2.0L Performance Tech 260hp (235hp auto) Turbocharged SS tuner version. 260 lb-ft of torque

Dyno results

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 29, 2009 | 08:31 PM
  #31  
Rainman's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 11-18-2008
Posts: 744
From: Oak Harbor, Washington
Cool Excellent

Originally Posted by RocketBuSS
I recently had my car dyno'd at Kilpatrick's in Waukesha, WI (near my hometown). The car was dyno'd on a Dynojet model 424x (I'm pretty sure anyway)... needless to say, I'm quite happy :)

Run 1: 301.38whp @ 5700, 338.11wtq @ 3400, A/F: 13.9 @ 23 PSI

Run 2: 299.72whp @ 5650, 341.05wtq @ 3450, A/F: 13.8 @ 23 PSI

Run 3: 298.51whp @ 5700, 339.74wtq @ 3400, A/F: 13.8 @ 23 PSI

I had a little loss due to heat soak (still runnin' the OEM IC yet guys...) but over all very consistant. A/F's are a SMIDGE high, but nothing I'm going to breathe into a paper bag about...

The tune was done by Steve Kenniff at GM Roadster Club. Martin Scott, the owner of the organization, would be able to hook you up. If there's anyone left that hasnt gone with a different tune, this would be the way to go for maximum gains... plus he guarantees his work and will redo/ reflash if you're not happy with it for nothing but the shipping charge.

PM me if you're interested and I'll give you his info.
What Mods do you have at this time?
Vince from Trifecta is going to do mine.
Just a side bar I'd ordered new personalized plates and as of today its official
HAULNSS
Old Apr 29, 2009 | 08:57 PM
  #32  
RocketBuSS's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 10-23-2008
Posts: 69
From: Delafield, WI
It's a stock car believe it or not. With IC/ piping, CAI and turbo back I would like to see around 330whp...

I think with the Trifecta tune you should see similar numbers... Alot has to do with altitude... I am relatively high above sea level...
Old Apr 29, 2009 | 09:05 PM
  #33  
Rainman's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 11-18-2008
Posts: 744
From: Oak Harbor, Washington
Great, when I spoke with Vince the day of the Dyno he said he could get 300whp as it sits but I'm going to document HP gains thru each add then Vince will finish with the tune.
330 or 340 should be easily obtained.
Keep us up to date on yours and I'll do the same.

Byron
Old Apr 29, 2009 | 09:06 PM
  #34  
RocketBuSS's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 10-23-2008
Posts: 69
From: Delafield, WI
Sounds good Rainman I'll post as soon as I get my parts installed.

Good luck with your tune, trust me, you'll love it!
Old Apr 29, 2009 | 10:29 PM
  #35  
2ohturbo's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 03-04-2008
Posts: 38
From: Richlands NC
Heres mine, GM Stage 1 and WG spring only:
Attached Images  
Old Apr 29, 2009 | 10:56 PM
  #36  
camaro98z28's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-23-2008
Posts: 1,148
From: Peoria, AZ
Originally Posted by SPPD
I had mine dyno'd last saturday and I am stock except the GM tune.
The results were 257hp and 281tq so that means I gained a whole 13hp and 31tq with the GM tune. For over $650 bucks I am not impressed. Although, I was told that the mobile dyno was probably reading low because it has no cooling fans. WTF, I hope that the specific dyno was actually wrong for me otherwise I would have saved my money.

SPPD
Yep there should be fans on the front. The TQ is nice gain. With fan, I would say you could gain another 10 hp and 10 TQ
Old Apr 30, 2009 | 05:51 AM
  #37  
hyperv6's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-05-2008
Posts: 5,464
From: Akron Ohio
Originally Posted by RocketBuSS
I do agree with this information, however, you even said yourself alot of what numbers you see on a dyno have alot to do with equipment, set up, conditions and just general knowledge of the equipment.

Kilpatricks has been dyno tuning cars since the late 80's and the Dynojet 424x is a reputable dyno. The day my runs were made it was low humidity, about 69 degrees in the shop and the car was at FOT. Just a little food for thought I guess...
Your not too far off what I have seen the stock set ups with only the stake kit.

I do not dispute your numbers, I was just warning that results will vary as dyno's in general are not alway run the way they should be. Just asomething to get in mind when someone thinks their stage kit only added 13 HP.

I have had been around many dynos and have seen good and very odd results. The day we saw them run a stock Shelby and it came out 50HP more than the Ford posted ratings it let us know the odd results we saw on the modified cars were incorrect as we suspected.

Since there is many calibrations and quality of dyno's it is hard to compare one to another. The best thing they provide is if you make changes you can gage the increase from the original run to the one after the modifications have been applied. In other words it measures gains better than totals. Just the nature of the tool.
Old Apr 30, 2009 | 06:16 AM
  #38  
RocketBuSS's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 10-23-2008
Posts: 69
From: Delafield, WI
Originally Posted by hyperv6
Your not too far off what I have seen the stock set ups with only the stake kit.

I do not dispute your numbers, I was just warning that results will vary as dyno's in general are not alway run the way they should be. Just asomething to get in mind when someone thinks their stage kit only added 13 HP.

I have had been around many dynos and have seen good and very odd results. The day we saw them run a stock Shelby and it came out 50HP more than the Ford posted ratings it let us know the odd results we saw on the modified cars were incorrect as we suspected.

Since there is many calibrations and quality of dyno's it is hard to compare one to another. The best thing they provide is if you make changes you can gage the increase from the original run to the one after the modifications have been applied. In other words it measures gains better than totals. Just the nature of the tool.
Oh definately. There was an article recently.. I believe it was motortrend... regarding the new Ferrari 599 GTB and the Corvette ZR-1 and they dyno'd each car before beating them within inches of their lives..

The Ferrari was real close to factory numbers (stated by Ferrari) but the ZR-1, which is supposed to throw down 638 hp at the crank (should be around 560-575 rwhp) ended up being at like 505 or 495 olr something way off like that because of the nature of the set up and the low stance of the car on the dyno itself. They retested on a different dyno and found another 80hp... imagine that.

But all that being said, if you go from one dyno to the next you're definately going to see different numbers.

oh, and I will NEVER use a Mustang dyno as long as I live haha
Old Apr 30, 2009 | 06:27 AM
  #39  
RocketBuSS's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 10-23-2008
Posts: 69
From: Delafield, WI
PS, 2ohturbo, thats some of the best numbers I've seen coming from a GM tune.

I havent had any issues with my stock WG spring... I dont seem to have any bleed off... unless my particular car is like the red headed step child of all HHR SS's... cuz I can hold 23 psi all the way to my 7k redline and not drop more than a 1/2 psi at MOST.

I know its only a $10 part and the install will take less than 30 min.. but I'm wondering if its worth the trouble for me?
Old May 1, 2009 | 08:15 AM
  #40  
SOMBERSHARK0714's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-29-2008
Posts: 838
From: Oak Creek, WI
congrats on the nice numbers !!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:19 PM.