madweazl
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2015
- Threads
- 16
- Messages
- 982
- Reaction score
- 279
- Location
- Fredericksburg, VA
- Vehicle(s)
- '19 GT350
- Vehicle Showcase
- 1
- Thread starter
- #1
After a couple trips to the dyno, I'd probably save the money and go another route if I had to do it over.
My initial dyno run was with the SCT X4 93 octane pre-loaded tune and Borla S-Type catback (2.5").
Results
401.7hp and 376.3lb' torque
Ambient air temp of 83°
Average IAT 87.7°
DA 2080'
Cost ~$400
My latest results including the addition of the JLT CAI and Lund tune (also 93 octane).
Results
408.7hp and 376.6lb' torque
Ambient air temp of 91°
Average IAT 100.8°
2757'
Cost ~$375
Edit: Based on the DA delta, there is a best guess difference of roughly 2.03% loss on today's run. This would provide a corrected (to match my initial runs conditions) 416.99hp. At this point, I'm relying on calculators to provide the apples to apples comparison in regard to DA differences. The additional corrected 8hp looks better than initial difference of 7hp (15hp over the initial run) but it's purely a guesstimate based on the calculator I used.
The runs were done on the same dyno but different days. The dyno in question is a Dyno Dynamics. For those not familiar with this particular dyno, it is very similar to the Mustang Dyno (resistance loading). It is known for publishing results considerably lower than the Dynojet just like the Mustang Dyno as well.
With that being said, I had very little interest in what the actual numbers were, the only thing I cared about was the difference between those numbers so I knew what the modications were actually doing or not doing.
What my results show - and what many members have argued to the contrary - is that the SCT pre-loaded tunes actually perform a lot better than most people "believe" to be true. Sure, they can argue that my initial results were inflated (must be the dyno, right?).
The flip side of that coin is the results showing the JLT CAI and custom Lund tune combined for 7hp and .3lb' torque. Paints an interesting picture now, doesnt it?
Looking at the AFR from today's run(s), there is room for improvement in the Lund tune (decent margin of safety) below 6000 RPM.
Initial run from last week in red with today's results in blue.
Contrary to popular belief, the SCT pre-loaded tunes are producing strong results and for the amount of money spent, provide far more bang for the buck than the JLT cold air intake and Lund tune. I do have a Lund tune for the stock intake and I'm really tempted to spend the $100 for another dyno session to see what it can do so I know exactly what the after market cold air intakes are really doing. Right now, my overwhelming speculation is that they (in the case of JLT since that is all I have data on) do absolutely nothing in regard to HP and torque on an essentially stock vehicle.
Video of the vehicle on the dyno
My initial dyno run was with the SCT X4 93 octane pre-loaded tune and Borla S-Type catback (2.5").
Results
401.7hp and 376.3lb' torque
Ambient air temp of 83°
Average IAT 87.7°
DA 2080'
Cost ~$400
My latest results including the addition of the JLT CAI and Lund tune (also 93 octane).
Results
408.7hp and 376.6lb' torque
Ambient air temp of 91°
Average IAT 100.8°
2757'
Cost ~$375
Edit: Based on the DA delta, there is a best guess difference of roughly 2.03% loss on today's run. This would provide a corrected (to match my initial runs conditions) 416.99hp. At this point, I'm relying on calculators to provide the apples to apples comparison in regard to DA differences. The additional corrected 8hp looks better than initial difference of 7hp (15hp over the initial run) but it's purely a guesstimate based on the calculator I used.
The runs were done on the same dyno but different days. The dyno in question is a Dyno Dynamics. For those not familiar with this particular dyno, it is very similar to the Mustang Dyno (resistance loading). It is known for publishing results considerably lower than the Dynojet just like the Mustang Dyno as well.
With that being said, I had very little interest in what the actual numbers were, the only thing I cared about was the difference between those numbers so I knew what the modications were actually doing or not doing.
What my results show - and what many members have argued to the contrary - is that the SCT pre-loaded tunes actually perform a lot better than most people "believe" to be true. Sure, they can argue that my initial results were inflated (must be the dyno, right?).
The flip side of that coin is the results showing the JLT CAI and custom Lund tune combined for 7hp and .3lb' torque. Paints an interesting picture now, doesnt it?
Looking at the AFR from today's run(s), there is room for improvement in the Lund tune (decent margin of safety) below 6000 RPM.
Initial run from last week in red with today's results in blue.
Contrary to popular belief, the SCT pre-loaded tunes are producing strong results and for the amount of money spent, provide far more bang for the buck than the JLT cold air intake and Lund tune. I do have a Lund tune for the stock intake and I'm really tempted to spend the $100 for another dyno session to see what it can do so I know exactly what the after market cold air intakes are really doing. Right now, my overwhelming speculation is that they (in the case of JLT since that is all I have data on) do absolutely nothing in regard to HP and torque on an essentially stock vehicle.
Video of the vehicle on the dyno
Sponsored
Last edited:
