 |
|
11-29-2007, 04:52 PM
|
#1
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
|
Dyno'd two 5.5 gens today
OK...so me first. I have an 03 se AUTO  These are the best two runs for me. During both runs, the front part of the stock intake was taken off (attached close to grill on chassis). On second run, i took off the filter holder also and left filter sitting in. Didnt think that small hole would make a diff since i already had the front taken off but i was wrong. I was told the car was pinging though...im not sure why since i run 93 octane. ANYWAYS, my only mod is the GAB. Runs were done is 3rd gear.
Now the 6spd. Belongs to my boy, he goes by shady33e on the forums. His only mod is a berk intake. On the first run he let off on the gas so thats the reason for the drop. Pretty much the same numbers on both runs. Runs were done in 4th gear.
Sooooo...what does everybody think?
Last edited by ShIft_uR FacE; 11-29-2007 at 04:55 PM.
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 05:02 PM
|
#2
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,472
|
seems like inflated numbers on the 6spd....very
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 05:15 PM
|
#3
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasYears
seems like inflated numbers on the 6spd....very
|
Just because your car didnt dyno that high with just an intake doesnt mean you have to hate  streetzlegend and 95blkmax can back me up as they were there. I also posted them as SAE not STD which gives lower numbers. Trust me i thought these numbers were high as well but as he went first and i went after, my numbers are about right sooooo....he has a factory freak what can i say 
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 05:38 PM
|
#4
|
|
Certified Hooptie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Espanola, NM
Posts: 27,119
|
Got runfiles? 
Numbers seem about right for the Auto, a little high for the 6MT, BUT, since they were done on the machine, those 6MT #'s aren't inflated IMO. They are what they are.
What kind of wheel/tire is everybody rocking?
STD #’s don’t ALWAYS give higher #’s. It depends on the RH, but I know fellas are in a place where RH is horrific, so yeah, in your case, the STD #’s will definitely be higher.
Last edited by NmexMAX; 11-29-2007 at 05:45 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 05:44 PM
|
#5
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,084
|
yea I can second these. I've done my last bunch of dynos at this same shop and my #s are right where they should be.
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 05:48 PM
|
#6
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
|
Yea i have all the runfiles. We both have the stock se 17's. I Have falken ze-912's and he has yokohamas of some sort. My tires were at 31 psi if that makes any difference.
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 05:49 PM
|
#7
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShIft_uR FacE
Just because your car didnt dyno that high with just an intake doesnt mean you have to hate |
not hating, just saying theyre high, relax. and i never dyno'd with just an intake, so dont hate
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 05:53 PM
|
#8
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasYears
not hating, just saying theyre high, relax. and i never dyno'd with just an intake, so dont hate
|
lol touche.
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 06:06 PM
|
#9
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NmexMAX
Got runfiles?
Numbers seem about right for the Auto, a little high for the 6MT, BUT, since they were done on the machine, those 6MT #'s aren't inflated IMO. They are what they are.
What kind of wheel/tire is everybody rocking?
STD #’s don’t ALWAYS give higher #’s. It depends on the RH, but I know fellas are in a place where RH is horrific, so yeah, in your case, the STD #’s will definitely be higher. |
So should i stick with the SAE graph numbers or STD? (lol) You're the man I need to ask...besides headers (for power), what would be the next best mod to do? I was thinking either TS ECU or LR MAF with AFC...opinions?
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 06:36 PM
|
#10
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShIft_uR FacE
TS ECU or LR MAF with AFC...opinions?
|
well the TS would be best combined with an SSIM to make the best use of the extended rev limiter. IMO (yeah i know im not nmex) i would go with the LRMAF and AFC because it will get you better power at the curent rev limit and the LRMAF will help you out even more when you go the the TS.
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 07:21 PM
|
#11
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasYears
well the TS would be best combined with an SSIM to make the best use of the extended rev limiter. IMO (yeah i know im not nmex) i would go with the LRMAF and AFC because it will get you better power at the curent rev limit and the LRMAF will help you out even more when you go the the TS.
|
I asked for Nmex's advice because he has an auto and an extensive modlist BUT everyones opinion counts. Thank you Have you had any experience with either mentioned items?
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 08:55 PM
|
#12
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 267
|
isnt there another run where it shows my highest hp @ 228.75 and torque 236 lol goddamnit...
and yea i swear to god all i got is a berk intake w/ AEM filter...
