So was this 274 whp and 238wtq on a dyno jet ?

 

^ Yes. My car on a Mustang would make just under 250. I made 235/194 on a Mainline, which reads ~6% lower than a Mustang. That was before the tune.

 

I dont disagree, 274whp is awesome...probably more than what most 3.2 owners are putting down...

where I disagree is only gaining 5whp from a TUNE !!!....maybe it was a conservative tune am not sure, but I have seen Andy/KN/other running the MS3 gain ~20+whp from the tune....

as a matter of fact, I think I still have the dyno graph and video from a 3.2 gaining 22whp and 27wtq from the tune....

I would definitely hope to see atleast 10+whp from a tune....NOW as i mentioned it depends on how some cars automatically adjust to the mods....if the afr and timing is pretty much on point, a tune will gain you 2-5whp since there is not much room to tune it....

 

Need chart

 

No it wouldn't. My 3.5 fully bolted, untuned 6MT type-s barely broke 300 on dynapacks.


I just dynod with a guy yesterday that runs MS3 and is cammed and fully bolted on his 3.2 6MT. He did 2-3 pulls on stock ECU and then did another 2-3 with MS3. Peak pulls between tunes were ~7whp IIRC. I don't remember exactly but it wasn't a drastic (20whp) difference for sure. I dynod right before him too and put down what I expected to put down. We have our speculations that the dyno tuner didn't change the dyno calibrations from my car to his since he was the next guy in line which resulted in inaccurate numbers, but regardless, the difference was minuscule.

 

[QUOTE=JJH;14746242]No it wouldn't. My 3.5 fully bolted, untuned 6MT type-s barely broke 300 on dynapacks.

I bet he'd make mid 290's on a Dynapack. No offense, your car's strong, but it's just basic physics that it takes a good chunk of power to turn 100 lbs of wheel/tire. I think ILC was making mid 280's SAE on a Dynojet fully bolted, untuned.

 

I bet he'd make mid 290's on a Dynapack. No offense, your car's strong, but it's just basic physics that it takes a good chunk of power to turn 100 lbs of wheel/tire. I think ILC was making mid 280's SAE on a Dynojet fully bolted, untuned.[/QUOTE]

No offense taken, but do you really think that same dyno, same day a fully bolted 3.5 vs a fully bolted 3.0 is only a difference of ~10whp? I would think it would be more than that.

In regards to wheel/tire weight. In reference to Dynapack, from the man himself, Doug of Hondata:

Some notes that I compiled when doing research on Dynapack vs roller dynos:

These losses do not take into account rolling drag, tire scrub or tire flex (related to inflation pressure, vehicle weight and strap down tension). In testing on Dynojets, we have found that a change in camber of about 2 deg can result in a 5-6 hp change in measured power. However, these are extremely difficult to quantify - but be advised, they do exist on roller dynos, but not on the Dynapack (thus another source of differences).

As power increases for a given combo, the difference will grow due to the change in acceleration rate on the Dynojet (assuming the same gear is used for all tests). As the acceleration rate goes up, the total torque required to accelerate the wheels and tires will go up (remember, the torque calculation is MoI * acceleration - twice the acceleration rate requires twice the torque). But on the Dynapack the acceleration rate is kept the same (or at least should be), so losses remain largely the same. Furthermore, both dynos are subject to inertial losses accelerating the flywheel, transmission, etc. and the faster acceleration rate as hp climbs will show increasing losses on the fixed load Dynojet

With a roller dyno, you have that many more variables to contend with vs a chassis dyno. Shouldn't the most accurate (we can agree that having the least amount of variables possible effecting the outcome = most accurate) dyno machine be the industry "standard"? I know you're not saying this, but many people will say "you're not really making 300whp if you didn't do it on a Mustang dyno/roller dyno". I don't understand the reasoning that goes into a statement like that. There is no absolute 100% accurate way of obtaining a vehicles whp so we should move to the next best method that has the least amount of variables effecting the outcome.

I don't think one dyno is better at determining actual whp than another, but I do think that the dynapack is the most accurate way of tracking whp changes between mods/tunes.

I made 294.1/277 (-10/+22 compared to Dynapack) on a traditional roller dyno this weekend, in case you missed that in my thread.

This is a very good read that takes a very calculated approach at breaking down the differences between roller dynos (specfically Dynojets) and chassis dynos (specfically Dynapacks).

http://home.earthlink.net/~spchurch/id12.html

And ending with this:

Good work with your car sonnick.

 

pfff... you would make less than 250whp on a mustang dyno... maybe 240-245 range. hahaha. but your numbers are appropriate in my opinion based on your last dynos and your increasing modes.

