Dyno: 2.80" pulley, Diablo

[coleman]

Here's my before and after comparison...
before: stock K&N replacement, no silencer
after: 2.80" pulley, 74.5" gatorback, NGK TR6 (0.035), and Diablo chip

http://www.fragfest.biz/~coleman/cars/2003/cobra/dyno/20020819v20020829.gif

i'm new to this, SO please let me know if anything is concerning!
i hope i don't do any damage to the vehicle. :kaboom:
next up is Bassani exhaust (I think) cat forward & back

:rolling:

 

[B-O-B'03]

Man Coleman, those are awsome numbers:thumbsup: !

Wonder what the new exhaust will add to it?

Thanks for the post.

-B

 

[haskett]

I wonder what's happening to the horsepower at the end of the RPMs ? Maybe that's the blower efficiency dropping off by being overspun ?

 

[coleman]

i haven't done any boost-bypass mod yet... don't even know if that would even help...
i'm very pleased cuz the new #s are across the board higher than before.
does the air/fuel look ok?

i really want L/T headers but they're $$$ ... i wish i knew if Bassani's complete solution will be as powerful at less expen$ive L/T, cats, cat-back...

if installation is just as expen$ive for shorty headers as L/Ts, i may change my mind and go w/ L/Ts

 

[postban]

93 RWTQ bump-up and much better a/f ratio from just a pulley, sheeeeee-it!

Exhaust will have very near a magic number.:thumbsup:

 

[B-O-B'03]

I think that would be:

93 RWTQ bump-up and much better a/f ratio from just a pulley (and a Diablo chip), sheeeeee-it!

Nice, very nice:thumbsup:

-B

 

[Lomancobra]

Man, I wish eaton would have given us a more capable S/C. Those numbers are sweet, but I can't get over the possible consequences.

 

[mjchip]

Originally posted by coleman
Here's my before and after comparison...
before: stock K&N replacement, no silencer
after: 2.80" pulley, 74.5" gatorback, NGK TR6 (0.035), and Diablo chip

http://www.fragfest.biz/~coleman/cars/2003/cobra/dyno/20020819v20020829.gif

i'm new to this, SO please let me know if anything is concerning!
i hope i don't do any damage to the vehicle. :kaboom:
next up is Bassani exhaust (I think) cat forward & back

:rolling:

Hey Coleman,

Please don't take this the wrong way BUT you more than likely have a bad tune. Believe it or not, I had this exact issue with two different Diablo programs and my 2.93" pulley. The programs advanced the timing too much and caused my car to ping. This triggered the knock sensors and the PCM ended up pulling a ton of timing. My dyno chart looked the same as yours shape-wise. Do you see on your chart where torque is much improved until 3000rpm and then takes a nose dive? Mine had the same dive AND it was because the PCM pulled 7 degrees of timing at 3000rpm due to knock sensors. I datalogged this information using a scan tool during the runs. Also, your a/f seems too lean to me. Personally, I wouldn't run that program. Contact whoever sold you the chip, give them the graphs and all data, and get a different program.

Best of luck and stay off it until you get the tuning issues resolved.

Cheers,

Mark

 

[jtfx6552]

Coleman, I didn't want to be the first to post and suggest some bad news, but I have to agree with Mark. Something in your combination is not working right.

You can check my curves here:
http://users.rcn.com/drfunky/pages/DynoSheets.html
We have the same torque for a few hundred RPMs, then yours drops off. I would think with the 2.8 instead of the 2.93 you should have more T and HP, not less.

Good luck and I am sure it will all work out. I am looking forward to more posts from you, because I think I would like to try the 2.8 as well.

 

[mjchip]

Originally posted by jtfx6552
Coleman, I didn't want to be the first to post and suggest some bad news, but I have to agree with Mark. Something in your combination is not working right.

You can check my curves here:
http://users.rcn.com/drfunky/pages/DynoSheets.html
We have the same torque for a few hundred RPMs, then yours drops off. I would think with the 2.8 instead of the 2.93 you should have more T and HP, not less.

Good luck and I am sure it will all work out. I am looking forward to more posts from you, because I think I would like to try the 2.8 as well.

