xx

[gixxersixxerman]

15k for about 30-40 more whp then a FBO e85 18 GT.. yeah id ask for my money back also..

I try and think of the good points... you have your car back.. it sounds like its running now.......... thats all i can think of.. Sorry this has been a shit show for you OP

Sponsored

 

[cobra199711]

A quick update.
The shop tuning my Mustang GT is Alternative Auto in Chesterfield, Michigan which is a small shop and the owner is Lidio who has been tuning Mustangs for 29 years. He has my car done. His friend wiped the CPU getting rid of the Livernois Motorsports tune. He said the car was seriously lean. I asked him if that same tune or a similar tune was on the car originally would it cause the failure. He said very likely. He found an issue with the Magnuson vacuum line had some sort of blockage which effected the tune. He tunes for only one octane and I told him to tune it for 91 octane. He has and said I might be disappointed as the car dyno'd 530 rwhp. The car will shift at 7,000-7200 rpm.
I asked him about the tune and he is loading the stock tune on to a memory stick. He said that it can be loaded on to an N gauge, if I wanted to have it tuned by some other tuner. I am unfamiliar with this "N gauge".
Another thing that is irritating is that he could not understand how the car could have been given to me that lean and poor running. His comment was "it really ran bad". I explained that they had the car several times over several months. It ran bad every time. He said he thought the tune was "aggressive".
He said that he is friends with Dan Millen, one of the owners of LMS there and did not want to say anything bad, but that something is going on in their tuning shop to have these issues.
So, I will pick the car up when I get down there on Thursday.
If LMS is reading this, please refund my money. I can't get the summer back but I am not a happy customer and have been more than patient. $15,600 is a lot to deal with 6 months and hassles like these.

For what you’ve been through, 700 rwhp wouldn’t even justify the b.s let alone 530...Hopefully they do you right but don’t count on it.

 

[gixxersixxerman]

I havent really done a ton of research on the subject, but i thought most FI cars, ie whipple, paxton, VMP and such, are making easy 650-700's on 91? ill be honest dont know much about this blower here

 

[Ggradtech]

Those 700 hp numbers refer to flywheel hp. The new Whipple (according to their website) states 730hp/680tq for the 2018-2019 Mustangs. Their description states these numbers as the flywheel hp, not RWHP. I think the Magnuson puts down 580 RWHP from dyno runs people have listed, so it's close to the Stage 1 Roush system of 650 flywheel I imagine.

 

[GreenS550]

It's disappointing as the internals of the Magnuson are the Eaton 2300tvs which made 588 on my 2011. I'm to the point of just wanting a good running mustang GT to mess around with. This is an auto trans whereas my 11 was a stick so that might make a difference.

 

[JennyStang]

530 on 91 seem super conservative tune. He must have set your max timing at 12. I’m sorry man but you have a built short block that can handle max timing on 91 at 15-17 timing and should be 600 whp. 93 can do 4 click higher safe at 19-21.

No disprected to that local tuner but WHAT IN THE faq man. everyone here said go Lund or palm beach. You should have 600 plus horsepower not 530. I’m sorry but your luck is horrible man.

 

[TripleB]

My Whipple stage 2 with canned tune out down 675 and I was disappointed. 530 I’d be crying

 

[Burkey]

Those 700 hp numbers refer to flywheel hp. The new Whipple (according to their website) states 730hp/680tq for the 2018-2019 Mustangs. Their description states these numbers as the flywheel hp, not RWHP. I think the Magnuson puts down 580 RWHP from dyno runs people have listed, so it's close to the Stage 1 Roush system of 650 flywheel I imagine.

Whipple are most certainly referring to power at the wheels.
Not sure where you got the idea that it was engine Hp.

 

[DTeal23]

Those 700 hp numbers refer to flywheel hp. The new Whipple (according to their website) states 730hp/680tq for the 2018-2019 Mustangs. Their description states these numbers as the flywheel hp, not RWHP. I think the Magnuson puts down 580 RWHP from dyno runs people have listed, so it's close to the Stage 1 Roush system of 650 flywheel I imagine.

There are plenty people making 700 wheel with different setups (Whipple, Procharger for sure) on pump.

 

[WhiteyDog]

All this downtime, the shot engine, all the hassles, the alleged lies, the ridiculously excessive amount of money spent and it ends up with . . . . . . . . . . .530rwhp???? That's uh, . . . . . not a whole lot more than N/A guys are getting. HOLY CHRIST am I glad I went with a different vendor and tuner. I feel for ya OP, to an extent. But d*mn, you got f*cked so hard I hope you're able to sit down by Christmas.

 

[GreenS550]

The car is running 16.5 degrees advance. It is what it is.

 

[Bluelightning]

There are plenty people making 700 wheel with different setups (Whipple, Procharger for sure) on pump.

I'm one of them with the out of the box whipple tune.

 

[JennyStang]

The car is running 16.5 degrees advance. It is what it is.

16.5 max timing with a built block wtf you doing.

Broooooooooooo.

Ok I’m done in this thread.

Sometimes I think liversucks boned you but now I’m thinking. You like pain or something. You took your car from livershat before it was done. Yeah they took forever but that’s on you and then go to a local tuner that obviously sucks after the advice of people that have the same setup and use and put down more safe power and have you 530 whp wow just wow

 

[Jobodizo]

Regardless of outcome, LMS is now out on my list of possibilities for FI in the future. I don't think we'll ever know EXACTLY what happened, but based on the last 2 pages of posts I've made up my mind about them.

 

[GreenS550]

When I picked up the car 2 weeks ago, LMS had put the stock 3.3 pulley back on to try and get drivability back. They claimed, and I have a dyno sheet of the car making 602 way up in the RPM range with the smaller pulley, but the drivability was terrible. They just could not figure it out. So, with the stock pulley the car makes 530 with stock exhaust and an automatic. Yes, that is low. The fellow tuning the car asked me what I wanted. I said at this point I wanted 91 octane with stock like drivability as he only tunes for one octane and 93 is nearly impossible to get near my home in the UP of Michigan.
I really think LMS tried to get it done but it was many, many trips there and back with no resolution. Then, letting the car go with pre-detonation is just bad. It is my belief that LMS did not want the car going back with a low HP number after all the hassle and cost.
I suppose with the engine in it now I could put a whipple and crank up the boost, etc.
When I say drivability was bad, I mean under part throttle the car would shut down power before the shift then jerk in to gear. It might stumble before taking power. In all the engines I built in my younger days I never experienced anything like it. LMS knew this and tried to fix it but couldn't.
All I was looking for from the beginning was stock drivability and decent HP in the mid to upper 500s like the videos I saw on their website. I now know with relative certainty that the tune must have been very lean and the shift points for the trans were goofy, thus causing the orig engine failure likely. Likely bacause I cannot know for sure.
I am nearly done with this thread I started a long time ago. I will post my experience when I pick up the car in a couple of days.

Sponsored