Hate to see what you think of my numbers when i get them... i will post mustang dyno, dynojet, and then dynopack.

 

This is a graph of the gains from the last dyno.


These are the gains from Friday. Idk what cal the lower line is, but that's the difference after FlashPro tweaks were made.


This is just a graph of the best numbers.


This is a pull I did. It's a bit uphill, but the car feels great and definitely moves.

 

Dude I made 235 on the Mainline, which reads 6% lower than a Mustang before the tune. We should put down similar numbers. I hope you put down more than I do, but I think it will be close. We will never know anyway because we will probably never dyno on the same dyno.

I know you will put down good numbers, but I'm not gonna argue +/- 5whp on a Mustang. I made what I made on a Dynojet and I'm happy.

 

Sonnick, do you/they have AFR and timing graph along with the dyno graph?

 

Just both of you come down to WV and race here. lol

 

Kansas is the geographical center

but yeah if you guys can make it for the national meet in June, it would be fun to just run with couple of you guys...I bet I will get to learn a whole lot from ya'll

 

It was a 13hp difference, street tuned...and climbing with each pull by 6-7hp increments when he reached his limit of 4 pulls in total. This was likely due to having fouled the plugs initially when he did two dyno pulls just prior on the stock ECU. His AFR was off the charts @ >10:1 at WOT when in VTEC.

 

Thanks for the clarification, I couldn't remember peak OEM ECU pull vs peak MS3 pull. If he was running that rich with OEM ECU, that would explain the drastic increases in power with each successive pull on MS3 as the plugs dried up since with MS3 his afr was on point. Had to think about that for a second.

In that case, to respond more appropriately to this:

I could see a more drastic difference if he had head work done or cams, but just being fully bolted I don't see there being a drastic difference in peak numbers considering how well our ECUs adjust afr.

I can't recall any instance of anyone that is running FlashPro gaining >10whp peak power vs OEM ECU. Obviously there is better overall driveability and a consistent increase in power across the whole powerband.

Were you saying that just from MS3 on a bolted car you were seeing 20+whp gains? If so, that's crazy. I don't see why FlashPro users wouldn't experience the same level of increase though.

 

Justin, sorry but you are saying exactly what I mentioned before....

depending on how the AFR and timing have adjusted, tuning might or might not have any gains or might have huge gains...

When Rodney was still legit, he tuned a car and with hte MS3 it gained only 3whp coz the untuned AFR and timing were spot on....it was a car with only PCD's....on Rodney's car, AEM v2 intake and jpipe and greddy exhaust, he gained 20+whp....I have posted the video and dyno before, let me check if I still have them...I will post it up....

 

here found it:


EDIT: this was the first time Rodney had dyno tuned the car...after messing with VTEC engagement point/etc, he was able to flatten the torque curve AND gain a tad bit more....honestly I wish if someone like Kurt/Andy would pick up where Rodney had left off and make this into an EPIC ECU for the TL

 

That is nuts! Just going by what I've seen recently since FlashPro was introduced for our cars and the best example being ILC who overall had great improvements but not so much in the way of peak. That's crazy that rodney was able to gain that much just from exhaust + MS3. Was this a part of his sales pitch for MS3? I kid, I kid.

 

none of us believed him and hence he posted up many dyno's and many video's....

about Flashpro....I beat a fully bolted on Type S Auto tuned with flashpro during the KC meet...I had AC blowing and 1 pregnant lady in the passenger seat LOL...

I think I got him by 2-3 car lengths going from 50-ish to 90-ish (if I remember right, I did run a lot of members during the KC meet LOL)

 

So odd...isn't flashpro as a whole more capable than MS3 being that FlashPro has idle control which MS3 doesn't have? Don't see why either would be better than the other.

Crazy that you pulled that hard on him.

Sorry for derailing your thread OP, just whittling away some time.

 

All good, JJH.

I'm having a hard time with the 20whp gains from the MS3. Unless he went crazy with timing, which I guess is possible. I'm not sure where my timing advance is set, maybe I will do a datalog to see. Although, depending on mods, it's possible. My AFR was pretty damn good with the stock ECU with all my bolt ons.

I also did gain 17/17 from when I walked in / walked out. Again, I'm not sure what the calibration was for the first pull, but when Miller tweaked it, the gains were substantial.

 

17/17 is awesome !!!

I would love the see the AFR/timing charts though

Sonnick you have one crazy effin J30

 

We'll see more youtube videos soon...

 

^ Once I get a transmission....ugh.

 

You should have Jorge at Jotech build you one.

 

^ A transmission? Nah...it's not that serious lol.