11.2% would make it more efficent then most Manuals, I DON'T BUY IT.

 

Whether you want to believe the hype or not, Dynojets are all calibrated by the manufacturer to give power results within 1% of each other. I'm not going to get into a silly flame war here on this subject, but if you get a large discrepancy b/w two or three Dynojets then they may not be calibrated correctly...and from my understanding, after so much use they should be rechecked to make sure the calibration is in order.

That being said, the biggest thing they have to offer is tuning a vehicle in a controlled environment, but under load, so its VERY close to simulating real life driving. So, documented changes on the same dyno using the same vehicle are the real benefits here.

If you choose not to believe Anderson Ford, that's fine. There's nothing really different about that then MAD coming over here and saying he doesn't believe some of the numbers posted on this board. Heck, maybe you don't believe my documented dyno figures of my vehicles below...show up to the track and get the smirk wiped off your face, then. I really don't care. I think its interesting that the same people who get all riled up (me a little bit, too) about someone questioning the validity of track results...turn right around and are so quick to question results of ONE test.

Could the dyno be out of calibration? Possibly. I don't live up there, I don't work for Anderson. I have come to trust and respect Rick Anderson's knowledge and expertise regarding high performance Fords, however. This isn't a Super Ford matter...its Anderson's dyno. They're the ones documenting the power made by different mods.

Also, saying that adding a chip into the mix would result in another +20hp gain or whatever is not correct. I've been around the 5.0 Mustang scene for a LONG time. These MAF meters calibrated by the manufacturer _can_ be made to do more than just flow more air than a stocker. You can lean or richen fuel mixtures just by altering the MAF calibration. Granted, its a different way of messing with the stock programming of the EEC compared to using a chip, but the end result can be the same (leaner is meaner...as long as its safe).

Could there be a difference in one Pro-M meter to the next? ABSOLUTELY! As they do more R&D they will more likely be able to tweak it for more power. I found this very true with the 4v Cobras. I purchased one in '96 almost immediately after buying my car. It did nothing...I returned it to the local Mustang shop I bought it from. Seriously, it recorded less than a 2hp gain on the dyno. Same dyno about a year later I tried another one (b/c supposedly the calibrations had been improved dramatically). Saw no less than 12hp/10tq at the rear wheels. Then a year later with the SAME mods, I dyno'd it at a _different_ Dynojet. HP/TQ was within 1hp and 1 ft/lb of each other from the dyno session a year earlier...same exact state of tune.

This isn't to prove that Anderson's data is correct without a shadow of a doubt. I wasn't there. Probably no one on this list was there. It all comes down to what you want to believe. Maybe MMFF will do an article on some different mods to a Lightning soon and post their numbers.

I think its great that we at least have some data points to reference.

As far as the % lost through the drivetrain? I'm no engineer. I've always maintained that its more of a set HP loss than it is really a %. Take two drivetrains set up EXACTLY the same but put them behind two VERY DIFFERENT motors. Say one is making 200hp and another is making 400hp. If its a straight % loss, then the drivetrain that's behind the 400hp motor will soak up 2x the amount of the other drivetrain...even though they are _identical_ parts. I don't buy that for one second.

Flame away. We just got through having nearly 100 posts of people trying to PROVE someone else wrong....

------------------
Wes Tarbox
90 LX 5.0 (10.69 @ 134.7)--586rwhp/587rwtq
96 Cobra (12.63 @ 114.5)--390rwhp/441rwtq
99 Lightning (13.20 @ 103.3)--362rwhp/444rwtq
00 Expedition XLT 5.4
http://members.aol.com/Wa2fst/index.html

 

Last fall I went to the Ford Motorsports Enthusiasts Dyno Day at Paul's High Performance in Jackson, MI. With just a Superchip I ran 355hp/440lb-ft (both about 20 more than with the chip in the #1 position) on his DynoJet.
http://www.teamfme.com/news/item0045.html

This past April 29th, 4 Lightnings (2-'99 & 2-'00) ran 317-343hp/404-454lb-ft on the same dyno. I don't know what modifications they have, but the numbers seem fairly consistant.
http://www.teamfme.com/news/item0072.html

 

Had '99 L dyno tested several months ago at Houston Performance. Results: 1st pull: HP 361.3 , Torque 445.4
2nd pull: HP 360.8 , Torque 442.0

Stock box with K&N, Superchip, Full Bassani. Since added Downs Filter Kit.

