FocusCanada Forums

Here are some of the pics... Video sound is awful Sry. :(

I made running 8% Rich 129HP and 165TQ on my good run which was not printed out. Pat only printed my low run.
I was told if i run it Lean I could Expect about 10 more HP roughly. Same for TQ.

Pics... Yes, I'm Lazy,

Pic's look awsome. So what is Tony's secret. I see that it has an intercooler. Look like its going to be an interesting Monday. Anyone disapointed with their result?

Some where...
You have to ask Tony for a ride in it. WOW is all I can say. But I don't think hes bringing it Monday. Not finished yet. Next meet he said it would be out.

186hp / 199wtq average.

139 whp 164.5 wtq

GFXjamie,May 23 2009, 11:18 PM Wrote:139 whp 164.5 wtq
[right][snapback]287880[/snapback][/right]

Jamie great numbers bud!
I think Ticketz is Procharged
Anyone else?

GFXjamie,May 24 2009, 12:18 AM Wrote:139 whp 164.5 wtq
[right][snapback]287880[/snapback][/right]

^^^ materialized out of his ass on the 3rd pull after some voodoo a/f recalibration ... up to that point I was in line for a six-pack. :lol:


137.5 - 155 for me :ph34r:

146.2 whp / 158 wtq
146 whp would be about 171 hp at the crank (stock specs = 170 hp ) ...hmm :(
158 wtq would be about 180 lb-ft at the crank ( stock specs = 145 lb-ft ) ... yeah , I am cool with that :)

ZTWsquared,May 24 2009, 08:34 AM Wrote:

GFXjamie,May 24 2009, 12:18 AM Wrote:139 whp 164.5 wtq
[right][snapback]287880[/snapback][/right]

^^^ materialized out of his ass on the 3rd pull after some voodoo a/f recalibration ... up to that point I was in line for a six-pack. :lol:
[right][snapback]287890[/snapback][/right]

Then theres the guy who pulls a prank, tell pat to tell me 10hp less on the first run. Just think, i made the bet with a UDP in the picture as well. Either way, good match up and i expect that 6 pack tomorrow night!

I hit 125whp and 135wtq with the Steeda SRI on the stock tune and running way rich. Then pulled 123whp and 137wtq with the steeda 87 tune. This was on a manual 2L Dtec.

The tune had a slightly lower peak power but increased the output in the 4600-6200rpm range.


-George

I wonder though why all of us got higher numbers on torque than horse power ? Shouldn't be the other way around ? Does anybody has an explanation for this ?

Gabriel,May 24 2009, 04:57 PM Wrote:I wonder though why all of us got higher numbers on torque than horse power ? Shouldn't be the other way around ? Does anybody has an explanation for this ?
[right][snapback]287904[/snapback][/right]

We are not Civics.

But seriously all the numbers seem a little too high. Specialy autos. But then most were duratechs.
Is steeda dyno knowen to read a lil bit higher?

I am sorry I missed out on this. It would have been nice to come and hang out. But with the family and doing my brakes and such.

It's a Mustang Dyno - they're notorious for pessimistic HP numbers. However, I've never heard of them exaggerating the torque numbers like that!

Off day with the dyno perhaps?

I'm not sure, he had the wieght set to 3400 LBS and the cars don't come close to that.
The torque is a lil high but when you drive it it does feel very torquie. It just needs the HP up. So for mine that only onther thing I want to do is the Cosy Intake Manifold, throtle body and a set of cams and valves. Oh and a proper tune... but steeda's tunes weren't looking so hot on Saturday.

NikiterZTS,May 24 2009, 08:42 PM Wrote:

Gabriel,May 24 2009, 04:57 PM Wrote:I wonder though why all of us got higher numbers on torque than horse power ? Shouldn't be the other way around ? Does anybody has an explanation for this ?
[right][snapback]287904[/snapback][/right]

We are not Civics.
[right][snapback]287909[/snapback][/right]

You think ? If " we were Civics " we had better numbers maybe. The one civic there put out 175 hp and 180 lbft just when most said s*** , it's a civic , there'll be no torque . Usually gasoline engines that we use in out type of vehicles have higher numbers on HP than on torque . The other way around would be more the case if we had diesel engines . I have also checked some results on a diferent focus site and also found HP>torque , look :http://www.focusfanatics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=101162
I am not arguing the HP numbers , all the cars there had mods more or less , just the torque numbers being higher ...

Scorcher000,May 25 2009, 08:21 AM Wrote:I'm not sure, he had the wieght set to 3400 LBS and the cars don't come close to that.
The torque is a lil high but when you drive it it does feel very torquie. It just needs the HP up. So for mine that only onther thing I want to do is the Cosy Intake Manifold, throtle body and a set of cams and valves. Oh and a proper tune... but steeda's tunes weren't looking so hot on Saturday.
[right][snapback]287939[/snapback][/right]

Could be the 3400 lbs to throw numbers off like that ? I know nothing of how a dyno measures . It's true , my car feels torquier with the Diablo program , but then the K&N filter claims to add 3-8hp , Diablo claims an average of 15 hp , ok let's not be so sure , but 1 HP increase ??? :lol:
I wonder if someone who knows Pat better , Jaime perhaps , could ask for a better explanation of the numbers ?... since we ( at least me ) were to busy watching the show . To be honest , Benzin pointed this out to me , then thought about it and I think he's got a point .
Anyway , it was a good day to hang out . I enjoyed it .

a mustang dyno by comparison to a dyno jet usually read low, the reason he added weight to the vehicles was to offset that. Also, the MD style dyno is a true measure of torque, they actualy put a proper load on the vehicle and act as if you are actually driving the car. Where as with a dyno jet, they use the HP number to calcuate torque. Also, we are not hondas!!!

Gabriel,May 25 2009, 07:50 AM Wrote:You think ? If  " we were Civics " we had better numbers maybe. The one civic there  put out 175 hp and 180 lbft just when most said s*** , it's a civic , there'll be no torque . [right][snapback]287940[/snapback][/right]

This was a K20 swapped civic, they have high HP and TQ numbers because they are not a smaller engine like a b16a/b18c so they can hit higher torque numbers by comparison, still isnt much more then hp mind you.

I still say their torque numbers are off. I was talking to Oscar this morning and he put down more reasonable sounding numbers, along the lines of what he should be putting down, really. The HP was more than the torque, albeit not by that much.

Bugs while dynoing the N/A cars perhaps? All the high-torque numbers are N/A cars and sorry fellas, I'm not convinced that a 2.0L Duratec is putting down 160+lb/ft at the wheels with bolt-ons.