My '12 GT dyno numbers...

FivePoint.0 said:

MT-82. Only "mod" is FRPP 3.73(not a performance mod since they come with 3.73 from the factory).

Best 5th gear pull was 374.57 HP and 362.37 TQ SAE. 91 octane and 4100 miles on the clock.

5th gear pull was no problem reading peak power on the stock tune. The dyno cut of at about 6700 RPM's.

Click to expand...

You have an axle back exhaust as well which gives you a few hp

Nice numbers though! Now get a tune and see the numbers go UP!

Here's a pic of the crumbled dyno sheet..lol

old_goat said:

What was the weather/humidity? What kind of dyno and was it calibrated correctly? People normally want an absolute value, but there are also some variables that will indicate lower or higher RWHP values.

Click to expand...

72 degrees, 44% humidity. I think it was a Dynojet 224, or something like that. Yes, it's calibrated correctly. What do you mean absolute value? I posted the dyno sheet on post #5.

5POINTO, 5th gear is 1:1 with the MT-82 transmission.

FivePoint.0 said:

What do you mean absolute value?

Click to expand...

You can make a pull, then 5 minutes make another pull and come up with a different number. You can make a pull in November and come up with a number, then make a pull in April and come up with another number. I'm just stating that dyno numbers are inherently without absolutes.

It's no different that going to the track in November and going to the same track in April, different conditions won't allow an 'absolute'. You can go to the track on November 9 with -500 DA and get a few times, and go back to the same track on November 16 with +500 DA and get different times, or instead of DA, the track prep could be different.

For example if my 2013 GT goes 12.8 in -500 DA, does this mean that my car is faster that another 2013 GT that runs a 12.95 in +2500 DA?

All I'm trying to state is that there are many different variables in what a car dyno's or runs at the track.

Thanks. However, isn't that what SAE is for, to eliminate all those variables? I'm happy with my best pull, regardless. There was a '13 GT that was tuned the same day. After the tune, it only read 36X horsepower(JLT intake). It was an auto, but the numbers were definitely not inflated. If anything, they're low. The car barely had 1K miles.

RCE EATR said:

Gotta say the car looks to be running rather lean...

Click to expand...

Looks fine to me. If the dyno operator got the a/f readings from a tailpipe sniffer it would read about 0.5 points higher than what it is, so he is running about 12.5:1 if I am looking at the graph correctly. With my BBR tune mine was reading 12.8:1 at the tailpipe going through the stock cats.

OP, the graph looks great for a stock 5.0 and SAE smoothing 5 is pretty much the standard. SAE won't correct for atmospheric conditions perfectly as it's just a numerical calculation so just take the numbers as a baseline to compare to mods you make on your own car. Be sure to use the same dyno for those future comparisons.

Grimace427 said:

Looks fine to me. If the dyno operator got the a/f readings from a tailpipe sniffer it would read about 0.5 points higher than what it is, so he is running about 12.5:1 if I am looking at the graph correctly. With my BBR tune mine was reading 12.8:1 at the tailpipe going through the stock cats.

OP, the graph looks great for a stock 5.0 and SAE smoothing 5 is pretty much the standard. SAE won't correct for atmospheric conditions perfectly as it's just a numerical calculation so just take the numbers as a baseline to compare to mods you make on your own car. Be sure to use the same dyno for those future comparisons.

Click to expand...

Actually, they disconnected a sensor and took the readings from there, not the tailpipe. This is my true A/F ratio.

As far as my numbers, STD would have been higher, so I'm pretty happy with the SAE results.

FivePoint.0 said:

Actually, they disconnected a sensor and took the readings from there, not the tailpipe. This is my true A/F ratio.

Click to expand...

Disconnected a sensor?

Which sensor? If they disconnected the front wideband O2 sensor, that is pure craziness. If they plugged in at the rear O2 sensor, then the readings would be the same as a tailpipe sniffer.

Grimace427 said:

Disconnected a sensor?

Which sensor? If they disconnected the front wideband O2 sensor, that is pure craziness. If they plugged in at the rear O2 sensor, then the readings would be the same as a tailpipe sniffer.

Click to expand...

Yes, it was the rear sensor. I didn't know it would be the same as the tailpipe. The tailpipe meter was broken. Thanks for the clarification.

Grimace427 said:

Disconnected a sensor?

Which sensor? If they disconnected the front wideband O2 sensor, that is pure craziness. If they plugged in at the rear O2 sensor, then the readings would be the same as a tailpipe sniffer.

Click to expand...

Yes, it was the rear sensor. I didn't know it would be the same as the tailpipe. The tailpipe device was broken. Thanks for the clarification.

Good thing it was only the rear O2 sensor as the fronts CONTROL the a/f operation of the ECU. That could have ended in disaster! The catalytic converts will alter the a/f readings a tad so reading just behind them or at the tailpipe makes little if any difference. You a/f ratio looks good, but an actual tuner should chime in for an expert opinion.

Grimace427 said:

Good thing it was only the rear O2 sensor as the fronts CONTROL the a/f operation of the ECU. That could have ended in disaster! The catalytic converts will alter the a/f readings a tad so reading just behind them or at the tailpipe makes little if any difference. You a/f ratio looks good, but an actual tuner should chime in for an expert opinion.

Click to expand...

Thanks! The dyno is actually at a mustang tuning shop. I specifically remember the tuner telling his worker to make sure he hooked up the rear sensor. He said everything looks good for a stock 5.0. I just wanted to get a baseline for now.