Evolution Performance, Inc. - 2016 Shelby GT350 Basline Dyno Numbers

[Voodooo]

So I take it you never ran just the tune before the other mods?

I did baseline 100% stock dyno pulls 454hp

Then, stock tune, headers and off road X pipes, stock mufflers pulled 484hp on 93 octane.

Then, Lund tune, headers and off road X pipes, stock mufflers pulled 511hp on 93 octane. But at a lean air fuel ratio of 14.02:1 and lifting off at 6000 rpm.

All dyno pulls were made with the stock CAI and same 93 Sunoco in the tank and on the same dyno at Watson racing. With less then 170 miles on the car.

Once I get the data logging done I will run on E85 and go back to Watson racing for more dyno pulls. If anymore tuning will be needed it will be done on the dyno. I will also try the JLT but I don't see it gaining much over 5hp increase. Once ford performance releases the 100mm throttle body I'll try that. I been considering a HOGAN custom cobra jet style intake but I think I'll hold out to see what ford performance offers.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sponsored

 

[65sohc]

Cool. I'm really interested to see how the flex fuel tune works out. I'm in CA so I don't even get the advertised 526 bhp.

 

[65sohc]

I'm data logging because the vendor I got my tune from screwed up big time and never told Lund I was running headers and off road X pipes. My tune was lean. If your on stock exhaust you'll be good to go.

This is interesting since one of the vendors mentioned a while back that you were waiting to install your exhuast before uploading the tune.

 

[Voodooo]

Correct. Then you know who it is.
Once I contacted Lund and he looked up my order he was not pleased.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[65sohc]

Correct. Then you know who it is.
Once I contacted Lund and he looked up my order he was not pleased.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The flex fuel tune thread in the 5.0 section has over 1400 posts and guys are still having issues. Not confidence-inspiring.

 

[Jbenso127]

The flex fuel tune thread in the 5.0 section has over 1400 posts and guys are still having issues. Not confidence-inspiring.

What issues are they seeing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[65sohc]

Frankly, I didn't read all 1400 posts, but I did read a fair number. Three months after the tune was introduced guys are still datalogging their fuel trims, trying to get the tunes dialed in. They are reporting discrepancies in reported ethanol%. Here is an example
"It's hard for me to ignore the fluctuation of ethanol content I had on my 3rd tank of 93. It went from as low as 18% all the way up 30% and back down to 25% within 20 min. Before that at the very end of my 2nd tank it started climbing from 20% up to 27% with no changes to the fuel content in that entire tank. So I don't know what the cause could be if my LTFT'S are correct. And if they are off I have another issue to address. So I feel like I'm in a lose lose. I would be OK with my LTFT'S being correct and just sticking with my 93 tune again since I really wasn't gaining much with E85 for my mods and the pump was 25 min away and it was too cold this winter to run it all year anyway..."

 

[superman07]

how many of you use the nguage to see if your car learned ethanol content and what the percent is?

 

[Poppacapp]

Frankly, I didn't read all 1400 posts, but I did read a fair number. Three months after the tune was introduced guys are still datalogging their fuel trims, trying to get the tunes dialed in. They are reporting discrepancies in reported ethanol%. Here is an example
"It's hard for me to ignore the fluctuation of ethanol content I had on my 3rd tank of 93. It went from as low as 18% all the way up 30% and back down to 25% within 20 min. Before that at the very end of my 2nd tank it started climbing from 20% up to 27% with no changes to the fuel content in that entire tank. So I don't know what the cause could be if my LTFT'S are correct. And if they are off I have another issue to address. So I feel like I'm in a lose lose. I would be OK with my LTFT'S being correct and just sticking with my 93 tune again since I really wasn't gaining much with E85 for my mods and the pump was 25 min away and it was too cold this winter to run it all year anyway..."

I have had no issue with my Lund Flex tune, and the % has always been within range of what it should be.

Sponsored