Horsepower guesses

[CaptCobrajet]

I have 620 rolling around in my head, but we'll see.  I can't help but just laugh out loud at Lykin's comment about an "averagely generous" dyno.  Typical.  If your piece is good, then, of course, my dyno is wrong.  For any who care, I went to great length to verify my equipment.  While all dynos are different, I took a 715 hp street engine up to Bischoff's and spent a day on it.  We unhooked it and drove straight home and put it on mine.  The DePac system I have has provision to create formulas to make adjustments separate from normal weather correction, which I also have.  We tuned my data to match the results from Tony's Superflow, and it is within 2-3 hp of his dyno throughout the range.  We tuned for Engine Masters on Tony's dyno, and we didn't see a significant difference between his and the JE Pistons facility used for EMC.  Many folks thought that dyno gave low numbers.  I have run many engines at BES.  I know their dyno is as "right" as they get, so I adjusted to match it. 

There are many, many factors that can contribute to differences between facilities.  Numbers are just numbers.  The machine is a tool, but I did need to get an accurate baseline to compare new stuff to my old data.  Proof for the customer is in the seat of the pants, and the ET slip.

I don't come on here very much anymore, because as soon as the opportunity arises, there are comments such as the "averagely generous" to take a shot at our results before we even fire the engine.  It sure is easy to belittle someone's effort by always dropping hints that the data is wrong.

We did our best to build Joe a good piece with a few changes, and most of the parts he already had.  I hope we did good for him.  We'll know tomorrow if the creek don't rise!

[cjshaker]

I wondered if you had your dyno compared yet.

Joe, is that your old cam, or a new one?

I was going to change my guess to 625. Maybe that's a bit much, but I'll stick with it.

[blykins]

I have 620 rolling around in my head, but we'll see.  I can't help but just laugh out loud at Lykin's comment about an "averagely generous" dyno.  Typical.  If your piece is good, then, of course, my dyno is wrong.  For any who care, I went to great length to verify my equipment.  While all dynos are different, I took a 715 hp street engine up to Bischoff's and spent a day on it.  We unhooked it and drove straight home and put it on mine.  The DePac system I have has provision to create formulas to make adjustments separate from normal weather correction, which I also have.  We tuned my data to match the results from Tony's Superflow, and it is within 2-3 hp of his dyno throughout the range.  We tuned for Engine Masters on Tony's dyno, and we didn't see a significant difference between his and the JE Pistons facility used for EMC.  Many folks thought that dyno gave low numbers.  I have run many engines at BES.  I know their dyno is as "right" as they get, so I adjusted to match it. 

There are many, many factors that can contribute to differences between facilities.  Numbers are just numbers.  The machine is a tool, but I did need to get an accurate baseline to compare new stuff to my old data.  Proof for the customer is in the seat of the pants, and the ET slip.

I don't come on here very much anymore, because as soon as the opportunity arises, there are comments such as the "averagely generous" to take a shot at our results before we even fire the engine.  It sure is easy to belittle someone's effort by always dropping hints that the data is wrong.

We did our best to build Joe a good piece with a few changes, and most of the parts he already had.  I hope we did good for him.  We'll know tomorrow if the creek don't rise!

Blair, I didn't even know you were building the engine or dyno'ing it, as he didn't specify that in the original post.   Not every post is a dig to you. 

BTW, since you brought it up, you posted on the other forum after you won the competition that the EMC dyno was down 35 hp from Bischoff's dyno.  I would consider that a significant difference.

Regardless, I hope you guys make big numbers. 

[CaptCobrajet]

Doug, we put a fairly mild solid roller in Joe's engine.  He ran a flat tappet before.   We worked on the heads a little, and I spent most of a day on the manifold.  Our plan is to get a safe baseline and then look at all eight cylinders and adjust as required to get AFRs as consistent as possible.  It is good for the engine, and there always seems to be a little extra power in bringing the lean and rich deviations to a minimum.
In the last BT 2x4 we did, there was 14 hp gained and some overall better conditions cylinder to cylinder after looking at all eight AFRs.


Brent, I am curious what other forum you speak of.  I can't recall posting on any forums other than this forum regarding the 2019 EMC.  I don't remember the exact numbers, but I don't think it was that much, although I could be mistaken. I generally wouldn't consider 5% between any two dynos in different places at different times to be unreasonable.

