Baseline dyno before JB4

[JDM_Man]

Different dyno and elevation. DO we know if the dyno was set up correctly for the stinger?

82whp of "elevation" lol

 

[Secondchance]

82whp of "elevation" lol

every dyno is different. the 82 difference you're quoting is irrelevant(dynojet to dynodynamics. The power gains from stock to map 2 w/ wires + plugs and intakes is what you should focus on, and 33 WHP ( from just intakes ) is low for sure, but not 82 whp in difference.

 

[Secondchance]

Vex Performance has an AWD dyno as well (specialize in Subies) but they really don’t like Burger Tuning. Told me the JB4 was just a glorified boost controller that might make 20 whp. This is based on their dynos on BMWs with JB4’s.

They are pretty biased...mine feels a hell of a lot faster!

Vex's AWD dyno is Sonny's dyno. He's rented the space from them for years, and works closely with them, but owns his dyno separately. He used to have it in the back of a hot tub repair place down south lol.

Lakeview Automotive has a mustang dyno. They're only open mon-friday though

 

[Terry@BMS]

I also ran map 1 vs 2. Didn't try 0.

Map 1 was about 15hp less.

I didn't even think about logging as I've done street logs on the same fuel and map. I had you look at them before and you said they looked good.

Things can look great in one situation and turn ugly in another, running on a dyno without doing logs at the same time to provide a context for the results is sort of a waste of time. You get some data but not everything you'd need. Especially so if not doing same day comparisons on non-dynojet machines that can vary a lot day to day by load setting and design. Sometimes you even spot simple operator mistakes like the dyno operator not going 100% gas pedal. You'd be surprised what we see sometimes.

Since torque looks good, and the AFR trace on the dyno looks good, I'd presume timing rolled off up top due to the 91 octane and/or insufficient airflow, dropping down the peak HP gain.

 

[Terry@BMS]

How can it be the fuel, BMS tested Map 2/91 octane with BMS intakes (same as you) and made 416whp.

The OP said he used Shell 91 which contains NO ETHANOL.

Seems like you have a power loss of roughly 82whp or close to 100 crank hp.

Did you install the fuel wires/correctly???

We use a dynojet machine. You can't compare non-dynojet numbers to a dynojet and comparing RWD to AWD is even more difficult. If it's not a dynojet the power numbers themselves are worthless and only useful for same day % gain comparisons.

 

[ecko04]

It seems as though some folks don't understand the purpose of the dyno, which leads to unnecessary arguments about gains, or lack thereof.

 

[Secondchance]

It seems as though some folks don't understand the purpose of the dyno, which leads to unnecessary arguments about gains, or lack thereof.

Bingo was his name-o

 

[Doel]

If you're trying to ascertain power gains, you need to make sure your baseline run is on the same dyno with very close to the same conditions. For instance, if your baseline is done when it's 60 degrees out then your modded run is at 90 degrees, you're going to see far lower gains than expected because of the IATs.

Not that the OP did this, but if you're using two different dynos, might as well throw all that data out the window for comparison sake because it's worthless.

 

[JDM_Man]

Things can look great in one situation and turn ugly in another, running on a dyno without doing logs at the same time to provide a context for the results is sort of a waste of time. You get some data but not everything you'd need. Especially so if not doing same day comparisons on non-dynojet machines that can vary a lot day to day by load setting and design. Sometimes you even spot simple operator mistakes like the dyno operator not going 100% gas pedal. You'd be surprised what we see sometimes.

Since torque looks good, and the AFR trace on the dyno looks good, I'd presume timing rolled off up top due to the 91 octane and/or insufficient airflow, dropping down the peak HP gain.

Why would it severely pull timing on his 91 octane run vs advancing the timing with your 91 run.

 

[Revvdmedia]

Why would it severely pull timing on his 91 octane run vs advancing the timing with your 91 run.

There is a going theory that Canadian 91 octane is inferior to USA 91 octane. It seems blasphemous to me, but it has the potential to be true.

 

[Terry@BMS]

Why would it severely pull timing on his 91 octane run vs advancing the timing with your 91 run.

Lower grade fuel is always going to be more sensitive especially on an all wheel drive load dyno. For all I know without the dyno logs the car wasn't at full throttle. Always log every dyno run if you expect to analyze the results.