Similar to Superford article.

SVT#042

 

Seems to me that a lot of you guys have dyno runs, but you won't post them?

If you need a URL to post from you are free to use mine!

By the way I made 325wrhp stock (like everyone else) and 325wrhp with a Pro-m and K&N (that was NOT a typo) and 350rwhp chiped.

 

Fine...

I'll scan the thing and put it on my web page. Please. This is silly. Like I said...no different than the entire debacle and argument with MAD, 'cept the shoe is on the other foot now.

I don't know how to post stuff here...every time I try it kicks it out. Whatever. Again, I have nothing to prove to you or anyone else...what a waste of my friggin' time it would be to give out misinformation. Yeah, I'm BS'ing everyone about my dyno runs. Go check out my web page. I have a scanned dyno pull on my LX there.

F1, no one questioned your sad results with the Pro-M meter. Then again, maybe you missed my entire post about why some may work differently than others. But, I have no reason to doubt your results whether you scanned it and put it here or not. Guess I take people at their _word_. I refuse to have my integrity called into question, but whatever.

Then again, if someone spits out info you don't like or agree with, its BS (or implied as such). If someone questions what you say, they're an idiot (my word...you use other choice words). It's a no-win situation. We can argue about this stuff forever.

And no, 325hp isn't like "everyone else"...or there wouldn't be owners who see other results. A buddy is getting his new 1000 mile '00 L dyno'd at SpeedWorks in Lewisville on Sat. I'll be happy to post the results of that. It's bone stock. He thinks its pretty slow, but then it would be if you have 10 and 11-sec cars to drive.

I'm curious...what's the best your truck has run at the track? I think we'd ALL agree that's what really matters, right?

------------------
Wes Tarbox
90 LX 5.0 (10.69 @ 134.7)--586rwhp/587rwtq
96 Cobra (12.63 @ 114.5)--390rwhp/441rwtq
99 Lightning (13.20 @ 103.3)--362rwhp/444rwtq
00 Expedition XLT 5.4
http://members.aol.com/Wa2fst/index.html

 

Wes,

I don't have a clue where you are coming from?

I post facts here to save L owners money; the PRO-M didn't do anything after being tweaked on, on a dyno by IMO a great technician for one hour.

What’s so wrong with posting that?

Hey, I have a chip from Dallas Mustang that made 25rwhp, I have posted this about a bazzion times. I have posted my dyno runs for all to see, and SIMPLY asked if others would do the same, so I could compare them to mine. I guess you interpret this, as I don't believe L owners?

I never criticized that L's don't make the HP and times that everyone states, God only knows that I probably have one of the highest L street kill race scores on this forum and my only losses were to two Vipers.

As far as Mad is concerned, he couldn't live with the fact that his precious track calculator didn't compute. I can't see how you can say the shoe is now on the other foot, if I get 130 post that state that they have the same setup and make that HP (350 stock, 370 w/o chipped), believe you me I shout the F%#K up after 2 posts! I FACT all I've seen is about 20 post in this forum the rate their L's in the 290 to 330 range, but by your omission lets add 20rwhp to the fire. So lets make a 60rwhp range between the L's? That's 20% between L's I don't think so.

Now that I've vented, you have you're opinion go and post it and I have mine.

Best regards.

 

Did I hear that right?
Sal needs to start a Cult for these guys...

[This message has been edited by 2000Silverbulletonorder (edited 05-18-2000).]

 

he did (with the Gen 1's) during his tenure as the president of the National Lightning Owners Club (when it comes to lightnings, hebedaman!)

 

Ohhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.......

Ohhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm........


DOug

 

Here you go:





[This message has been edited by 2000Silverbulletonorder (edited 05-18-2000).]

 

some might take exception to the crucifix as a "cult". how bout a big happy budda or a huge conical air filter that we know exists, but only the "chosen" may have.

 

F1,

I'd never fault anyone for posting their own experiences. Period. In fact if you read everything in my post, you'll see that I "hear ya" when you said you got a whopping ZERO from the Pro-M 80mm MAF.

No matter who is tuning with the thing on the dyno (even those guys at DMP...another story), unless they have the ability to recalibrate the MAF (which I don't believe they can...burning chips is different altogether), then there's nothing they can do with it. They buy those things from Pro-M, just like you and I can.

