91 Plus on the Dyno

[pitaSHO]

Well, I put the 91 up on the dyno Saturday, and I gotta say, I'm a little disappointed. I don't have a pic of the dyno sheet, but here are the stats:
Mustang Dyno (I think)
Temp: 70-ish
Time: 1:00 PM
Cloudy
HP: 221
TQ:203

Mods

3.2L w/3.0 cams (112k on motor)
TwEECer w/advanced timing and early secondary opening
BBB's
PnP snakes
80mm MAF
Y-pipe
Dynamax exhaust
4 piece underdrive set
Quaiffe

...Nothing a turbo can't fix.

Chris K.

 

[K-Dawg]

Sounds about right. I think Mustang dynos tend to read lower than Dynojets.

 

[St Louis SHO]

Actually thats right on par. Nice numbers.

 

[Toolman]

That would be nice numbers on a Dynojet.

 

[1bad98SHO]

Was about to say thats pretty good. Puts you around 240-260 at the flywheel give or take some.

 

[jayro]

I think the #'s sound pretty good. With a 17% drivetrain loss that puts you at 266 at the crank. Should the torque be a little higher though? My 3.0L put down 192 ft/lbs with similar mods.

Jeremy

 

[St Louis SHO]

On a Dyno-Jet it should be 240ish HP/220ish TQ.

 

[pitaSHO]

I was hoping for at least 230hp, and here's why. I dyno'd my 95 MTX a few years ago on a different dyno (higher temps and later in the day and I know they aren't comparable). It dyno'd at 210hp and 197tq with only a y-pipe and 75mm Pro-M MAF (I later added BBB's, EHIR's, aluminum flywheel). I don't know if that dyno was off (not sure what kind it was), but I was expecting higher numbers from the 91 because it has the 3.2 and other intake mods. So the way I'm thinking (which isn't always right ) a PnP intake, BBB's, UDP's, bigger MAF, TwEECer, and 3.2 was only worth 11hp (a lotta dough for a little go). Time to look at 'stangs... :theyareontome:ANYWAY, the only way to know for sure is to dyno them on the same day on the same dyno... Gotta rebuild the 95 first, tho.

Thanks for the input.

Chris K.

 

[Toolman]

Find out what kind of dyno they operate. A mustang dyno will read signifigantly different numbers than a dynojet.

 

[SHOspazz92]

Considering Mustang Dyno's read 12-14% Lower then a Dyno Jet I'd say those are pretty damned good Numbers.

-Sam

 

[Sho Amo]

sounds good.

 

[94shodriver]

Looking through all the old dyno archives, it looks like you're actually doing pretty well. It seems as though the more mods you put on an engine, the less effect they have until you do some major changes, like cams, nitrous, or FI. I guess the SHO engine is just really well tuned as is, so there isn't a lot to get out of it easily. If you consider that the latest multi-cam 3.5L V-6s on the market put out about 275-285 hp at the crank, then for your displacement you're right on the money. Once I get back and do my 3.2 swap, I hope it's as strong as yours.

Ian

 

[pitaSHO]

Now for the age-old question: if the Mustang dyno reads 12-17% lower than a Dynojet, which one is right? Do they measure power differently? 221hp x 12% = 247.5hp, which is sah-WEET. I can handle that. What's killin me is which one is more accurate? (which we may never know, since it could be debated until the end of the world...) Thanks again for the feedback and compliments.:thankyou:

Chris K.

 

[St Louis SHO]

Mustang is more accurate. They are loaded more, hence the lower, but more reallistic numbers.

 

[38SHO]

looking good, you have a good 30-40whp increase over stock type numbers....

the quaife makes its slightly lower, the tweecer could be good or bad... you might have better numbers on another tune..... who knows

I wouldn't feel bad at all about that with your mods, and some of those really aren't going to give you any more power that you listed...

 

[SHOspazz92]

Mustang is more accurate. They are loaded more, hence the lower, but more reallistic numbers.

Why this is true, Finding one with someone who knows how to properly work it and Calibrate it a royal pain in the ass. Dyno Jets, Why not as real world accurate spit out Generic numbers that are easy to compare with others to see where you are at.

-Sam

 

[leerocketmike]

Hey

Those are descent numbers for the mods you have... be happy most SHO's struggle to see 215hp with bolt ons... Your Tweecer made the difference I think...

 

[warmonger]

numbers look good,would love to see the curve.