It has been about a month since the bolt-on performance mods have been in place, so I will now report experiences for all to see. I will report these results in three successive back-to-back posts to cut down the size of each. Please excuse the post lengths, but these are interesting performance results and I want to share with you and hopefully get your expert opinions as well.

In addition to a cat-back (Ravin Z55) and a K&N Gen. II FIPK, I also installed the Superchip (flip chip). The cat-back was installed first. The cat-back gave immediate noticeable gains in performance in both low and high end with the less restrictive exhaust. I have always heard that Ford exhaust systems, from the valve train on back, are more restrictive compared to other brands. Maybe this is why the performance increase was so noticeable.

The K&N and Superchip were installed two weeks later on the same day. Some noticeable performance gains immediately after install of both, but performance seemed to continue to improve for about a week. Of course I noticed an improvement in shifting response (automatic tranny) immediately after chip install. I can’t explain why the performance gain from the chip seemed to take a few days to become complete – could just be my perception only – either that or it took a while for the computer to fully reset. During chip install, I did reset the computer by disconnecting the battery and turning the headlights on for at least 30 minutes.

Have seen some posts lately about trouble with the chip install. My experience - I had no problems with Superchip installation at all, very simple installation. To avoid scraped knuckles, did find it best to remove the battery and support bracket to gain clear access to the computer module though. Also, probably spent more time than necessary cleaning the computer terminal posts where the Superchip plugs in, but I wanted to be sure they were clean. Other than that, the most difficult part of the chip install was deciding where I wanted to mount the toggle switch for the flip!! Finally decided to place it at the bottom of the dash just a tad behind the console.

Overall, performance definitely feels stronger and crisper than stock with all three mods in place. Would definitely recommend the three mods to all.


------------------
2001 SuperCrew, Silver, 5.4L, 4x4, 3.55, Limited slip, Tow Package, 265x70x17, Sliding Rear Window, Tuff Spray-on Liner, Ravin Z55 Single-in Dual-out Sideswept, K&N FIPK, SuperChip, 1" Thick Sheepskin seat covers (soft as a babys butt), Nerf Bars, PIAA Superwhites, 9006 - 65W Fog Lights
Future mods - Roots Supercharger, Headders, revamped sterio system.

 

Continuing from the previous post. With the modifications in place for about a month (cat-back, K&N FIPK, flipchip Superchip), I wanted to measure what I had and set a baseline, because I may want to add a blower at a later date. Went to a speed shop and had a dyno run first, and made G-Tech measurements myself a week later once the G-Tech unit arrived in the mail. G-Tech results are in the post after this.

Rear Wheel Dyno results (run on a cool day w/ low humidity):
Pass 1 & 2, Superchip flipped “on”
Pass 3, turn engine off, Superchip flipped “off”, restart engine

Results Pass 1: HP(max) = 199.1 at 4100rpm, Torque(max) = 279.9 at 3350rpm
Results Pass 2: HP(max) = 199.7 at 4100rpm, Torque(max) = 277.5 at 3350rpm
Results Pass 3: HP(max) = 194.6 at 4250rpm, Torque(max) = 267.0 at 3450rpm

Reading the dyno chart, pass 1 and pass 2 compare closely as expected since there were no differences between the two setups. Comparing Pass 1&2 to 3, there were some performance differences. At peak performance levels, the results indicate a reduction of about 5HP and 12ft-lb torque when the chip is flipped “off” (not removed, just flipped to the off position). Note 1, the Superchip, when flipped “on” gave bigger performance gains down low than at peak (the dyno chart started at 3100 RPM and ended at 5200 RPM. The biggest flipped “on” gains on the plot showed up at the start of the chart at 3100 RPM. Although HP and torque were not plotted before 3100 RPM, it appears from the look of the plot that that the chip gives good gains at RPM’s lower than 3100). From the dyno chart, the flipped “on” position gave about 12.5 more HP and about 15ft-lb more torque at lower RPM levels. The flipped “on” gains progressively reduced as RPM’s increased to peak performance and reduced further up to WOT. Note 2, The flipped “off” position may be a hotter configuration than the stock computer, i.e. flipped “off” may give better performance than removing the chip. Also, I had never run in flipped “off” before, so some residual programming in the computer from flipped “on” might have still been present. These are only my opinions though.