Also I get plenty of timing drops on 91 octane here too. But weather and dyno fans allowed for solid results as shown that day.

 

[Dspec 1]

Vex doesn't have a Dyno. The Dyno I used is airboy. He leases space out of vex. So it's the same one you are thinking about.[/

It’s starting to come together for me now...

 

[MrSmoofy]

Seems like something's wonky. I ended up with 382 at the wheels on a kinda crap pull (wrong gear, for one), baseline is typically about 315 whp I think (someone correct me if the crack is addling my brain). So next gain almost 70. Differences: intakes and ~95 octane. But I'm at very close to sea level... maybe that's a bigger factor?

Little off topic but are there any videos on how to properly dyno a stinger?

I've had mine done a couple of times and I would hope they guy doing was an expert but because I don't know anything about it I can't tell if it's being done wrong or not or what to tell him. He normally gets it up to a certain speed in 4th (I told him to use 5th he said he likes 4th and adjusted the dyno for doing it 4th) and then accelerates I'm assuming not enough pedal to hit the kick down gets it up to about 5500 and stops the test.

 

[Secondchance]

There is a going theory that Canadian 91 octane is inferior to USA 91 octane. It seems blasphemous to me, but it has the potential to be true.

Whatever it may or may not "seem" to you, its been shown very true a multitude of times. The further east you go in Canada, the bigger the gap in actual octane performance you see. Shell 91 is the closest thing we have to american 91, our Husky 94 can perform well depending on a variety of things, but you lose a decent amount of fuel economy using it ( ethanol blended ).

 

[Ek9max]

How can it be the fuel, BMS tested Map 2/91 octane with BMS intakes (same as you) and made 416whp.

The OP said he used Shell 91 which contains NO ETHANOL.

Seems like you have a power loss of roughly 82whp or close to 100 crank hp.

Did you install the fuel wires/correctly???

Yes. And you can see the are much leaner

 

[Secondchance]

Why would it severely pull timing on his 91 octane run vs advancing the timing with your 91 run.

That's like asking why your apple tastes different than mine. Our Gasoline(s) aren't manufactured in the same facilities, nor by the same companies, and they have different processes and additives / mixtures. Do you honestly think that the 91 Octane at a 7-11 branded gas station ( not a 7-11 with an esso or petro can station ) is the same as the 91 octane at Shell, let alone a Conoco station in Virginia? Cmon dude..

 

[Secondchance]

Yes. And you can see the are much leaner

rich mixtures rob power, being leaner typically produces more power, provided its kept inside the safe range. How rich or lean it is has more to do with the amount of fuel, and not the octane directly.

Mitsubishi used to tune the Evo X into low 10s or high 9's for AFR factory, to keep it safe, but it greatly hindered fuel economy and performance. That's why simple tunes on that car made great power gains, just as an example.

 

[JDM_Man]

So whats the alternative?

If Shell 91 (apparently the best gas we have) is inferior to basic 91 from the USA whats the solution? Petro 94? Having to run boostane or another additive if we want more then 30 whp from Map 2?

Can BMS make a map for Canadian stingers? Or is JB4 not a good option for Canadians?

 

[Terry@BMS]

So whats the alternative?

You can't live vicariously through other people's results.

If you want to see what your car makes put it on a dynojet, compare map 0 to map 2, and find out. If the numbers are lower than you'd like post your dyno logs and we can evaluate ways to improve your specific cars performance.

Given the large torque gain I think OP is probably doing just fine on your 91 octane. Likely just not enough airflow or too much load nose dived timing up top. With lower grade fuel the margin for error is always narrow as the knock detection system is set to error on the side of caution by design.

 

[Revvdmedia]

So whats the alternative?

If Shell 91 (apparently the best gas we have) is inferior to basic 91 from the USA whats the solution? Petro 94? Having to run boostane or another additive if we want more then 30 whp from Map 2?

Can BMS make a map for Canadian stingers? Or is JB4 not a good option for Canadians?

Boostane is probably the only other option for a number of us if the gas is insufficient in octane. I'd say much of Canada does not have E85 to supplement.

We can make "our own" maps with Map 6 (I think), you can set custom boost values per every 500 rpm and you can fine tune a little to your liking. On the other hand, I believe BMS is working on a "learning" tune or something like that which should adjust automatically?