Lund Racing +75RWHP, +135RWTQ Tune ONLY

[carterussell]

I don't see how Lund can achieve these number safely while everyone else have gotten much less. Great numbers but i'd be afraid my engine would explode or some other awful event

Sponsored

 

[15EBStang]

I don't see how Lund can achieve these number safely while everyone else have gotten much less. Great numbers but i'd be afraid my engine would explode or some other awful event

Lunds numbers are similar to others.... One made slightly more

 

[Smitty02]

Chill out. ...As stated, the final #s are what matter, and there's even issues there when comparing one pull to another...

Final numbers are a tough way to go since all dynos read differently. I feel like the gain is actually more important since it removes the factor of the dyno from the equation. This only works/is relevant though if the baseline is same day, same octane. Of course this is IMO. That said the final dyno graph looks awesome and the HP doesn't fall off as much near the peak!

 

[l2frankie]

still new to tuning. would a tune around this be safe assuming you have an intercooler? and maybe more juice passed 4k rpms?

 

[EricRN]

Did we ever get a tuner response from Lund?

 

[TurboAg]

Did we ever get a tuner response from Lund?

Pretty sure they were using 87 octane for base run. 316whp is around what other tuners are getting on 93 given variation between dynos and conditions, etc

 

[Voodoo Mamba]

Can someone with a stock 93 octane m/t EB..unbiased..get this advertised tune...go to an authorized Dynojet speedshop and video the stock 93 run cool the car down. then..vs. 93 Lund tune? This will show what this tune is really doing. I'm pretty sure 95% of the EBM owners on here drive their cars DD.

I'm hoping that a company does a "Tune shootout" (anonymous to the tuner companies of course) for the EBM with all of the handheld tunes from the big dogs and test them all to really show the truth.

 

[l2frankie]

is the graph saying 316 hp 410 tq? if so isnt that higher then most dynos with just a tune on 93?

 

[2015-MUSTANG]

is the graph saying 316 hp 410 tq? if so isnt that higher then most dynos with just a tune on 93?

These numbers are good, wonder what it would run the quarter mile in.

 

[l2frankie]

These numbers are good, wonder what it would run the quarter mile in.

honestly look great to me. if its real cant imagine what an actual exhaust setup would run

 

[KrisR]

Oldest thread in the world, haha. But I have a manual trans Ecoboost car and dynoed on stock tune, 93 octane, last weekend. My Lund NGauge is in the mail, I'm going back on Saturday to the same Dynojet to see the difference, tune only, 93 octane.

 

[ronv95]

Oldest thread in the world, haha. But I have a manual trans Ecoboost car and dynoed on stock tune, 93 octane, last weekend. My Lund NGauge is in the mail, I'm going back on Saturday to the same Dynojet to see the difference, tune only, 93 octane.

Interested in results.

 

[boosted16]

Yeah can't wait to see results after the tune. Keep us posted

 

[PRG3k]

Oldest thread in the world, haha. But I have a manual trans Ecoboost car and dynoed on stock tune, 93 octane, last weekend. My Lund NGauge is in the mail, I'm going back on Saturday to the same Dynojet to see the difference, tune only, 93 octane.

What were you're stock numbers?

 

[KrisR]

What were you're stock numbers?

278hp/273tq, SAE, Dynojet. Cool pull. Backup pull a couple minutes later made more torque down low (290ish) but it fell off a little more on top, heat soak / aggressive overtemp nannies in the tune I suppose.

Tune is here and loaded, going to datalog tonight and send it to Lund and they might send me a revision if necessary before Saturday.

I may have to dyno at a different location (long story) on Saturday, and if so I'll redyno with the factory tune there as well as the 93 Lund tune.

Sponsored