Anyway, the whole point was to get a baseline. However, I was a little disappointed with the numbers. Stock flywheel HP on the 5.4L is 260HP. From what I gather, stock rear wheel HP is 48HP to 65HP less than the flywheel HP due to parasitic losses, which gives a range of stock rear wheel HP of 195HP to 212HP (efficiency of 75%-82%). From the dyno with modifications in place, HP(max)=199.7. You can’t tell me that the three modifications didn’t result in more RWHP than that. I was expecting a RWHP of 220HP to 230HP or so. I did notice performance gains after addition of the modifications as mentioned in the previous post, so they did add something. Either stock rear wheel horsepower is less, or the dyno results are off. The speed shop I had the dyno done looked very clean and professional. Several Mustangs were in getting all sorts of modifications. So I don’t think there was a mistake in the dyno. What do you think? Anyone with experiences to relate?


------------------
2001 SuperCrew, Silver, 5.4L, 4x4, 3.55, Limited slip, Tow Package, 265x70x17, Sliding Rear Window, Tuff Spray-on Liner, Ravin Z55 Single-in Dual-out Sideswept, K&N FIPK, SuperChip, 1" Thick Sheepskin seat covers (soft as a babys butt), Nerf Bars, PIAA Superwhites, 9006 - 65W Fog Lights
Future mods - Roots Supercharger, Headders, revamped sterio system.

 

Continuation from the two previous posts.

With G-Tech, here are the performance results:
RWHP(max) = 235HP to 241HP
Best 0-60 = 8.4 sec
Best ¼ mile = 16.4 sec at 87 mph

Estimated vehicle weight at time of testing = curb weight + spray-on bed liner + nerfs + completely full gas tank + driver = 4918 + 40 +45 +185 +160 = 5348 lbs. Not bad results I guess considering the size and weight of the beast. Of course I was hoping for a lower ET, but don’t we all. I can see some possible improvement in times as I learn to launch better, but not much.

I noticed that the G-Tech unit estimated a rearwheel horsepower of 235 to 241 HP, which is considerably higher than what was measured on a Dyno a week or so earlier (199.7HP). All conditions and modifications were the same between the time of the dyno and the G-Tech runs. For comparison, I measured the RWHP with the G-Tech in my other car (1983 944, stock flywheel = 145 HP) and got 114 HP, giving an efficiency of 79%, which is believable. Frankly, 235-241HP seems high. I was expecting something like this :

Modified RWHP = Stock RWHP + cat-back mod + FIPK mod + Superchip mod
Modified RWHP = 195 + 15 + 5 + 15 = 230 HP

So, I am confused about the HP thing given the results posed. Not that HP is the most important variable, 0-60 and ET’s are the real measures of muscle, I just find the HP results interesting and a little bit confusing and irritating. Wish I could zone in a little closer on what the “true” HP really is just to satisfy my curosity. How accurate is the G-Tech, and how accurate are dyno’s?

I will shut up now. Again, sorry for the long posts, but they are performance results related and I wanted to share this information with you and thought you would find them of interest – this is what this site is all about. Please respond with your opinions and experiences as I am relatively new at this HP and ET game and am finding myself seductively lured into the bolt-on performance world.


[This message has been edited by GoDogGo (edited 12-04-2000).]

 

Good informative post. Looks like the G-tech make you smile more than the dyno. Unfortunately from everything I have read, the dyno is probably more accurate. We have very simular modifications, I sure hope I picked up more than 5 or 10 hp.

------------------
98 Nascar Edition, Superchip, Airaid, Flowmaster 70 series, bedliner, in bed tool box, Profile bug deflector and window vents, Class III receiver hitch.

 

Hi GoDogGo,

This is an *excellent* example of what happens when you use an "inertia" dyno, like a Dynojet, and also when you do not program the automatic transmission to stay locked in 3rd gear so that you can give the dyno plenty of time to stabilize. When you can't get readings below 3000 rpm, you can forget real accuracy, as you can forget any accuracy on any inertia dyno when the weight of the vehicle does not match the weight of the rollers, which is 3600 lbs. This vehicle is *much* heavier, and so the load factoring is way off as a result.

Another point here is that anytime you change the program in the computer, you simply *must* disconnect the battery, and then turn on the headlights for 5 full minutes, so that you completely clear the computer's memory, and get a completely fresh program load. This must be done *every* time you want to make a change in the program and then do another dyno pull, as when you don't, you have the previous program sitting there in memory, and it takes at least 50-100 miles of driving to slowly overwrite what's in accumulated memory, so you don't get much *immediate* benefit.

There also is a difference between the stock program and then the programming for 87 octane in Positon 1 of the custom Flip Chip that we did for you. Meaning, that with a good quality 87 octane fuel, you picked up about 5 horsepwoer from the program in Position 1 versus the completely stock factory program. It's not much of a gain, which is why we tell people not to expect a real raw increase in power when using 87 octane in the custom Flip Chips set up with one program for regular, and the other our normal performance program for premium gas. Sure it runs and accelerate a bit better, due to gaining a few horsepower, but mostly due to the removal of transitional spark retards, etc. The real power gain comes on premium, of course.