Hoping for a good day of testing today that yields Mr. Joe some benefits.

[blykins]

Doug, we put a fairly mild solid roller in Joe's engine.  He ran a flat tappet before.   We worked on the heads a little, and I spent most of a day on the manifold.  Our plan is to get a safe baseline and then look at all eight cylinders and adjust as required to get AFRs as consistent as possible.  It is good for the engine, and there always seems to be a little extra power in bringing the lean and rich deviations to a minimum.
In the last BT 2x4 we did, there was 14 hp gained and some overall better conditions cylinder to cylinder after looking at all eight AFRs.


Brent, I am curious what other forum you speak of.  I can't recall posting on any forums other than this forum regarding the 2019 EMC.  I don't remember the exact numbers, but I don't think it was that much, although I could be mistaken. I generally wouldn't consider 5% between any two dynos in different places at different times to be unreasonable.

Hoping for a good day of testing today that yields Mr. Joe some benefits.

The "old" FE forum. 



Like I said, I didn't know you were doing the assembly and dyno when I posted what I did.  As a matter of fact, Mr. Joe called me several months ago to see about drilling his block and I referred him to you. 

[CaptCobrajet]

Yep, I did post that, but I had forgotten it.  There was 35 difference between my best in testing and my average at the contest, and that is how that stuff goes, otherwise they could just have mail-in dyno contests, or maybe mail-in time slips and then randomly draw to see who we race, LOL.  That would be about as accurate as our elections!  I had better go to work....... lots to do today.

[cjshaker]

That would be about as accurate as our elections!

LOL

I asked about the cam because the duration @ .050 isn't all that far off from my flat tappet, but with more lift. I've no doubt there's lots more "under the curve" though.

I went back and looked at Joe's ET's and MPH at the R&R events, and we have very similar numbers to what mine is now (after my Jerico and rear gear swaps). He's obviously upping the game considerably. Traction will be his biggest challenge now.

[Stangman]

So after months of playing around with calculators and wondering the end of the road has come. After a brief warm up Blair made a pull carefully with the carbs how they were although he did go through them and we were pretty close to where we wanted to be at 615 HP and 593 lb ft torque. He had sent me the sheet and told me he will start tuning not just for max power but getting the AFR were they need to be. You can tell by the first and last sheet that the motor was much happier. The final outcome was 625 HP  and 608 lb ft torque. I would like to thank Blair for spending alittle extra time today to get things right. Im assuming he will be on later. So it should put alittle more pep in the ole Stang. Now to get it in the car. Doug was kind enough to send some pics in. You can also notice at 6600 from the first to the last is a good chunk higher.

[cjshaker]

Posting these for Joe...

First pull:

[Stangman]

And congrats to Doug who hit the number. As I promised Ata boy.

[cjshaker]

With roughly a 20% increase in power, it'll be interesting to see how the car reacts. Good luck, and be safe.

[My427stang]

Joe, looks like a fun summer for you!  Is it a racer or a street machine?  How's the rest of the car set up.  Sorry if I forgot.  I'll blame it on Covid, even if I don't have it

[Stangman]

Thanks Ross from your lips to Gods ears. The car is a street car including no cage which I might have to install. Probably alot like yours . Stock front suspension with calvert shocks, and stock leafs out of a 428CJ car and 10 way adjustable calverts in the back. If you go to any of my videos I get alot of seperation in the rear but the car hooks and works with the set up I had. An extra 80 horse and 75 lb ft and I dont know were Im gonna be. I guess I should also be looking into frame connectors. I only get to the track 2 to 4 times a year.  I drive the car alot but not really that far you know cruise spots an sometimes I will take it down to the beach were I can drive for like 40 miles. My last motor had about 1500 street miles and 75 quarter mile passes and 75 to 100 1/8 mile passes in 5 to 6 years. Oh and I have calvert bars in the back also. 

[6667fan]

That is going to be a lot of fun Joe! Great numbers.

You are gonna need a roll bar if you go to any NHRA track where the tech guys are watching. IIRC you were going low 11s before. Anything quicker than 11.5 needs at least a roll bar. 10.00 -10.99  needs a cage but if there are no structural mods past the firewall, ( excepting wheel tubs), than a six point bar is allowed.
( please consult the latest NHRA rule book to confirm this).

Get ‘er done