Dragster
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #1
Hey everyone! I finally finished up my latest install and had some time to get the car tuned and dynoed. My car is a 2015 GT PP manual, and this build consists of Comp stage 1 cams, a GT350 manifold and throttle body, Roush CAI, full exhaust (Kooks 1 3/4" green catted headers + Borla S-type catback), and supporting mods like OPG, CS, and balancer. Alex from Lund did a remote dyno tune on the car. The local Lund affiliated shop uses a Mustang dyno, so I also got some runs on a Dynojet to make the comparison easier. My previous setup was the same thing, except I had stage 3 cams and the stock throttle body. You can read about those results in that thread here:
https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/th...old-results-spoiler-alert-its-not-good.92074/
My "baseline" run was at the shop with the Mustang dyno, and the car made 400 hp and 363 ft-lbs. The setup consisted of full exhaust, Roush CAI, and Lund tune. I will upload the files for the dyno graphs because I don't know how to upload a pdf from my computer on the new forum. The car felt good with that setup, but like everyone else, I wanted a little more NA hp and a little more RPM to use for track days. While I love the transmission gearing for the street, having an extra 1,000 rpm at the track would allow me to hold gears longer. I decided to stay NA on this build simply because my last car (an 03 Cobra) was blown and I wanted to do something different.
The stage 1 setup on the Mustang dyno made 414 hp and 313 ft-lbs, but the operator recalibrated the dyno between my stage 3 cam run and the stage 1 cam run, so it's difficult to make any comparisons--which is frustrating. In any event, it's pretty obvious that the car loses quite a bit down low and makes the gains at the top. The Mustang dyno graph ends around 7500, but the power plateaus and continues to nearly 8,000 RPM. In my opinion, the better comparisons are the Dynojet results because this was the same dyno I did my stage 3 Dynojet runs on, and has not be recalibrated in any way since then. There, the car made 436 hp and 365 ft-lbs. Again, the car loses torque down low, but carries the hp for longer in the rev range. Whether or not it's worth it is debatable... I wish I had done a baseline run on a Dynojet so I could see exactly what the changes were on my car. As it is, you can see that for my setup, the stage 1 cams are better than the stage 3 cams. The stage 1 cams lost less down low, and carried basically the same hp for just as long up top.
I was hoping for more peak gains with the cams to offset the loss down low, but it is what it is. The frustrating thing is that the loss in torque down low is significantly greater than the hp gains up top. In the thread with the stage 3 cam results, I have a Dynojet comparison between my car with stage 3 cams and a full bolt on car with the stock manifold and cams, and that car makes about 55 ft-lbs of torque more than my car did at 4,000 RPM (and below, really), while my car makes only 16 more peak hp. The biggest difference, though, was that the stock cams and manifold are done by about 6500 while my car carried the power to 8,000. So hopefully the area under the curve is greater with the cams and manifold. Even with the stage 1 cams, it's probably still down about 30 ft-lbs low in the rev range compared to a FBO Coyote.
My biggest issue right now, though, is with the throttle in the new tune. All of my tunes have been done by Lund, with my stage 3 tune done by Jon Jr., and the new one done by Alex. Below, say 3500 RPM, the car will jump to about 90% load with even the slightest amount of throttle given. So then you have a ton of pedal travel to get the last 10% or so. It's really annoying. It's also frustrating to heel-toe with this setup because you basically have to floor the pedal to get the throttle open enough to blip it. It also means that there's basically no difference in throttle response between the different drive modes. This wasn't the case with the stage 3 tune that Jon Jr. did. I'm hoping Alex can fix this in the tune, but we'll see. It's honestly annoying as hell to drive at this point, and I won't keep it this way if he can't fix it. I did change from the stock throttle body to the GT350 TB when I put in the stage 1 cams, so maybe that has something to do with it. I don't know, but either way, it's annoying and frustrating. After swapping cams twice, I'm just ready for the car to be DONE.
I should've started a GoFundMe to help pay for all of this nonsense...
Doing cams sucks because there is so little data out there, so hopefully this can be useful to anyone out there that's thinking of going that route.
https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/th...old-results-spoiler-alert-its-not-good.92074/
My "baseline" run was at the shop with the Mustang dyno, and the car made 400 hp and 363 ft-lbs. The setup consisted of full exhaust, Roush CAI, and Lund tune. I will upload the files for the dyno graphs because I don't know how to upload a pdf from my computer on the new forum. The car felt good with that setup, but like everyone else, I wanted a little more NA hp and a little more RPM to use for track days. While I love the transmission gearing for the street, having an extra 1,000 rpm at the track would allow me to hold gears longer. I decided to stay NA on this build simply because my last car (an 03 Cobra) was blown and I wanted to do something different.
The stage 1 setup on the Mustang dyno made 414 hp and 313 ft-lbs, but the operator recalibrated the dyno between my stage 3 cam run and the stage 1 cam run, so it's difficult to make any comparisons--which is frustrating. In any event, it's pretty obvious that the car loses quite a bit down low and makes the gains at the top. The Mustang dyno graph ends around 7500, but the power plateaus and continues to nearly 8,000 RPM. In my opinion, the better comparisons are the Dynojet results because this was the same dyno I did my stage 3 Dynojet runs on, and has not be recalibrated in any way since then. There, the car made 436 hp and 365 ft-lbs. Again, the car loses torque down low, but carries the hp for longer in the rev range. Whether or not it's worth it is debatable... I wish I had done a baseline run on a Dynojet so I could see exactly what the changes were on my car. As it is, you can see that for my setup, the stage 1 cams are better than the stage 3 cams. The stage 1 cams lost less down low, and carried basically the same hp for just as long up top.
I was hoping for more peak gains with the cams to offset the loss down low, but it is what it is. The frustrating thing is that the loss in torque down low is significantly greater than the hp gains up top. In the thread with the stage 3 cam results, I have a Dynojet comparison between my car with stage 3 cams and a full bolt on car with the stock manifold and cams, and that car makes about 55 ft-lbs of torque more than my car did at 4,000 RPM (and below, really), while my car makes only 16 more peak hp. The biggest difference, though, was that the stock cams and manifold are done by about 6500 while my car carried the power to 8,000. So hopefully the area under the curve is greater with the cams and manifold. Even with the stage 1 cams, it's probably still down about 30 ft-lbs low in the rev range compared to a FBO Coyote.
My biggest issue right now, though, is with the throttle in the new tune. All of my tunes have been done by Lund, with my stage 3 tune done by Jon Jr., and the new one done by Alex. Below, say 3500 RPM, the car will jump to about 90% load with even the slightest amount of throttle given. So then you have a ton of pedal travel to get the last 10% or so. It's really annoying. It's also frustrating to heel-toe with this setup because you basically have to floor the pedal to get the throttle open enough to blip it. It also means that there's basically no difference in throttle response between the different drive modes. This wasn't the case with the stage 3 tune that Jon Jr. did. I'm hoping Alex can fix this in the tune, but we'll see. It's honestly annoying as hell to drive at this point, and I won't keep it this way if he can't fix it. I did change from the stock throttle body to the GT350 TB when I put in the stage 1 cams, so maybe that has something to do with it. I don't know, but either way, it's annoying and frustrating. After swapping cams twice, I'm just ready for the car to be DONE.
I should've started a GoFundMe to help pay for all of this nonsense...
Doing cams sucks because there is so little data out there, so hopefully this can be useful to anyone out there that's thinking of going that route.Sponsored