We could go on forever hear about the merits of various dynos, and what it really takes to get accurate back-to-back results, but suffice it to say that in this case, the G-Tech unit and your seat-of-the-pants impressions are giving a far more accurate picture in this case, strange as it sounds.

The accuracy of those G-Tech units varies, but the main thing is that they have to be very carefully leveled and calibrated & set up, each time you use it, with correct vehicle weight figures, etc. They are usually accurate to within a few tenths of a second in terms of 1/4 miles times compared to running at the drag strip during the same time, so you can directly compare drag strip clocks to the G-Tech units numbers.

But in terms of horsepower, I think it's obvious that you can feel more of a difference in the seat of your pants than what those dyno numbers show. By the way, the dyno rpms figures for peak power are way off, too, as peak horsepower comes at anywhere from 4700-4900 rpm in these vehicles, not just barely above 4000 rpm.

All in all, it's an admirable attempt to quantify results, but the wrong techniques and dyno were used. It needs to be an eddy-current chassis dyno, so that the load factor isn't skewed by the fact that your vehicles weighs almost a ton more than the rollers of that dyno do, then the computer has to be properly re-set and it's memory cleared to allow a complete fresh program load each time you change the program, and the transmission needs to be programmed to stay locked in 3rd gear, so you can start the pull from just off-idle and thru the entire rpm range, otherwise the dyno doesn't have enough time to properly stabilize, etc. This is exactly what Superchips has to do when they are on the dyno doing development work and/or testing, and there just isn't any other way around it, if you want accurate results.

In this case, I would go first by seat of the pants, and then look at the G-Tech's numbers, as that is about the most accurate data you have there. To get a 16.4 ET at that weight is nothing short of *excellent* with your vehicles weight & mods, and I agree with you, you gained more power than the dyno showed.

If you'd like to go over this in detail, feel free to give us a call.

------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Performance Products F150Online Superchip ordering system: F150Online Superchip Ordering System
First National F-150 Online Rally Event Organizer

[This message has been edited by Superchips_Distributor (edited 12-05-2000).]

 

GoDogGo,

Do you have any numbers on fuel economy? Just curious.

Greg O.

 

Thanks Mike for you informative response. I didn't realize all the issues and complications related to the dynojet. I just thought that the vehicle pulled a force on a fixed mass (the rollers) which could be converted to torque and then HP - didn't know that vehicle weight was important, or that the gearing mattered. Disappointed now that those guys didn't take better care of me and inform me of the pros and cons, etc. I will call to discuss with them. Unfortunately, now I know what to look for should there be a next time.

Yes, I figured the chip in the off position was hotter than stock and that it needed to be completely recalibrated when turned off. Keep in mind that I really wasn't interested in the results with the chip off, but I had three pulls and on a whim I thought it would be interesting thing to do.

Ok then … given the discussions, my feeling is that the RWHP is about 230HP with the modifications. Mike, given the types of modifications (cat-back, K&N, chip) like so many others have on the 5.4L (with stock flywheel 260 HP), and your experiences on the dyno with these vehicles and these types of modifications, would 230 HP be your fair assessment of the RWHP?

Yes Omangreg, thanks for reminding me,
Highway mileage = 15.5 to 16 mpg, City = 14 to 15 mpg.

Mike, thanks for your usual great help. Hopefully, I may call you soon to discuss perhaps another program arrangement for the chip (if possible - we can discuss).

GoDogGo


[This message has been edited by GoDogGo (edited 12-05-2000).]

 

Outstanding post(s) GoDogGo!

------------------
2000 F-150 XLT, 4x2, 5.4L Supercab, Superchip, Styleside, Black with silver two-tone, 3.55 rear, class III towing package with super engine cooling/Auxilary transmission cooling HD package, Heavy duty shocks, 4 wheel disk ABS, overhead console, sliding rear window, keyless entry, dark graphite interior, in dash CD, factory leather wrapped steering wheel, FORD bedliner, FORD black tubular cab steps, K&N air filter, mar-hyde rubberized undercoating, Modine climate filtration system, Bugflector II, Mobil 1 oil, build 7/2000




[This message has been edited by Dustoff (edited 12-05-2000).]

 

With the same modifications except superchip
my truck did 228.9rwhp and 306.5rwtq on the dyno. Since then I have been chipped and changed torque converter.

