Stock vs. ProCal vs. Bama - 2011 Mustang GT Dyno Results - Page 2 - Ford Mustang Forum
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #16 of 169 (permalink) Old 12-31-2010 Thread Starter
Site Sponsor
 
AMChrisRose's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Malvern
Posts: 2,245
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by icckart View Post
Chris, it looks like you have the limiter at about 7200 RPM??? When I spoke with your tuner he said you normally set to 7500 hard limit (said it was plenty safe). He said I could spec. a more conservative number (like 7300 hard) on the tune sheet. Looks like the FRPP tune didn't bump the rev. limit though??? What's a "safe" value?

Did you compare FRPP to Bama on a 6MT car? I know your "project" car is an auto. Any plans for a 6MT test? Can you guess as to the HP/TQ gains vs. the auto plot (about the same or what)?

Does the 4.10 (also with the auto TQ multiplier) make a big difference, vs a 6MT with 3.73 or 3.55? I assume the Dynojet software accounts for the FDR you enter but???
Nothing is entered in Dynojet software. Its simply the speed and RPM and a known weight of the drum. The only thing that can be modified is correction factor (STD vs. SAE, etc.). And they are all within 5%. This way, you cannot modify anything in order for results to get skewed. Doesn't matter what gears, tires, etc. on a dynojet. The 24" Rollers are a known mass, no need for weight of the vehicle, etc.

As for the rev limits, you can see that power is not a steady climb on the stock cams/head/manifolds. We shift our car at 7300 RPM and don't find it necessary to go farther. 7500 is fine on this motor, but if you're not making power, why? You know? The hard limit on a manual car is at 7500, same with our Auto. However, the shift points are set up for 7300RPM, which is where we've had the best luck shifting at.

Manual vs. Auto on the FRPP file is going to be identical (other than a tad more drivetrain loss on the Auto), because they have identical engine parameters, for the most part. The difference in gearing and 1:1 ratios is going to be the fun one to figure out. I could sit down and crunch numbers to find exactly what results are comparable, but this atleast shows the difference in the tunes. And from what I've seen, these cars dyno almost identical numbers know matter what gear you pull them in, regardless of rear axle ratio.

We're still experimenting, and these are only preliminary results, but we'll have more soon!


Chris Rose | AmericanMuscle.com
Toll Free: 866.727.1266 | M-F 9AM-9PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Bama Hotline: 888.226.9764 | M-F 9AM-5:30PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Free Same-Day Shipping!
Need help? PM AMAlexLazarus for immediate assistance!
AMChrisRose is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 169 (permalink) Old 12-31-2010 Thread Starter
Site Sponsor
 
AMChrisRose's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Malvern
Posts: 2,245
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlonShalev View Post
This just looks way too odd. Pro-cal loses HP? yeah I would think It's a lot more conservative but losing HP vs stock tune looks way too odd.
We agree. Our intentions were never to hurt FRPP. That's just the way the results came out. Everything was done in the same gear, all tests were done the same way. You can see they were all done within a degree of each other, same SAE correction factor (.99), same humidity. This was as fair and controlled as a test is going to get.

We installed the ProCal tool the same way as any consumer would, with no tricks (man that thing loads slow). There were no differences.


Chris Rose | AmericanMuscle.com
Toll Free: 866.727.1266 | M-F 9AM-9PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Bama Hotline: 888.226.9764 | M-F 9AM-5:30PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Free Same-Day Shipping!
Need help? PM AMAlexLazarus for immediate assistance!
AMChrisRose is offline  
GT Member
 
JohnRichard's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 2,396
 
If you look at the file time stamps the engine lost power as the day progressed, first run Bama, second run stock & third run ProCal.
and educate me here... why do all three show different gear ratio's?

I don't speak often but when I do, I don't have clue what I am talking about. I just repeat things that I once heard and do not repeat them correctly... My doctor told me it was an ID 10 T problem and it was incurable.
So when I reply to a post or add to a thread I just find the words elsewhere and copy and paste.
JohnRichard is offline  
 
Apprentice
 
konablue5oh's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 245
 
The numbers below about 3600 rpm seem too low. By 3000 rpm a 6MT shows around 300 ft-lbs tq and all three tunes here show quite a bit lower. I dont understand the explanations about the converter (unlocked vs locked). But does that have anything to do with it?