A MAF can be made to do some of the same things as a chip...I'm simplifying this here but it can have a big affect on the fuel/spark curves (not by actually changing the factory curve itself, but what tables the EEC may look up). I've seen huge differences in A/F ratios with just the change of a MAF meter. If its calibrated to make the engine run a bit lean compared to the stocker then I can see someone picking up some power. This is why I will just contend that some meters may be better than others (especially right now, since they're basically in the "guinea pig" stage). I assume you read my example about my '96 Cobra. Believe me, I wasn't happy either when I only got 2 hp the first one I tried. But, after reading over and over 2 years later after more R&D had been done that people were picking up some power with it...I gave it a shot again.

Do I think the meter Anderson used would do squat on your truck as it sits? No, I don't. Now that a custom chip has been burned to your satisfaction and you picked up 25hp, which is very good, I'd have to say that more than likely the chip would have to be reburned even if you got a meter that had a bit better calibration. My point is that in many cases, they both are used to do the same thing...change/manipulate the factory programming to some extent (chip being more precise, of course). I don't think anyone would ever see 10hp from a meter and 25 on top of that from a chip. Just my opinion.
People don't pick up power from a little larger MAF on an otherwise stock vehicle...they pick up power b/c of the calibration of the MAF itself.

I know I'm getting off the subject here.

I didn't dyno my truck when it was stock, so I have no idea what it made (and I wasn't arguing that point). 3 pulls with the chip only it ranged from 355-362, so that's an error factor of ~1%. All the L's I've seen at DynoTech in Garland were in the 335+rwhp range bone stock. I've never seen 290rwhp. I'd think that would be very, very low, and really out of the ordinary, but I haven't searched the archives on this, so whatever you say. But, if a 3400lb Mustang making 290rwhp runs mid-13s (maybe), then a 4500lb brick doing the same will be lucky to run mid-14s. Ooops... that might be considered improper theory again. Been racing these things at the dragstrip too long to believe otherwise, though. There's a lot more to it than that, I understand (gearing, traction, etc)...but I'm a little weary of the "TQ rules" stuff, or we'd all be driving turbo diesels with 550ft/lbs of TQ.

Another fact is that we're sitting here arguing about a _magazine article_. "My daddy can beat up your daddy"...and we're sitting behind a computer screen. I apologize!! I should never have even entered into the debate. Frankly, its not worthy of argument. Certainly there's nothing wrong with posting your experiences...as you said, that's where the rest of us benefit. But, picking and choosing who to believe on this board is a little immature, IMO. I choose to be a little more diplomatic, but that's just me. If you don't think I'm a credible source of info here...that's certainly your prerogative. I've got WA 2 good of a rep both locally and nationally with the Mustang crowd. Like I said before, it'd be a complete waste of my time to BS someone here, but it won't hurt my feelings if you or others feel that way.

And, I'm not the only one here who thinks that 34x rwhp is feasible from a stock L. Would that be kind of high? Sure. Even Super Ford commented about that in the article. I just KNOW from my experience that Anderson is a good source of info and knowledge. Maybe someone should call them and ask what THAT particular truck is running at the track? Might be real tell-tale of what's going on. Just a thought.

Tired of grown-ups acting like children (ME included since I got caught up in this _worthless_ banter), so I'm

Signing off... best of luck to _all_ of you L owners. May you post many kills in the future. Just be safe doing it. You know where to reach me. I'll be back if I have some questions for you "experts". For the time being its remaining in its current slow state with no more planned mods.

------------------
Wes Tarbox
90 LX 5.0 (10.69 @ 134.7)--586rwhp/587rwtq
96 Cobra (12.63 @ 114.5)--390rwhp/441rwtq
99 Lightning (13.20 @ 103.3)--362rwhp/444rwtq
00 Expedition XLT 5.4 http://members.aol.com/Wa2fst/index.html




[This message has been edited by WA 2 FST (edited 05-19-2000).]

 

f1 car, you wanted dyno runs for a stock '00. Look at the post that Sixpipes did about our dyno runs. Sixpipes is modded, but Silver 2000 was bone stock except for a K&N element in the original air box, and mine was completely stock. Silver 2000 showed a peak rear wheel HP of 328, and mine was 334. Both of us plan to go back for more dyno runs after we get filters and chips.

 

If we ever get filters and chips.......

Co-Workers buying Porsche Boxster's and talking trash.... Need to embarass them... Need Chip and Filter .....Praying to the North east ? To the Chip and Filter Gods

Doug