Whipple horsepower numbers

[sonic]

STAGE 2 and manual

733 - 737 on 93 w 3.625"?
RWHP?
What other mods?
Manual or Auto?

Initial dyno after install was 652 RWHP w 3.625", large TB, 93, 72#, stock crank pulley, IC pump upgrade, stock exhaust, Auto, Advanced trac off, 4th gear, did not pull abs fuse or disconnect front wheel speed sensor, 7500rpm, 80F ambient, 600ft elevation.

That's a long way off from 730 RWHP...
Chime in if this sounds too low.

Sponsored

 

[carnut]

sub'd. I'll post my results, stage 2 whipple, once installed later this month...

 

[FLSTANG]

733 - 737 on 93 w 3.625"?
RWHP?
What other mods?
Manual or Auto?

Initial dyno after install was 652 RWHP w 3.625", large TB, 93, 72#, stock crank pulley, IC pump upgrade, stock exhaust, Auto, Advanced trac off, 4th gear, did not pull abs fuse or disconnect front wheel speed sensor, 7500rpm, 80F ambient, 600ft elevation.

That's a long way off from 730 RWHP...
Chime in if this sounds too low.

This is from the whipple tune. Car is a manual, I have the borla sport catback.
rwhp #s

 

[Dat Boi Kumar]

800+ HP With VP

 

[jvandy50]

"Stage 2" kit, 3.625" pulley, 93 octane = 765rwhp and 562wtq, manual car

I have Kooks long tubes with high flow "green cats" and Borla Touring exhaust

So you're running the Whipple tune correct?

 

[Jmeo]

So you're running the Whipple tune correct?

Yes, I am using the supplied Whipple tune and couldn't be happier.

 

[Getdownonit]

"Stage 2" kit, 3.625" pulley, 93 octane = 765rwhp and 562wtq, manual car

I have Kooks long tubes with high flow "green cats" and Borla Touring exhaust

Interesting, why is TQ so low?

 

[desant89]

I found that these numbers can be really different from dyno to dyno. I doubt that our cars are that much different from one another having the same exact setups. Has anyone ran a Whipple stage 2 using the Whipple cal (pulley?)? I am kicking myself for not trying it, but I was too lazy to swap them out at the track.

 

[Mike02z]

Dyno sheets are purely for bragging rights, nothing more. What kind of 1/4 mile times and trap speeds are you seeing?

 

[NikkaBun]

Bump. Old topic guys my apologies but new to the forums. I have a 2017 S550 Mustang GT with a 2.9L Whipple currently running a 3.75 pulley. My supporting mods are 55lb injectors, Whipple intake, Factory TB, AWE Catback and a stage 1. I am up north where 93 Octane is readily available. My question is can i safely run a 3.625 pulley without blowing up my engine?

 

[Neil T.]

I run a piston/rod motor, 3.8L whipple, T56 swap.

4" pulley: 948/689 @17lbs
3.5" pulley: 1044/770 @20lbs
3" pulley: 1028/850 @~24lbs belt broke above 7k

 

[HKusp]

Bump. Old topic guys my apologies but new to the forums. I have a 2017 S550 Mustang GT with a 2.9L Whipple currently running a 3.75 pulley. My supporting mods are 55lb injectors, Whipple intake, Factory TB, AWE Catback and a stage 1. I am up north where 93 Octane is readily available. My question is can i safely run a 3.625 pulley without blowing up my engine?

It depends on your tuner and what he does with timing and knock. I will tell you, do not run back to back to back pulls without giving the pistons sufficient time to cool if you have stock pistons with stock ring gap. You will be putting it at a serious risk of ringland failure. I get that yours is a 2.9 and mine isn't, but the principals are the same. Heat and compression on 93 octane can be bad. Ask me how I know...

 

[NGOT8R]

@HKusp how much boost and what power level were you at when you experienced the ringland failure?

 

[robvas]

@HKusp how much boost and what power level were you at when you experienced the ringland failure?

And how much timing?

 

[HKusp]

I was on 93, the 3.875 pulley at 12ish PSI, probably 750ish WHP based off of air consumption numbers, never dynoed, and I was certainly north of 17* of timing. EngineerMike was playing with my tuning a while back and he saw 21* North of 7000rpm if I recall correctly. But the failure was done on back to back to back highway pulls running 2 GT500's in 100*+ temps.

Sponsored