Jump to content
TEAM SHELBY FORUM

Picked Up 26 HP and 27 FT/LBS With L&M TB


lawdude

Recommended Posts

Slapped that bad boy on yesterday and dynoed it today. On 05/07 with Jon Lund Tune, upper and lower pulleys, and Lethal Off-Road mid pipe, I put down 516.41 HP and 540.36 FT/Lbs torque (SAE). Today only difference was the L&M throttle body. I put down 542.62 HP and 567.42 FT/LBS of torque (SAE). All runs done on same dynojet.

 

lawdude happy. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats on the HP and TQ gains!!! Have you had a chance to drive it much on the street yet? Curious how the throttle response feels after the swap. Had a friend with a 97 simlar to mine who said he's do the swap again for the gain in throttle response alone.

 

 

Yep, no issues so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So no changes measured in A/F? You aren't running any leaner than before?

 

 

Nope. I was concerned about that and set A/F to 0 on Jon Lund tune until I could get to dyno. Read A/F at the bung. First run A/F set at 0. Fat reading. Second run leaned it one step. Still fat. Third run leaned it to max that tune would allow. Still no higher than 11.4. I think it's time for a remote custom tune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So no changes measured in A/F? You aren't running any leaner than before?

 

 

 

A/f ratio should not really ever change at all as long as the MAF is not being pegged.(a 5 volt reading would mean the meter is pegged and can not read any higher)

In a Mass air computer controlled car(Which a GT500 is) if the MAF curve is correct in the tune it will see more air coming in and will open the injector according for the increase in airflow.(a/f ratio in a MAF car should always stay consistent to the target fuel map if the MAFreading/curve is correct)

 

Now this is only true if the MAF curve is an accurate curve that was entered in the tune . The only 100 percent and accurate way to obtain a MAF curve is to actually flow it on a flow bench to obtain the complete MAF curve.(This is the way Ford does it).

 

If its done that way, a complete and accurate curve will be obtained from 0 volts up to 5volts with the actual airflow measurement per voltage(the CFM measurement per any voltage point will be correct and the computer will adjust the injector pulse according to the air flow it see.)

 

If a car runs leaner or richer because it see's more air in a MAF car (as long as the meter is not pegged ) it is because the MAF curve most likely is incorrect at that airflow/voltage point in the tune.

 

Some MAF curves are tuned or obtained/ calculated by tuning from a dyno or data-logs using short term trims/o2 sensor reading in the car or an A/f gauge hooked up to the dyno/car.

Someone can get the meter curve close this way but never 100 percent .

The reason it would run leaner/richer when additional airflow is seen from original tune (if the motor airflow was increased) is because the MAF curve is incorrect at that airflow point/voltage in the tune/meter curve.

 

Why, because when the car was tuned they never went that high on the MAF reading/ curve and now it does because a change was made to the motor where its moving more air.

 

(Example the old setup went to 4 volts on the MAF and with the change now the meter goes to 4.4 volts) To correct it they would have to tweak the MAF curve again in the tune at an airflow range the car was never tuned for.

 

If a MAF curve is entered in the tune with a 100 percent accurate meter curve from 0-5 volts, 99 percent of the time the tune would be dead on with the A/f that is entered in the target a/f maps and would stay consistent at any airflow the MAF could measure.(This would be true for an increase or decrease in airflow)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slapped that bad boy on yesterday and dynoed it today. On 05/07 with Jon Lund Tune, upper and lower pulleys, and Lethal Off-Road mid pipe, I put down 516.41 HP and 540.36 FT/Lbs torque (SAE). Today only difference was the L&M throttle body. I put down 542.62 HP and 567.42 FT/LBS of torque (SAE). All runs done on same dynojet.

 

lawdude happy. :)

 

 

Hi

 

I'm thinking about changing the TB also. Was this the 66mm or 72mm version? Did you have to do any porting?

 

thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slapped that bad boy on yesterday and dynoed it today. On 05/07 with Jon Lund Tune, upper and lower pulleys, and Lethal Off-Road mid pipe, I put down 516.41 HP and 540.36 FT/Lbs torque (SAE). Today only difference was the L&M throttle body. I put down 542.62 HP and 567.42 FT/LBS of torque (SAE). All runs done on same dynojet.

 

lawdude happy. :)

 

 

These dynos must be all over the place because you're now about where I'm at w/ just the lower pulley, long tubes and tune, and I haven't even installed the VMP 67mm TB or upper pulley yet.

 

Maybe the headers and hi-flow cats are helping more than I thought? :headscratch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These dynos must be all over the place because you're now about where I'm at w/ just the lower pulley, long tubes and tune, and I haven't even installed the VMP 67mm TB or upper pulley yet.

 

Maybe the headers and hi-flow cats are helping more than I thought? :headscratch:

 

 

It really depends on what type of Dyno is being used. It is a very slippery slope comparing numbers between cars if they are not run on the same Dyno if not at the very least the same type of Dyno. Lawdude is using the same Dyno every time he does something so he gets to see the gains he is making with his changes, perfect way to go. But to have another car on another Dyno let alone maybe even a different TYPE of Dyno then you start getting into the realm of not even comparing the same thing anymore.

 

I am using a Mustang Dynojet that everyone in my area uses and with my mods and a new K&N filter I'm at 530 RWHP where as on a Dynojet I used, before I was told about the Mustang Dynojet with same set up, I hit 610 RWHP.

 

My new crank pulley will not be going on until July so I can't say for sure what the rough estimate is on the power gain, but I would assume that if you have done just the crank pulley, exhaust and a tune and your getting 540 RWHP, the two of you are using two different types of Dyno machines.

 

Nic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really depends on what type of Dyno is being used. It is a very slippery slope comparing numbers between cars if they are not run on the same Dyno if not at the very least the same type of Dyno. Lawdude is using the same Dyno every time he does something so he gets to see the gains he is making with his changes, perfect way to go. But to have another car on another Dyno let alone maybe even a different TYPE of Dyno then you start getting into the realm of not even comparing the same thing anymore.

 

I am using a Mustang Dynojet that everyone in my area uses and with my mods and a new K&N filter I'm at 530 RWHP where as on a Dynojet I used, before I was told about the Mustang Dynojet with same set up, I hit 610 RWHP.

 

My new crank pulley will not be going on until July so I can't say for sure what the rough estimate is on the power gain, but I would assume that if you have done just the crank pulley, exhaust and a tune and your getting 540 RWHP, the two of you are using two different types of Dyno machines.

 

Nic

 

 

With the IW 10% pulley, long tubes, high flow cats, and a 91 tune, I was at 552 rwhp and 552 lb/ft. That was also on a cold winter Kansas evening. I'm hoping with the upper pulley, 67mm TB, and the new heat exchanger helping to prevent heat soak that I will exceed the 600 rwhp mark - and that's plenty for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...
...