2018 GT Whipple Stage 2 - Mustang Dyno Results

[eveslow78]

I dont think its low. On a dyno jet you would be around 670 to 680whp. Whipple claimed 755whp. Dont believe the hype. I have this kit and it's great. I also had a stage 2 procharger on my 15. Car made 560whp on dyno jet when procharger claimed 650+whp. Point is dyno is a tool and you can influence the number. If the car runs great that's all that matters.

For sure! Thanks. Love the input.

Sponsored

 

[gimmie11s]

Nice OP! Car looks great too.

 

[Stang78]

That does seem low. Mine a couple of months ago made 744 on 93 with the 3.875 pulley, but I have a Lund tune. On a Mustang dyno it made 740.

View attachment 322625

 

[Zinc03svt]

I dont think its low. On a dyno jet you would be around 670 to 680whp. Whipple claimed 755whp. Dont believe the hype. I have this kit and it's great. I also had a stage 2 procharger on my 15. Car made 560whp on dyno jet when procharger claimed 650+whp. Point is dyno is a tool and you can influence the number. If the car runs great that's all that matters.

560 whp on a Procharged stage II? Was that on 5 lbs lol.

I would be a little disappointed OP considering a 2k plus less beefcake vortech is making better or equal peak #’s on average. You really need to make 2-3 runs to get average on a dyno anyway. Redyno it when you have more time and add some VP Octanium to your pump.

 

[markmurfie]

The peak number doesn't really matter unless you are comparing changes, but the shape of the curve makes it looks like its still NA. Notably the camel humps. Whipple's don't usually peak as your graph shows, as you usually can't rev high enough to get out of its efficiency range. This looks like some Tq management was still on and it was limiting output based on an NA torque value. Cars most likely working and running great, probably feels like its got a lot more than the dyno indicated on the road and track.

 

[olaosunt]

Did you get logs of the pull ?

On

BTW, what do you do to fix the stuck bypass valve?

Rob

Not sure what exactly the dyno operator did when he said he “fiddled with it “ . I wonder if the line he runs to record boost was in the way since it was perfectly fine when I dropped off the car .

I have not had a chance to take a look at it but below is whipple told me when I asked

“Bypass should certainly never stick closed, are you sure it was stuck or could it be throttle or something else? There is a manual stop on the bypass blade arm assembly that the stop sits on. If it is in fact stuck, it may need a 1/16 turn or less to let the blade not rest in that max closed position. But we test this, in the lab, we freeze the car to -20 and let it soak for an hour to freeze. But anything is possible”

 

[eveslow78]

That does seem low. Mine a couple of months ago made 744 on 93 with the 3.875 pulley, but I have a Lund tune. On a Mustang dyno it made 740.

View attachment 322625

I can always get Palm Beach Dyno of Lethal to take a look here in a couple weeks when I'm in FL.

 

[eveslow78]

The peak number doesn't really matter unless you are comparing changes, but the shape of the curve makes it looks like its still NA. Notably the camel humps. Whipple's don't usually peak as your graph shows, as you usually can't rev high enough to get out of its efficiency range. This looks like some Tq management was still on and it was limiting output based on an NA torque value. Cars most likely working and running great, probably feels like its got a lot more than the dyno indicated on the road and track.

Are you saying TQ was low? Possibly some some level of traction control override?

Thanks for the info!

 

[GrabberBlue5.0]

OP, did you get tire rub on that pull? From the video it looked like it.

 

[eveslow78]

OP, did you get tire rub on that pull? From the video it looked like it.

Never rub on the rear, but if I hit a big bump I can rub fronts slightly.

 

[GrabberBlue5.0]

Maybe I should finish my thought. It wasn’t a completely random question. Others seem to be concerned with low power output on the dyno. If you’re getting tire run, this could absolutely be detrimental to your dyno run/hp output

 

[Stang78]

2018 Mustang GT PP - Whipple Stage 2
~2500 miles
10 Speed Auto
H-Pipe
VP 94 Fuel (Illinois 93 is now "winter blend" aka garbage)

Power 628.4 @ 7045rpm 632.7 with WCF

Torque 502 @ 6106rpm 506.2 with WCF

Dyno Sheet

• eveslow78
• Dec 1, 2018

VP94

• eveslow78
• Dec 1, 2018

GTonDYNO

• eveslow78
• Dec 1, 2018

It looks like it could of been pulling timing on the top end. It’s dipping top a little. Mine did that up top when it wasn’t happy with the fuel. I know the whipple tune is very conservative because they want it to work in every state where good 93 is not offered. If you can swing it I’d suggest a custom tune.

 

[Stang78]

I can always get Palm Beach Dyno of Lethal to take a look here in a couple weeks when I'm in FL.

Yeah you can’t go wrong there. Will be a night and day difference. Congrats on the build. The whipple is a lot of fun.

 

[eveslow78]

Yeah you can’t go wrong there. Will be a night and day difference. Congrats on the build. The whipple is a lot of fun.

Thanks Stang78! I've had the Whipple on for about a month and have never been able to give it a good run because we have had a VERY cold and white fall. I'm really excited to get it down to FL for some fun. BTW, 78 is the best number ever, I have it plastered all over my house LOL

 

[PC 2015]

560 whp on a Procharged stage II? Was that on 5 lbs lol.

I would be a little disappointed OP considering a 2k plus less beefcake vortech is making better or equal peak #’s on average. You really need to make 2-3 runs to get average on a dyno anyway. Redyno it when you have more time and add some VP Octanium to your pump.

Well it was really 560whp was the highest same day. No out the box kit 9 psi. Then I went catless and custom tune and was 600whp. Then pulley down to 3.80 waste gated to 13psi. When it was all said and done it 753whp with 100 and 702 with 93.

Sponsored