|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,130
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,130 |
This is not a representation of your typical loaded mustang dyno numbers. I chose to have them converted to dynojet numbers, because that is what most people use. So dont think of this as mustang dyno numbers, because They would be lower.
Originally posted by Who the F are You?:
does your family tree not have any branches on it?
99SVT
235hp @ 6550rpm
212tq @ 5350rpm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,194
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,194 |
Look pretty good. Torque seems a little low but otherwise its fine. Hopefully I will get on the dyno in a few days maybe weeks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,130
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,130 |
does anybody have any ideas what kind of torque a car like mine should be producing? and what could be keeping it low if it is low?
Originally posted by Who the F are You?:
does your family tree not have any branches on it?
99SVT
235hp @ 6550rpm
212tq @ 5350rpm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,194
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,194 |
Originally posted by RandyCSVT:
does anybody have any ideas what kind of torque a car like mine should be producing? and what could be keeping it low if it is low?
It's probably within the errors of the dyno. I just said that because my car made the same thing without the headers nd y-pipe. Anywhere from 150 to 160 seems normal for modded SVTs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,600
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,600 |
Originally posted by RandyCSVT:
This is not a representation of your typical loaded mustang dyno numbers. I chose to have them converted to dynojet numbers, because that is what most people use. So dont think of this as mustang dyno numbers, because They would be lower.
Oh OK. I was like "dayum! Thats freakin awesome!" but, you have now let me down  
FWIW, I made 156 lb-ft with very similar mods to yours, minus UDP and a tune. So yes, your TQ is a little low. Not sure why though.
#4559 of 6535 born on Feb 17, 1998
Black 1998.5 CSVT
FOR SALE [cleaning house]: SVT rear swaybar. Reasonable offer and its yours!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,713
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,713 |
Originally posted by RandyCSVT:
does anybody have any ideas what kind of torque a car like mine should be producing? and what could be keeping it low if it is low?
I hit 185hp and 159tq on Street Flight's (ADC's predecessor) dyno.
You're making great power!
Derek
Scion xB 5-spd
Previous: 2000 Silver Frost SVT
Please share the road with cyclists.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197 |
You guys know an UDP for the crank on a Duratec is a no no right? It's why you never hear of ppl running them. The purpose of a DMD is to reduce harmonics. An underdrive will introduce more. Who knows maybe you won't have problems with one but I wouldn't chance it for the minimal gains.
-'96 SE MTX 3L
-'98 SVT 1,173 of 6,535
-'05 Mazda 6s, loaded, g/f's ride
-Need a 96-00 manual on CD? PM or email me
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,130
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,130 |
It hasnt given me any issues and has been on the car for over a year. I think the debate is split 50/50 and am willing to take my chances. If my engine goes because of the UDP I will just get a 3L and use a DMD.
Originally posted by Who the F are You?:
does your family tree not have any branches on it?
99SVT
235hp @ 6550rpm
212tq @ 5350rpm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,325
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,325 |
Originally posted by todras:
You guys know an UDP for the crank on a Duratec is a no no right? It's why you never hear of ppl running them. The purpose of a DMD is to reduce harmonics. An underdrive will introduce more. Who knows maybe you won't have problems with one but I wouldn't chance it for the minimal gains.
My car just hit 90,000 miles this week on the highway, that is 70,000 miles of UDP life. There are lots of us still running them with no problems.
I noticed I hit 90k right after I got done running it to 6,800 rpms 3 times to merge into traffic like I do and have done many many times every day for the last 5 years. I thought pretty much everyone was at the point now where they realized an UDP on a duratec will theoretically lower your crank/bearing life, but it looks like it's so far out that none of us will care.
97 Contour SE MTX
K&N 3530, UR UDP, 19# Injectors, mystery mod, FMS wires, Fordchip.com chip, SVT: TB, Flywheel, clutch, exhaust
04 Grand Caravan SXT
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,130
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,130 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
Originally posted by todras:
You guys know an UDP for the crank on a Duratec is a no no right? It's why you never hear of ppl running them. The purpose of a DMD is to reduce harmonics. An underdrive will introduce more. Who knows maybe you won't have problems with one but I wouldn't chance it for the minimal gains.
My car just hit 90,000 miles this week on the highway, that is 70,000 miles of UDP life. There are lots of us still running them with no problems.
I noticed I hit 90k right after I got done running it to 6,800 rpms 3 times to merge into traffic like I do and have done many many times every day for the last 5 years. I thought pretty much everyone was at the point now where they realized an UDP on a duratec will theoretically lower your crank/bearing life, but it looks like it's so far out that none of us will care.
My thinking exactly. I will probably celebrate my 100,000 mile marker with a 3L anyways.
Originally posted by Who the F are You?:
does your family tree not have any branches on it?
99SVT
235hp @ 6550rpm
212tq @ 5350rpm
|
|
|
|
|