__________________
MODS:Berk Intake
SAE223.7hp/230.6
Mods to come:Cattman Headers/Y-pipe or Illuminas/S-Techs
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 09:13 PM
|
#13
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 267
|
oh....nvm i guess its different with sea# and std#s....
__________________
MODS:Berk Intake
SAE223.7hp/230.6
Mods to come:Cattman Headers/Y-pipe or Illuminas/S-Techs
|
|
|
|
|
11-29-2007, 09:17 PM
|
#14
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShIft_uR FacE
I asked for Nmex's advice because he has an auto
|
i know, i was just pullin your leg
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShIft_uR FacE
Have you had any experience with either mentioned items?
|
i have a BBMAF, its not LR but the same idea. i cant really state my experience because mine is considerably different from everyone else's. where as most people go very lean, my car richened up to about 10:1 afr. using the afc i have corrections as high as -12. but the dyno's ive seen point to what i told you above
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 12:04 AM
|
#15
|
|
192.168.1.1
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Yuh Mom's, NO
Posts: 17,292
|
I have the LRMAF when youre ready.. 
__________________
 
VQpower.com
Need work done: Suspension, Engine, Brakes, Cosmetic, Headlight Retrofits
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 01:46 AM
|
#16
|
|
Certified Hooptie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Espanola, NM
Posts: 27,119
|
In the past, LRMAF has shown great responsiveness, but not great peak power. In then end, my throttle response was/is better than you think, anyhow, there has been trivial evidence on this mod, so, my advice is: if you have an AFC, Do eeeeiiit! if not, do more researchm and in the end j00's makes moar whp than teh Nmex.  |
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 02:19 AM
|
#17
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NmexMAX
in the end j00's makes moar whp than teh Nmex. |
nono, shift was asking and he's auto
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 02:26 AM
|
#18
|
|
Certified Hooptie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Espanola, NM
Posts: 27,119
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasYears
nono, shift was asking and he's auto
|
> j00..
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 02:28 AM
|
#19
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,472
|
not with those mods...but maybe in the future
PS: z33 injectors to be in on dec 10th, driving/AF tuning impressions to follow.
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 09:16 AM
|
#20
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
|
I guess LRMAF it is for now. I dont have an AFC so...vafc or safc? I understand the vafc has more tuning points but can they be used properly on the max? Also, would you guys recommend the same for the 6spd or a different approach? Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 10:16 AM
|
#21
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,084
|
Dont use the VAFC if you know you're going to change the MAF. No adjustment for MAF IN/OUT. So you'd have to add fuel across the board. Where as with an SAFC you can just change the MAF IN and the SAFC (be it the 1 or the 2, preferably the 2 for more tuning points) interpolates the corrections for ya and its just easier to deal with
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 10:16 AM
|
#22
|
|
Certified Hooptie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Espanola, NM
Posts: 27,119
|
SAFC makes the LRMAF easier to 'tune', but SAFC does have more 'tuning' points (vs VAFCII). IMO, SAFC would be the way to go (less headaches re: LARMAF)
Last edited by NmexMAX; 11-30-2007 at 11:46 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 11:41 AM
|
#23
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,472
|
when i tried this with my VAFC-2 it seemed like 6 and 4 made a 2pt difference. not sure which way (6 in, 4 out or 4 in, 6 out) went more rich since it was a lot harder to get info on this than i thought. but there is DEF an MAF correction. my guess is people havent gotten it to work because the correction is either too much or too little for them. its not like its hard to tune part throttle and idle with it, i have my car running pretty lean on part throttle and everytime i check it the part throttle readings are right where i want them. i dont doubt its easier with the safc, i just think if you are willing to spend some time getting it right that the vafc would be better cause of the many correction points
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 11:47 AM
|
#24
|
|
Certified Hooptie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Espanola, NM
Posts: 27,119
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasYears
|
Yeah, hence the headache comment.
So, how lean are you @ part throttle?
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 11:53 AM
|
#25
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NmexMAX
So, how lean are you @ part throttle?
|
not SUPER lean, but ive been trying to make sure that when it first goes into open loop @ part throttle that im getting leaner than 14.6:1 as opposed to the 12:1 i used to get. BTW, the throttle response is a lot better now too
|
|
|
|
|
11-30-2007, 12:00 PM
|
#26
|
|
| |
