put up your dyno results

[tec548]

That does seem a bit low for a SC kit. Stock our trucks run about 312 wheel HP and 345 wheel TQ. His baseline numbers are about 25~28 low, even if this were added to the pre/post numbers output seems low. Dyno's should only be looked at as comparative and not really quantitave, so looking at the before/after spread (taking the numbers out) the graph looks very good.

 

[BRAPPPP]

state if 1 3/4 headers or 1 7/8

 

[Wilson]

I have 1 7\8

 

[BRAPPPP]

I have 1 7\8

Cats or no cats

 

[Wilson]

Started with them and took them off don't think it matters but I'm glad I took them off. Dyno with

 

[BramageDained]

That does seem a bit low for a SC kit. Stock our trucks run about 312 wheel HP and 345 wheel TQ. His baseline numbers are about 25~28 low, even if this were added to the pre/post numbers output seems low. Dyno's should only be looked at as comparative and not really quantitave, so looking at the before/after spread (taking the numbers out) the graph looks very good.

That's dynodynamics and it's uncorrected. The Evo I had made 770hp/615tq on that dyno, but, 8xxHP/715TQ on two other dynos.

Like I mentioned in another post, that dyno gives numbers 16% lower than another local shop's DynoJet.

I'm not trying to race numbers, just pointing out that non-dynojet dynos vary in what they read. DynoDynamics and Mustang Dynos give significantly lower numbers than a DynoJet.

 

[Wilson]

Anymore

 

[The Macf]

bumping for future finding

 

[Keys]

2010 2.9L Whipple 525 RWHP / 485 RWTQ / 10.79 p.s.i boost

 

[englishrodder]

2012 SCREW with Hellion Twin Turbo kit, No cats Ford Racing Exhaust

643RWHP, 672Tq @ 10.92lbs boost

The other graph with lower figures was with the cats and lower boost