 

Hi GoDogGo,

Don't feel bad, the vast majority of Dynojet owners themselves are not aware of their mechanical limitations, because they've never owned a chassis dyno before, due to their expense, of course. This is all a relatively new phenomenon, in that chassis dynos traditionally cost well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars for a good eddy current chassis dyno like the automakers & Superchips use. Then Dynojet came along with a way to make an inexpensive inertia style dyno and be able to sell it for just $30K, which is *nothing* for a chassis dyno, it's really a drop in the bucket. And it's ok for determining rough approximate power levels on vehicles weighing close to the rollers weights, which would be Mustangs, Camaro's, etc., though it still isn't a good tool for doing any kind of exact back-to-back numbers, just approximation work, which is fine for the price, absolutely, and they have their place. So it's a good thing, but most of their owners don't know all these facts that I explained to you, so I wouldn't go giving them a hard time, it's really not their "fault", so to speak, ok?

They do not have the ability to program your transmission to stay into 3rd gear, they aren't powertrain programmers or engineers of course, so that isn't going to happen at just any shop with a chassis dyno, nor should it be expected. It's just something to be aware of.

I almost hate answering these kinds of questions because I invariably get irate calls from Dynojet owners who procede to launch into a tirade about how dare we tell bad things about them and their shop, etc., which of course we *never* intend to do, just explain the real facts to answer questions, nothing more. Most shop owners are very hard-working great guys who have their own wallet & reputation out there on the line every single day, and they're good people usually. And the facts are also that unless you have rather extensive work experience in chassis dyno's, then of course you don't know what it really takes to get accurate numbers, either one time or especially doing back-to-back comparisons. Just like we don't know about brain surgery or dentistry unless we're brain surgeons or dentists.

All your local guy can do is to take the vehicle's Overdrive off, and then run it up in 3rd gear to the point where when he punches it, it will no longer downshift into 2nd gear, and then run it up from there, that's all you can do unless you can program the automatic tranny to stay in 3rd on the automatics.

See, most people, and I think this is very natural as I thought the exact same thing until I learned, think of a "dyno" as an absolute device, that cannot be disputed, and is always accurate. But it's not, and even among good quality eddy current dynos, you will get variances. That is why top tuners like John Lingenfelter on the GM's for example, have numerous different kinds of dynos in house (glad he can afford it!), because his 100 hp packages for example, will deliver different numbers on different dynos, so when he gets a call like that, he can say wait, we have that same dyno, and "x" is what you should get under "x" corrected conditions, etc.

So all in all, please don't give your local vendor a hard time, it's not like he isn't trying, I'm quite sure that he is trying his best to accommodate you, he's just dealing with limnitations of his equiupment & resources, like any of us, and that does *not* make them a bad shop or bad people, ok?

You know what the vehicle *feels* like, and what it ET's approximately, etc., and I think you're doing well, especially at that weight, that's a *lot* of vehicle to accelerate, and those times can't be had with only 200 hp at the rear wheels at that weight.

------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Performance Products F150Online Superchip ordering system: F150Online Superchip Ordering System
First National F-150 Online Rally Event Organizer

[This message has been edited by Superchips_Distributor (edited 12-06-2000).]

 

Hey GoDogGo I noticed you are from Houston and was wanting to know which shop you had the dyno done at? I am considering having my truck put on the dyno and also were they able to check your air/fuel mixture?

------------------
99 F-150 XLT 5.4L,3.55ls 17"CENTERLINE WHEELS,GIBSON CAT BACK,GIBSON HEADERS,POWERDYNE 9psi SUPERCHARGER,auto meter dual gauge pod with phanthom boost and air fuel gauge,extang bed cover,superchip is ordered

 

dwight c
I went to a place called Houston Performance. Their address and phone are:

14610 Tomball Parkway, Suite 403, Houston, TX 77086. (281) 893-6080. I had never had a dyno done before, but the shop looked really clean, also seemed like a good bunch of guys. Lots of mustangs were in their shop when I went there.

Thanks for the info stewdog. Looks like you have given me a good indication of the HP. How do you like the torque converter? Is it something you would recommend? What type, etc.
GoDogGo


------------------
2001 SuperCrew, Silver, 5.4L, 4x4, 3.55, Limited slip, Tow Package, 265x70x17, Sliding Rear Window, Tuff Spray-on Liner, Ravin Z55 Single-in Dual-out Sideswept, K&N FIPK, SuperChip, 1" Thick Sheepskin seat covers (soft as a babys butt), Nerf Bars, PIAA Superwhites, 9006 - 65W Fog Lights
Future mods - Roots Supercharger, Headders, revamped sterio system.

 

Well seat of the pants it is faster and the company claim 40-50hp at the rear wheels but the extra power did not show up on the dyno. I have not been back to the dyno since the chip so I really don't know what power kind of power I am making. All I can do is judge against other vehicles. I raced a Cadillac STS 0-70 and won by a truck length so that would give me a high 14 sec quarter. I wish I could get real figures on power.