Later on tonight (when I get home from the office), I'll post my dyno chart so that you can see the similarity. Just go easy until you get this sorted out.

Mark

 

[Cobra'03]

Originally posted by Lomancobra
Man, I wish eaton would have given us a more capable S/C. Those numbers are sweet, but I can't get over the possible consequences.

Does Eaton make such a thing? - really, I think one would have to go to a Lysholm type such as Mercedes uses to get significantly more perf. But for the design goals of Ford, this one is fine - it gives the low down punch we wanted and is reliable and relatively inexpensive.

 

[coleman]

darn, i autocross this Sunday!!!
please let me know what to relay to Dallas Mustang cuz I'm a layman!

 

[03DOHC]

Originally posted by Lomancobra
Man, I wish eaton would have given us a more capable S/C. Those numbers are sweet, but I can't get over the possible consequences.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there already some guys w/480-500rwhp w/the M112 right now? That's almost 600bhp and they've only just begun. How much more capability do you want?:shrug:

 

[mjchip]

Originally posted by coleman
darn, i autocross this Sunday!!!
please let me know what to relay to Dallas Mustang cuz I'm a layman!

They need to get your car back on the dyno to log some timing curves at WOT with that program. If they have a scan tool, have them log base timing, timing advance, and knock retard as well as RPM.

Seriously, they should've been able to tell that something was wrong by looking at that dyno chart. At a minimum the air-fuel is too lean from 3500-5500rpm. Also, the torque builds nicely and then nose dives after 3000rpm.

My suggestion is to go easy with the car until they get it right. If you don't have confidence in their ability to fix it properly, get someone else to tune it on the dyno.

If you want to see what my car looked like with a similar Diablo program, check this out (look at the red lines):

Best of luck,

Mark

 

[mjchip]

Originally posted by 03DOHC
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there already some guys w/480-500rwhp w/the M112 right now? That's almost 600bhp and they've only just begun. How much more capability do you want?:shrug:

Yes there are people making 500rwhp with the Eaton M112 blower. However they (and we) are overspinning the heck out of it to get those results. The volumetric efficiency above the 14,000rpm rating is dropping off fast and the blower is basically maxed out. Not that more HP can't be made BUT with the penalty of a lot of additional heat which can lead to detonation and other problems.

What is really needed is a larger displacement blower with higher efficiency. For example a >>112 cu-in twin-screw device....

Hope this puts it in perspective.

Cheers,

Mark

 

[03DOHC]

I got perspective, the L guys are spinning it that fast and faster. Even if you don't spin it that fast they are still making good power without the smaller pulley. Sure, I'd take the twin-screw, but if the price of the car got any higher, as it would've if Ford put that on there, I probably wouldn't buy it as it would be even more money.

If you make 425rwhp that is about 500bhp w/out pulley. Sounds good to me.

Anyway..

 

[mjchip]

Originally posted by 03DOHC
I got perspective, the L guys are spinning it that fast and faster. Even if you don't spin it that fast they are still making good power without the smaller pulley.

Well, using that perspective, what would you say is the max hp that one could get out of the M112 before needing to upgrade?

Mark

 

[03DOHC]

At that point it's obvious that they'd have to upgrade to make more power.

Let me ask you this. How many cars would be faster than you once you get to that point? Not very many. That's all I'm saying.

 

[mjchip]

Originally posted by 03DOHC
At that point it's obvious that they'd have to upgrade to make more power.

Let me ask you this. How many cars would be faster than you once you get to that point? Not very many. That's all I'm saying.

Well, a stock 2002 Z06 ran 114mph in the quarter on Wed night when I was at the track. It made only 360rwhp but is 500lbs lighter. I'm laying down 443rwhp but at 3840lbs., I can only run 114mph. So, to answer your question. It doesn't take much to spank an '03 making 450rwhp because it weighs so darned much.

Mark

 

[03DOHC]

Gotta put it to the ground if you want to go faster. Maybe you need practice? MPH doesn't win races. Who get there first is what matters. Aerodynamic differences are in the vettes favor.