One more dyno sheet from BamaChips...

[Doug904]

Hey guys,

Here's a guy who's sent me his tuner in for me to fine tune it for him. His a/f is kinda lean at an average of 13.8-14.4 but he also added a Volant air intake after he got his tuner from me. I've seen the most changes using a Volant air intake so in my book they are good, expensive yes but they do make a difference.

He's made 194.8 rwhp and 218.8 rwtq. His mods include the Volant, Cat-back exhaust and JBA plug wires. With a richer a/f ratio he'll be at the 200rwhp mark too. This guy is in Texas and I wasn't able to goto the dyno with him but I'm also sending him a Raptor Datalogger so he can check his sensors and ensure he's not activating the knock sensor.

This dyno graph also shows that the dyno lost a RPM signal for a brief second from 70mph to about 90mph but even without the graph the numbers are still the same. This is shown on the torque line.

Thanks, Doug.


Coy Miller's 2001 Ranger

 

[celly]

I like what you have to say about Volant intakes, especially since you'll have my chip in a few days.

 

[Spdrcer34]

Can you post a REAL dyno sheet? One that has the Horsepower curve and Torque Curve in relation to ENGINE RPMS....not mph. That sheet means absolutely NOTHING.

Ryan

 

[Doug904]

That sheet means everything written on it. Speed and RPM ratings are simply two different values they measure them in. This was taken in Texas so I wasn't able to specify which rating I wanted it in. Why do you think actual speed isn't a rating? Do you not think the tires are moving when your turning RPM's on a dyno?

Here are two examples of other vehicles I've done tuning for and also of the Run viewer Software for the dynojet dyno readings. This is the same run just the engine speed is monitored differently. This is to show that there is no difference in the readings no matter how you measure engine speed.

Run measured using RPM's

Run measured using MPH's

On a side note these are preliminary numbers for the X-charger tuning done by mail order. Since I have adjusted the top end a/f numbers to bring them out of the lower a/f ratio's. This was on a 4x4 automatic 4.0 SOHC Ranger

Here's some more runs, all crossing at other RPM's then 5250 and and all in SAE rating...

1993 Ranger 3.0 5-speed doing some Nitrous adjustments Here they cross at 4800

Same 3.0 Ranger Here they cross at around 4100-4200

My baseline run when I first installed my Whipple Supercharger on my automatic 3.0 Ranger Here they cross at 4800


Later Doug.

 

[SilverBullet]

I always thought a leaner A/F would give you more HP. I used to tune turbo Mitusbishis and that's what we always went for. A richer A/F always made the car run like dog poop.

 

[aldive]

Can you post a REAL dyno sheet? One that has the Horsepower curve and Torque Curve in relation to ENGINE RPMS....not mph. That sheet means absolutely NOTHING.

Ryan

You appear to be quite critical of Doug. What are your qualifications? Where are your dyno sheets?

Doug is a renowned expert on the Ford 4.9 l motor; I am certain we can all learn something from him.

I for one appreciate his input on this website.

 

[Spdrcer34]

In Dougs LAST POST on this thread, that FIRST dyno sheet is about the only one that is a valid and readable dyno sheet. Note that the numbers ACTAULLY cross at 5250.

I am not so much critical of Doug, but the dyno sheets he is posting. I am seriously considering having a chip made for my X, and have been doing some research on companies that offer them for us. Bama chips is currently at the top of that list.

My qualifications? What does it matter? I obviously know enough about this stuff that I am able to question the results that were posted. Believe me, I have spent many hours in a dyno room, at the race track, and building medium to high horsepower engines for Street and Drag Racing Performance. I may come off as a smart@$$, but sometimes I don't know anyother way to express my thoughts.

Ryan

 

[SVO]

I always thought a leaner A/F would give you more HP. I used to tune turbo Mitusbishis and that's what we always went for. A richer A/F always made the car run like dog poop.

Being too lean will cause heat and pre-ignition detonation (not good) but running a lil "fat", 12.1 is not all bad cause you can add a little timing to it and it won't be boggy.

A/F & timing, as you know is very criticle on boosted and NO2 applications.


Read you plugs everyone







Jeff - :navajo:

 

[Doug904]

In Dougs LAST POST on this thread, that FIRST dyno sheet is about the only one that is a valid and readable dyno sheet. Note that the numbers ACTAULLY cross at 5250.


Ryan

I've contacted the dyno today and the owner of the dyno sent me this response....


Doug,

This is a question I get a lot and there is a very simple answer to it. The dyno software sets the scale for the HP and TQ automatically and therefore they are often different. For example: If a car makes 330HP and 360 TQ, Winpep will have 350 at the top of the HP side of the graph and 400 at the top of the TQ side. It is like two sepatate graphs on one page. When arranging the graph, however, I can "force" the scaling so that they are the same and the HP and TQ will cross A 5250 every time. Attached, you will find two graphs of the new base pull on Robert's Ranger. One is scaled
automatically and, on the other, I forced the scaling, neither affect the horsepower or torque numbers abit. I hope this helps......


Here's the two graph's he's attached....


Auto Scaling You'll notice on the top of the Torque side of the graph it is 220 but on the top of the HP side is 200 and therefore the numbers cross at 4800 rpm's.

Forced Scaling... Now if you look at this graph you'll see that the rating number as the top of both sides is 200, and the TQ goes higher.


So, now with that said every graph I've posted is valid, it is the Hp and TQ scales on the side of each graph that can differ based on the amount of HP and TQ the engine produced.

Thanks, Doug.

 

[celly]

I for one appreciate his input on this website.

Al <-----what he said.

 

[Doug904]

I always thought a leaner A/F would give you more HP. I used to tune turbo Mitusbishis and that's what we always went for. A richer A/F always made the car run like dog poop.

Hey guy,

Like before mentioned leaner isn't always better, especially on a supercharged application but even on a naturally aspirated engine. Where most vehicles command a 14.6 a/f ratio under light loads or part throttle and less when they goto mid throttle or more, high load situations, they reduce the a/f ratio down to ranges from 12.2-13.2 on SOME cars and trucks, it's different for every one.

Now on a dyno my experience has been this, lean equals hp but rich equals torque. Now given there is a point where too much of either will hurt both but a little richer a/f will can give you more torque down low where as a leaner mixture up top can give you more overall hp. It is very difficult to find a perfect mixture of both and this is why, with my tuning, I offer two variations of the high octane fuel programs.

A Performance program for more upper end power and a Torque program for more low to mid range punch. It's all in how many you've done and how well you know the engine and what it likes.

thanks, Doug.

 

[Shagnasty]

In Dougs LAST POST on this thread, that FIRST dyno sheet is about the only one that is a valid and readable dyno sheet. Note that the numbers ACTAULLY cross at 5250.

I am not so much critical of Doug, but the dyno sheets he is posting. I am seriously considering having a chip made for my X, and have been doing some research on companies that offer them for us. Bama chips is currently at the top of that list.

My qualifications? What does it matter? I obviously know enough about this stuff that I am able to question the results that were posted. Believe me, I have spent many hours in a dyno room, at the race track, and building medium to high horsepower engines for Street and Drag Racing Performance. I may come off as a smart@$$, but sometimes I don't know anyother way to express my thoughts.

Ryan

Here's a knowlege bomb. HP is the application of TQ @ a given RPM... The curves and values tell you everything you need to know... regardless of baseline being MPH or RPM. Quit arguing everything... I want to learn as well.

So doug... please do some before/after dyno runs. I'd like to see both sheets side by side....

Thanks buddy.