I'm not doubting that the bama tune makes more power, just wondering whether this is a valid comparison below say 3600 rpm.

Regarding the FRPP tune, I think it should show more TQ at lower RPM than the stock tune - they're not a bunch of morons over there. However, they claim only 16HP/7ftlbs peak increase on the 6MT which is less than 5% for HP and less than 2% for TQ. So from what I've seen with dyno numbers, if you only did 1 pull, the variation between pulls you see anyway may mask this small increase in peak numbers. You'd need to do multiple dyno pulls with each tune.

You did warn us this was preliminary data. Hopefully we see more data in follow-up posts. Looks pretty promising so far.
konablue5oh is offline  
PONY Member
4.6L Member
S197 Member
 
Cusp's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 910
 
I thought that the computer tweeks in the tune according to driving style and other environmental factors and can take a few miles to settle in. If this is the case, does flashing the PCM on the Dyno and making a pull right away reflect how things will be after a sufficient learning time has been allowed for? I don't know this is the case, but the idea occurred to me.

Does the FRPP tune adjust some things not reflected on the graphs like throttle response? Giving the car a more sporting feel if not a lot of additional power.

2008 manual GT with deluxe trim, Edelbrock e-force, FRPP GTB Mufflers. 3.73 gears, Coast Ultralight Drive-shaft. 18" OEM Polished Bullitts, Webelectric Sequentials, XM built into the Shaker 500. Alarm and Escort RedLine.
Cusp is offline  
Rookie
 
ThePinkPony's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 7
 
I don't think he "Lost HP" He just traded it in Torque. The same amount of HP he lost is what he gained in TQ. Since HP is not possible to felt, they probably thought they could sacrifice it for TQ and let people believe they had more HP.
ThePinkPony is offline  
post #22 of 169 (permalink) Old 12-31-2010 Thread Starter
Site Sponsor
 
AMChrisRose's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Malvern
Posts: 2,245
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnRichard View Post
If you look at the file time stamps the engine lost power as the day progressed, first run Bama, second run stock & third run ProCal.
and educate me here... why do all three show different gear ratio's?
All runs were run with almost identical ECT and IAT temperatures, so heat soak other variables shouldn't have played a part. We did datalog a few things with the Ford IDS just to make sure we went lab quality.

Gear ratios are never 110% identical run to run. What you're looking for a huge separation.. for example, we did a 4th gear run, gear ratio was 85 and some change. The little decimal difference is standard run fluctuations.

Chris Rose | AmericanMuscle.com
Toll Free: 866.727.1266 | M-F 9AM-9PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Bama Hotline: 888.226.9764 | M-F 9AM-5:30PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Free Same-Day Shipping!
Need help? PM AMAlexLazarus for immediate assistance!
AMChrisRose is offline  
post #23 of 169 (permalink) Old 12-31-2010 Thread Starter
Site Sponsor
 
AMChrisRose's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Malvern
Posts: 2,245
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by konablue5oh View Post
The numbers below about 3600 rpm seem too low. By 3000 rpm a 6MT shows around 300 ft-lbs tq and all three tunes here show quite a bit lower. I dont understand the explanations about the converter (unlocked vs locked). But does that have anything to do with it?

I'm not doubting that the bama tune makes more power, just wondering whether this is a valid comparison below say 3600 rpm.

Regarding the FRPP tune, I think it should show more TQ at lower RPM than the stock tune - they're not a bunch of morons over there. However, they claim only 16HP/7ftlbs peak increase on the 6MT which is less than 5% for HP and less than 2% for TQ. So from what I've seen with dyno numbers, if you only did 1 pull, the variation between pulls you see anyway may mask this small increase in peak numbers. You'd need to do multiple dyno pulls with each tune.

You did warn us this was preliminary data. Hopefully we see more data in follow-up posts. Looks pretty promising so far.
The converter being unlocked is why you see low torque numbers at those low speeds, yes. However, regardless they were ALL unlocked, so the GAINS are going to be proportional. If one were done with the converter locked, then I would agree that the test would hold less value at lower speeds, but they were all done in the same manner.

