short runner dyno
short runner dyno
ok, i said good or bad.
here is the sheet

my fuel pump is not keeping up, so i have to replace it. A/F ratios ranged from 19:1 to 15:1. so power was not there.
that's the bad news, no good numbers, and it did affect the torque curve a little, even if the numbers were 30lb-ft and 30-40 hp low.
the old dyno was
340 rwtq at 3650 and 250 rwhp at 4250. the new was
280 rwtq at 4800 and 244 rwhp at 5200 still rising at O/D shift.
basically the hp shifted from 4250 to around 5700 from a 2nd gear pull i did. so power would have continued to rise to 5700.
conclusion? get a/f right and do another pull or two. go to tim barth and get a real tune before i blow it up. the new intake setup pulls enough cfm to max an 80mm C&L maf. so it definitely has the cfm for big power at 5700-6100.
note: torque suffered from a cam at 0(zero) degrees advance. 20-30 were lost from that and 10 from short runners, the rest is A/F.
i lost 60 lb-ft. 30 from A/F and 30 from cams/intake setup. with the cams at stock position only 10-15 lb-ft lost to runner length.
at 5200 rpm i had 20 hp over stock and rising.
here is the sheet
my fuel pump is not keeping up, so i have to replace it. A/F ratios ranged from 19:1 to 15:1. so power was not there.
that's the bad news, no good numbers, and it did affect the torque curve a little, even if the numbers were 30lb-ft and 30-40 hp low.
the old dyno was
340 rwtq at 3650 and 250 rwhp at 4250. the new was
280 rwtq at 4800 and 244 rwhp at 5200 still rising at O/D shift.
basically the hp shifted from 4250 to around 5700 from a 2nd gear pull i did. so power would have continued to rise to 5700.
conclusion? get a/f right and do another pull or two. go to tim barth and get a real tune before i blow it up. the new intake setup pulls enough cfm to max an 80mm C&L maf. so it definitely has the cfm for big power at 5700-6100.
note: torque suffered from a cam at 0(zero) degrees advance. 20-30 were lost from that and 10 from short runners, the rest is A/F.
i lost 60 lb-ft. 30 from A/F and 30 from cams/intake setup. with the cams at stock position only 10-15 lb-ft lost to runner length.
at 5200 rpm i had 20 hp over stock and rising.
yes. i am not sure 'results' fits, i have to do another dyno once the A/F is sorted out.
but at least it's an update. the fact is, it made essentially the same horsepower even with bad running conditions.
but at least it's an update. the fact is, it made essentially the same horsepower even with bad running conditions.
Trending Topics
1 upper tooth is 8.5 degrees. the cams are really straight up. most cams are advanced 4 degrees to keep low end, so i really am hurting low end, but it's to demonstrate this intake.
the fact is, that without VCT i am losing 20-30 lb-ft until 5000-6000rpms. but with stock no-vct timing the cams quit at 5000, so i am in a delemna.
BBR sells adjustable fixed gears. set to 4 degrees advance my peak torque would have been around 300 rwtq even with 19:1- 15:1 lean condition.
the fact is, that without VCT i am losing 20-30 lb-ft until 5000-6000rpms. but with stock no-vct timing the cams quit at 5000, so i am in a delemna.
BBR sells adjustable fixed gears. set to 4 degrees advance my peak torque would have been around 300 rwtq even with 19:1- 15:1 lean condition.
Off topic, but either superford or musscle mustang mag mentions the aussie intake for the 5.4 that you were talking about. It doesnt specify what 5.4 it fits (4,3,2 valve) so I dont know. They have a picture of it and hint to a dyno run in the future.
Originally Posted by ThumperMX113
Jesus those A/Fs are insane, I'm suprised you even pushed the motor four times with a A/F like that..
the wideband was burnished white from the lean heat. it was working perfect. well at least we know these motors can handle a lot of abuse. i won't be running it at all until the fuel situation is fixed.
i expect power to follow suit and should be in the 270 rw range at 5200 and i will have to wait to get the tranny to shift at 5700 in 3rd to find the real max hp. it should actually be rising at 5700 still..
the fact is this config is better for 6500-6900 than 5700.
i expect power to follow suit and should be in the 270 rw range at 5200 and i will have to wait to get the tranny to shift at 5700 in 3rd to find the real max hp. it should actually be rising at 5700 still..
the fact is this config is better for 6500-6900 than 5700.
ok... update. i installed a 255lph pump. what a difference. track friday night in clarksville. it spins the hell out of 1st and 2nd now.
only numbers matter really. i have already run 79mph this year. that's about 310hp with the mis-matched combo. now there's no excuse. everything is there to do it.
82mph is the goal.
only numbers matter really. i have already run 79mph this year. that's about 310hp with the mis-matched combo. now there's no excuse. everything is there to do it.
82mph is the goal.
Originally Posted by assasinator
ok... update. i installed a 255lph pump. what a difference. track friday night in clarksville. it spins the hell out of 1st and 2nd now.
only numbers matter really. i have already run 79mph this year. that's about 310hp with the mis-matched combo. now there's no excuse. everything is there to do it.
82mph is the goal.
only numbers matter really. i have already run 79mph this year. that's about 310hp with the mis-matched combo. now there's no excuse. everything is there to do it.
82mph is the goal.




