Fordchip was down in the ATL doing what they do best and one of the cars/trucks was a blown Harley F-150 and I figured I'd pass along the #'s.

The baseline was done with a JDM chip installed and netted a measly 342 but then after the first run with the new Fordchip burn it was up to 395 and the guy was extreamly happy to say the very least. There also was a Paxton blown blackwood truck on the rollers but I never got the 411 on those numbers.

Good job Fordchip!

-Scott

 

Hi Scott,

That kind of result is possible via tuning alone *ONLY* if the original tuning was so far off as to be grossly incompetent.

I don't want anyone thinking they are going to be able to get *another* 50+ HP at the rear wheels via tuning alone when they already have a competent program, as that will not *ever* happen.

It's very important to note that without any supporting data whatsoever, such as the before & after A/F's, all the atmospheric data before & after, and all the operational data (MAF flow & voltage, & everything else), those numbers tell the general public absolutely nothing, and tell us as tuners that this was only possible via tuning alone only if the previous tuning was *way* off.

We have seen situations in which this kind of result was possible, and have achieved that kind of result in 2002 & 2003 Harleys numerous times ourselves. But in each case, it was only because the configuration wasn't tuned for correctly (if at all) to begin with, or the tuning was so far off as to be incompetent, which is always possible of course.

It sounds very fetching to claim another 50+ HP via tuning alone, but in reality that happens ONLY if the original tuning is so far off as to not even be close to correct for the configuration at hand. Well, unless we're talking about a 1999 or 2000 Lightning, which are so pig-rich from the factory that we can easily add another 40+ peak HP to at the rear wheels in bone stock trim, with no other modifications than just our tuning. But for any 2001 or newer Lightning, or any factory supercharged Harley, a 50+ HP gain at the wheels via tuning alone isn't going to happen unless there is something very wrong with the previous tune/configuration, so that must be what was going on there.

Please understand, I don't mean to rain on your parade, nor do I mean to say that those guys didn't get that result, not at all - they are good tuners, to be sure, and credit where credit is due! But it was an abnormal result rather than anything typical or normal, and only happened due to *something* being way off beforehand.

The bottom line is, a proper tune is absolutely critical to these supercharged 5.4 Lightnings & Harleys, not only for power gains, but to keep the motor safe,. healthy & pumping out power for many miles. Nice to see a good job was done!

Thanks for your post & have fun,

 

Your kidding right? I hate to rain on your parade but these runs were back to back so I figured the changes in the pressure of the Atmosphere where small enough to leave out and to tell you the truth I have never seen "atmospheric data before & after, and all the operational data" posted along with dyno numbers.
I stated the JDM chip was the baseline so gee I wonder if that "tune" was "so far off as to be incompetent" DUH? that was the point All-Star.



Thanks for your post & have fun

 

Chill out, or get lost.

 

if the h/d made 342 rwhp isnt that about what a stock one does?

if the guy got 395, let me give you some advice, document it, and get rich saling the chip to all the lightning guys and h/d guys because getting 50 hp out of a stock truck with a chip is something special. any chance you have a graph or any info on how much torque and at what rpm the chip gains h.p.?

 

Hi BigScott,

I'm going to ignore the childish "All Star" comment for now, and just write it off to you having an immature moment.

It doesn't matter that the runs were done "back to back," that has absolutely nothing to do with having *none* of the supporting data, the A/F's, the operational data, etc., to show the actual conditions of the motor. Which *is*, by the way, absolutely SOP in dyno tuning, whether you happen to be aware of that or not.

And by the way, doing back to back runs will only result in each successive run showing 3-8 HP less power than what would be shown on an initial pull, before all that additional heat is pumped into the powertrain (which in this case could mean that they actually gained a bit *more* power, say, 55 or 57 HP instead of 51 & change). All of that has nothing to do with not having before & after A/F's & operational data.

For example, we have gained upwards of 70 HP at the wheels on a few 4.0 V6 Rangers that have had a supercharger added, but that kind of huge additional power gain was only possible because the *previous* tuning was so far off (A/F's in the 9's, etc.), and I'd never advertise "Hey, let us tune your Ranger's 4.0 V6 and get another 70 HP" just because one or a coupla vehicle's tuning was so far off that we got that kind of gain, or want anyone to think that was going to happen for them. See what I mean?

Or for another example, take someone that puts a 6 PSI pulley on a Lightning or Harley & tires running on the factory program - compare *those* dyno numbers & operational data & you quickly see why a 40-60 HP gain is possible.

