Lund Racing 93 Octane Tune Results

[likeaboss]

As I wait patiently for my GT350 allocation this spring I decided to try out a Lund Racing 93 Octane tune with the SCT X4 I have. I've had the tune installed for a few weeks and the butt dyno said my car was faster, but I wanted to see if it really was so I took my GT to Pure Automotive Performance in Millersville, MD. They did a bone stock baseline dyno on my car last fall. The only other mod I have is a MBRP Street Catback. On the dyno I gained 20RWHP and 26RWTQ over stock. That's impressive for just a tune on a NA car. Needless to say I'm another happy Lund customer and 16 Camaro SS ready!

Sponsored

 

[Simmons-Racing]

I have the same thing, a cat back and a lund 93 tune. Made 418 whp and just ran a 12.5 @ 115 today on the stock tires.

Simmons

 

[evo8904]

Nice results!!! I'm really glad that I went the Lund for tuning. My car drives better than it did when it was stock.

 

[likeaboss]

I have the same thing, a cat back and a lund 93 tune. Made 418 whp and just ran a 12.5 @ 115 today on the stock tires.

Simmons

Nice! I hope for something similar when I finally hit the track.

Nice results!!! I'm really glad that I went the Lund for tuning. My car drives better than it did when it was stock.

Agreed, much better than stock with a very smooth power delivery. I wish I had your Whipple though! If I don't go through with the GT350 that's probably my next move.

 

[2015 Silver GT]

Looks like a 20 rwhp gain not a 30 rwhp gain unless the graph is wrong. Still pretty good gains.

 

[likeaboss]

Looks like a 20 rwhp gain not a 30 rwhp gain unless the graph is wrong. Still pretty good gains.

Yup my mistake! Corrected.

 

[BmacIL]

Interesting that it's leaner everywhere.

 

[likeaboss]

Interesting that it's leaner everywhere.

I guess I can have Lund squeeze out a little more, but I'll stay on the safe side.

 

[likeaboss]

Just for fun here is my GT500 on the same dyno. Both stock running 93 and with the Lund Racing 93 tune. Even though it blew the stock tires off I miss that low end torque sometimes.

 

[Choking_Victim]

Interesting that it's leaner everywhere.

sure that part of the plan to get more power. Still looks plenty safe to me.:cheers:

 

[Silver50Pony]

As I wait patiently for my GT350 allocation this spring I decided to try out a Lund Racing 93 Octane tune with the SCT X4 I have. I've had the tune installed for a few weeks and the butt dyno said my car was faster, but I wanted to see if it really was so I took my GT to Pure Automotive Performance in Millersville, MD. They did a bone stock baseline dyno on my car last fall. The only other mod I have is a MBRP Street Catback. On the dyno I gained 20RWHP and 26RWTQ over stock. That's impressive for just a tune on a NA car. Needless to say I'm another happy Lund customer and 16 Camaro SS ready!

Look at that horsepower gain, same horsepower at 7300 7400 as it had at 6600 right before rev limit lol. Perfect shift point looks to be right around 7000 7100

 

[Legionofone]

sure that part of the plan to get more power. Still looks plenty safe to me.:cheers:

Yep, lean is hot, hot is power.

Only problem is too lean is hole in your piston too...

 

[Choking_Victim]

Yep, lean is hot, hot is power.

Only problem is too lean is hole in your piston too...

it's hard to tell exactly in the above graph but from the looks mid to high 12's AFR isn't gonna melt a hole in the piston.

 

[Silver50Pony]

The red line going straight across is 12.0 AF RATIO , next black hash mark would be 12.5 ... Line barely goes above that so the highest afr during that WOT run would be 12.6 12.7 that's as perfect as it gets...anything below 13.0 is safe

 

[Choking_Victim]

The red line going straight across is 12.0 AF RATIO , next black hash mark would be 12.5 ... Line barely goes above that so the highest afr during that WOT run would be 12.6 12.7 that's as perfect as it gets...anything below 13.0 is safe

I completely agree. And personally target 12.8 myself...I was commenting for those who think that is a lean condition in a n/a motor...clearly they are confused.

Sponsored