We did do multiple runs, and we took the best of each. The runs were almost perfectly over-layed anyway, so it really didn't matter which ones we chose.

Yes, this is preliminary, we're going to do a video with a little more information, including Ford IDS datalogging.

Chris Rose | AmericanMuscle.com
Toll Free: 866.727.1266 | M-F 9AM-9PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Bama Hotline: 888.226.9764 | M-F 9AM-5:30PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Free Same-Day Shipping!
Need help? PM AMAlexLazarus for immediate assistance!
AMChrisRose is offline  
post #24 of 169 (permalink) Old 12-31-2010 Thread Starter
Site Sponsor
 
AMChrisRose's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Malvern
Posts: 2,245
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cusp View Post
I thought that the computer tweeks in the tune according to driving style and other environmental factors and can take a few miles to settle in. If this is the case, does flashing the PCM on the Dyno and making a pull right away reflect how things will be after a sufficient learning time has been allowed for? I don't know this is the case, but the idea occurred to me.

Does the FRPP tune adjust some things not reflected on the graphs like throttle response? Giving the car a more sporting feel if not a lot of additional power.
The spark advance and air/fuel ratio has a window where it learns. We did multiple pulls and took the best of each configuration. These numbers reflect after any "learning". Keep in mind, the learning is not responsible for any real huge gains, either. That's probably why the runs were within 2-3RWHP back-to-back. Again, either way we took the BEST of 2-3 runs. The learning processes are more for idle/part throttle operation. The WOT stuff is simply wideband o2 feedback and knock sensor feedback. Within 1 run, this stuff should be fine.

There is an increase in the Ford driver demand engine table, which is where you'll see an increase in throttle response. That's where most people are "feeling" the difference. Every aftermarket tune does this. While it can be an illusion of more power, it really does have a nicer response. The driveability of the Ford tune is pretty nice.

Chris Rose | AmericanMuscle.com
Toll Free: 866.727.1266 | M-F 9AM-9PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Bama Hotline: 888.226.9764 | M-F 9AM-5:30PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Free Same-Day Shipping!
Need help? PM AMAlexLazarus for immediate assistance!
AMChrisRose is offline  
PONY Member
 
Zathras's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 275
 
This is a tangent, but on the stock run, I'm surprised the torque is so low. I thought the 5.0 was supposed to be a 390 lb/ft torque monster. I know you lose some in the drivetrain, but not that much!

Is this kind of sub-300-torque reading typical for the 5.0 automatic?

2011 Kona Blue GT Premium
Zathras is offline  
GT Member
5.0L Member
 
94GTLaserRC's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,140
 
I know you're not going to give specific secrets, but what could possibly so much different to acct for that much in TQ, assuming the data is legit?

2. What size/type wheel/rims were on the vehicle?
RC

2011 GT/CS Auto-Security Package, HID, Remote Start.

STEEDA: LCA/Upper 3rd Link, Adj Rear Sway bar, Spyder 20" Rims 11"/9.5", Hood Struts.

VMP S/C w/82mm Pulley, JLT CF Intake, Vortech Max Flow BAP, AFCO Dual Fan Heat Exchanger, FMS 3.31 Gears, Kooks 1-7/8 LTs, Kooks Off Road H-Pipe, GT500 AB's, Baer Big Brake Kit with 14" Rotors, Aeroforce Interceptor Dual Scan Gauge w/Speed of Sound A-Pillar.

Roush Front Bumper, Saleen Front Grille, Custom Radiator Cover/Coil Covers
94GTLaserRC is offline  
post #27 of 169 (permalink) Old 01-01-2011 Thread Starter
Site Sponsor
 
AMChrisRose's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Malvern
Posts: 2,245
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zathras View Post
This is a tangent, but on the stock run, I'm surprised the torque is so low. I thought the 5.0 was supposed to be a 390 lb/ft torque monster. I know you lose some in the drivetrain, but not that much!

Is this kind of sub-300-torque reading typical for the 5.0 automatic?
You have to remember, the torque converter was unlocked, and many of the factory torque reduction parameters are going to rape the torque output of the car.

If we took this same car, and loaded a stock tune in with a dyno lock and converter lock via SCT, the numbers would have been like 355/335 or something similar. Then again, if we did the same thing for the Ford tune and for our tune, you'd see a small increase as well (less of a torque increase, because we modify the torque reduction in our tune and the Ford tune probably does as well).

Chris Rose | AmericanMuscle.com
Toll Free: 866.727.1266 | M-F 9AM-9PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Bama Hotline: 888.226.9764 | M-F 9AM-5:30PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Free Same-Day Shipping!
Need help? PM AMAlexLazarus for immediate assistance!
AMChrisRose is offline  
post #28 of 169 (permalink) Old 01-01-2011 Thread Starter
Site Sponsor
 
AMChrisRose's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Malvern
Posts: 2,245
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 94GTLaserRC View Post
I know you're not going to give specific secrets, but what could possibly so much different to acct for that much in TQ, assuming the data is legit?

2. What size/type wheel/rims were on the vehicle?
RC
That's 100% legit. It's a combination of everything that we do with air/fuel ratio, timing, VCT and drive-by-wire. There's not really one single thing responsible for it, but all of them. There's a ton of power left on the table.

This was an Auto with 18" Bullitts. The tires were I believe 275/40/18? I might be wrong it could have been 275/35/18?

Chris Rose | AmericanMuscle.com
Toll Free: 866.727.1266 | M-F 9AM-9PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Bama Hotline: 888.226.9764 | M-F 9AM-5:30PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Free Same-Day Shipping!
Need help? PM AMAlexLazarus for immediate assistance!
AMChrisRose is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
4.6L Member
 
Brutal Metal's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: Largo
Posts: 5,431
 
Send a message via Yahoo to Brutal Metal
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnRichard View Post
If you look at the file time stamps the engine lost power as the day progressed, first run Bama, second run stock & third run ProCal.
and educate me here... why do all three show different gear ratio's?
If the ECT temps are similar that shouldn't make any difference, heat soak would be minimal with the cooldown time Chris talked about But it is weird that a modified tune file would loose power over stock, you'd think spark advance would at least be dialed in?

99 SVT Cobra-Teksid.020(284ci)
Stock HCI,Manley Pistons & H Beam Rods
Polished Vortech V-2,Reichard 3.10/6.75ATI(14lbs Boost)
GodSpeed SpecV Intercooler,60's,Twin Aviator's,
04 SVT Tank/Twin Hat,SCT-BA5000,BF IRS Brace
MPH Powerpipe,ProCharger BPV,
Mac O/R H & 2.5 CB
Vogtland Springs,Bilsteins,MM CC Plates,Steeda Tri-Ax,MT ET Streets
Home of Worlds Fastest All Ford Outlaw 10.5 Car 4.03/200.80 Fordspeed Racing
Brutal Metal is offline  
post #30 of 169 (permalink) Old 01-01-2011 Thread Starter
Site Sponsor
 
AMChrisRose's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Malvern
Posts: 2,245
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brutal Metal View Post
If the ECT temps are similar that shouldn't make any difference, heat soak would be minimal with the cooldown time Chris talked about But it is weird that a modified tune file would loose power over stock, you'd think spark advance would at least be dialed in?
Yeah, if you look at what temperature we ran the car in, and the cool-down time between runs, plus the two fans - it wasn't heat soak. The ECT/IATs were almost identical, within a few degrees.

I didn't want to get into tune details, because these are only the preliminary results, but the Ford tune, from our preliminary datalogs was a little low. We're now datalogging with a Ford IDS unit that gives much more precise and lab-quality datalogs, to confirm this. So far, that's what we've seen.

Chris


Chris Rose | AmericanMuscle.com
Toll Free: 866.727.1266 | M-F 9AM-9PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Bama Hotline: 888.226.9764 | M-F 9AM-5:30PM EST | Sat 10AM-4PM EST
Free Same-Day Shipping!
Need help? PM AMAlexLazarus for immediate assistance!
AMChrisRose is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread

Tags
2011 mustang , bama , dyno , procal , results

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1