Abnormally large power gains like that happen only when *correcting* tuning that is pretty darn far off.

I think we're actually arguing semantics here, and what I mean is simply this: while they are indeed very good tuners, of course, and that kind of result is possible, it is *only* possible when the previous tuning is so far off as to be vastly inappropriate for the mechanical configuration, and that nobody should think that after having a proper tune, or even a tune that is "fairly close," *another* 50+ HP is available via tuning, as it's not. That's all.

Now if we had the before A/F's (in this case, on the JDM program), as well as the after A/F's (with the revised tuning that yielded the 50 HP gain), and if we had the before MAF flow data, etc., in other words, all of the operational data, it would be very obvious exactly how & why there was that much additional power that could be made. And gaining 50+ HP at the rear wheels via tuning alone on that vehicle will only happen when the original tuning is *way* off for the application/configuration. And I explained that quite thoroughly in my previous post.

So I think we're basically agreeing in principle, actually, and my original point is simply that we don't want anyone thinking that after they have a proper tune, *another* 50 HP is going to be available via tuning, as that will never happen even with God tuning the motor.

So relax my friend, I think we're really speaking a lot closer than what it appears, they corrected some pretty far out of whack tuning, and that's obviously the only way such gains were possible. Thanks for your post & have fun!

 

Hi BrotherDave,

A stock supercharged Harley isn't really going to make 342 HP at the rear wheels, though as I mentioned in my original post, you *can* see that kind of number on a Dynojet from a Harley with nothing more than a good tune & otherwise stock. This is due not to huge power gains, but due to decent power gains and an optimistic inertia dyno, that's all. Realistically, we see most stock Harley's making roughly around the 280 to as much as 290 HP range at the rear wheels, on an eddy current dyno. On a Dynojet, we've seen stock Harleys show as much as 320+ HP at the wheels.

Now there are plenty of stock *Lightnings* that will show 342 HP & more on a Dynojet (which is still a very optimistic number), but usually the Harleys won't read that high in bone-stock trim, even on a Dynojet.

Just FYI................

 

"I'm going to ignore the childish "All Star" comment for now, and just write it off to you having an immature moment."

How is" All star" a childish comment SportO?

Just because YOU can't get the numbers does not mean they cannot be gotten by others more experienced then yourself. I like the Dynojet excuse also, Tooners always default to saying that the numbers were fudged when they are challenged (Not that I even challenged you, I just posted some back to back numbers and you went on about temps and global positioning).

Just FYI................

 

I think someone needs to call the troll police...

 

I would have to agree with Mike, gains of 50 hp through tuning could only happen if the first tuning was grossly incompetant.

Mike is a knowledgeable well respected contributor to these forums, and for you to come off with an "All star" comment sounds pretty childish. Mike did a very good job of explaining his position and it sounds like you have an issue with admitting when you are wrong.

 

New poster with 5 posts has a lot of credibility around here, heh

 

I think it would be best for you to chill out. Mike is definatly one of the most knowledgable members on this board and like it or not he knows what hes talking about. Actually i could have told you that you cant gain 50 hp with just a tune. If you noticed, he wrote a huge lengthy responce to explain to you the circumstances with absolutly nothing to benefit him. So glad you got a nice tune, but think before you post a$$holed remarks.

 

Examine a sample of postings made by Mike T. over the years he's been contributing to this board. Check them for REAL data about Ford engines. I think you'll find he has a huge credibility established with the folks here, especially the Lightning guys.

Now, take a sample of customers who Mike T. has helped over the years. See how many are satisfied; see how many are not.

I'll start: I'm completely satisfied with Mike T.'s support, services and products.

Take some friendly advice: READ and UNDERSTAND what Mike posted BEFORE you make your grade school comments here. Since you obviously did not understand what Mike was trying to tell you, I'll translate.

The initial program the truck was running on was faulty. (Whether it was a JDM, factory or other tune makes no difference)

The new program the truck was running on was good.

If the initial program was good to start with, it would not have been possible for the new program to make 50 more HP.

The comments about the additional data Mike asked for would only be pertinent to someone who knows what they are doing / talking about regarding tuning trucks via the computer.

You obviously are not one of those people.

By the way SportO, it's "tuners", not "tooners".

????? Global positioning ?????

 

Thanks to you mike for all of your time and expertise you have devoted to us lightning owners adviseing us i myself am grateful to have someone such as your self who have spent many hours of your time informing us and instructing us the correct and proper procedure on our trucks as well as other grateful members on this forum you are tops in my book on knowledge on fords and chips and dyno read out/ tom