nd COMPLETELY since the track was wet. LIke, literally. Rained 45 minutes prior and it never dried up. I never spin 2nd so may try Friday again when it has been dry since I SPUN to a 1.901 so if I could repeat my 1.852 or 1.873 60' times and not spin 2nd, I see a 12.700 or faster in the same conditions.
Corrected was 12.6XX @ 110.70 or some **** like that but I don't bank on them too much because simply put, I did't run those times. I am happy since it is IN the car, just need to try when a little cooler and no rain.
I did this by reloading the Tillman tune which was NOT taking my damn rev limit change. Took about 7 tries. Not so frustrated anymore haha
My ultimate goal in cooler temps is 12.4XX or faster.
Car sounds sick, and I'd be really interested to hear how it runs with the rev limiter bumped, in the right conditions. The car made great power, so it's not going to be anything underlying in the tune, once the rev limiter is bumped.
Chris
08-15-2012, 04:16 PM
#28
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 30
Sounds like I can just bump up your rev limiter to 6800 for you and all will be solved. I'm the one that tuned your car, so I'll shoot a new tune with a 6800 rev limit over to Tillman Speed for you.
Car sounds sick, and I'd be really interested to hear how it runs with the rev limiter bumped, in the right conditions. The car made great power, so it's not going to be anything underlying in the tune, once the rev limiter is bumped.
Chris
Car sounds sick, and I'd be really interested to hear how it runs with the rev limiter bumped, in the right conditions. The car made great power, so it's not going to be anything underlying in the tune, once the rev limiter is bumped.
Chris
The ONLY thing I will say is that the AM email tune has waayyyyyy better throttle response vs your dyno tune. But after running both yesterday, your tune definitely was more powerful but when blipping for rev matches I literally have to mash the gas and it will not respond at times vs the email tune which is instantaneous. That is the only thing I got to complain about now since the track proved your tune was faster
I also wanted to mention that when we spoke we discussed the cams not making power hence the 6500 fuel cut off but in the dyno sheet itself it is still carrying UPWARDS until the cut, unless I am looking at it or interpreting it wrong. Just hoping there isn't "untuned' ponies up there.
Again, great work for such little tune time and the tuner itself seems to be the issue.
08-15-2012, 04:23 PM
#29
I got the limiter bumped up. I stated that in the post you quoted hehe. Just took literally 7 tries. Not sure why. Ever since the firmware update it is finicky, the tuner that is.
The ONLY thing I will say is that the AM email tune has waayyyyyy better throttle response vs your dyno tune. But after running both yesterday, your tune definitely was more powerful but when blipping for rev matches I literally have to mash the gas and it will not respond at times vs the email tune which is instantaneous. That is the only thing I got to complain about now since the track proved your tune was faster
I also wanted to mention that when we spoke we discussed the cams not making power hence the 6500 fuel cut off but in the dyno sheet itself it is still carrying UPWARDS until the cut, unless I am looking at it or interpreting it wrong. Just hoping there isn't "untuned' ponies up there.
Again, great work for such little tune time and the tuner itself seems to be the issue.
The ONLY thing I will say is that the AM email tune has waayyyyyy better throttle response vs your dyno tune. But after running both yesterday, your tune definitely was more powerful but when blipping for rev matches I literally have to mash the gas and it will not respond at times vs the email tune which is instantaneous. That is the only thing I got to complain about now since the track proved your tune was faster
I also wanted to mention that when we spoke we discussed the cams not making power hence the 6500 fuel cut off but in the dyno sheet itself it is still carrying UPWARDS until the cut, unless I am looking at it or interpreting it wrong. Just hoping there isn't "untuned' ponies up there.
Again, great work for such little tune time and the tuner itself seems to be the issue.
The power is pretty flat just below where you see that little "upward blip" at the very end. I'm confident the HP would have stayed the same or increased minimally over the next 200-300 RPM. It's definitely not "untuned" at those RPMs. The Air/Fuel ratio is going to hold steady and the timing is set to continue to hold flat. You'll be fine going another few hundred RPM.
Don't worry about what the dyno says - the numbers look great. Judge what happens at the track Friday. Also, let me put the limiter into the tune, hardcode - not adjusted with end user adjustability.
I'll make those changes and send them out to you, after hours obviously.
08-15-2012, 04:48 PM
#30
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 30
If you're looking for aggressive throttle response, I can adjust it for you. I usually go a little less aggressive with the cams to prevent any kind of surging under light throttle.
The power is pretty flat just below where you see that little "upward blip" at the very end. I'm confident the HP would have stayed the same or increased minimally over the next 200-300 RPM. It's definitely not "untuned" at those RPMs. The Air/Fuel ratio is going to hold steady and the timing is set to continue to hold flat. You'll be fine going another few hundred RPM.
Don't worry about what the dyno says - the numbers look great. Judge what happens at the track Friday. Also, let me put the limiter into the tune, hardcode - not adjusted with end user adjustability.
I'll make those changes and send them out to you, after hours obviously.
The power is pretty flat just below where you see that little "upward blip" at the very end. I'm confident the HP would have stayed the same or increased minimally over the next 200-300 RPM. It's definitely not "untuned" at those RPMs. The Air/Fuel ratio is going to hold steady and the timing is set to continue to hold flat. You'll be fine going another few hundred RPM.
Don't worry about what the dyno says - the numbers look great. Judge what happens at the track Friday. Also, let me put the limiter into the tune, hardcode - not adjusted with end user adjustability.
I'll make those changes and send them out to you, after hours obviously.
Thanks so much dude!!!!!
