carterussell
Active Member
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
Lunds numbers are similar to others.... One made slightly moreI 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
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!Chill out. ...As stated, the final #s are what matter, and there's even issues there when comparing one pull to another...
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, etcDid we ever get a tuner response from Lund?
These numbers are good, wonder what it would run the quarter mile in.is the graph saying 316 hp 410 tq? if so isnt that higher then most dynos with just a tune on 93?
honestly look great to me. if its real cant imagine what an actual exhaust setup would runThese numbers are good, wonder what it would run the quarter mile in.
Interested in results.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.
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.
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.What were you're stock numbers?