Vortech installed and dynoed

[firemanken]

I have a 06 Mustang GT Vert with auto tranny. I just had a vortech non-intercooled supercharger installed yesterday. The dyno numbers are 401 rwhp and 371 rwtq. I thought that was good with the auto tranny. The car runs great with the custom dyno. I also have 410 gears and corsa axlebacks.

I don't know what it would do at the track. I have no plans to take it there because I wouldn't run it unless it had a roll cage.

 

[DarkFireGT]

Those are pretty darn good numbers for an auto and non-intercooled. What was your baseline? Autos put down 240-250 stock.

 

[firemanken]

I never did a baseline when I got the car but when I had my JLT CAI with a Brentspeed 93 octane tune and UDP I was running 298 rwhp and 296 rwtq. I would figure it was in that 250 range.

 

[Mr_Q]

Christ I need to dyno mine again because at Vortech mine with the power cooler laid down 385rwhp. If it continues to be the same it's time to find a better I guess.

 

[firemanken]

the place that did my custom tune did an 05 GT a few years ago with the vortech and they got the same dyno numbers. They told me the guy with the 05 intercoolded it a year later and they got 458 rwhp. The 05 now just had the engine rebuilt and the auto tranny done and its putting out over 600 rwhp.

 

[firemanken]

dyno sheet

 

[tom281]

Congrats, nice numbers!!! I have the non-cooled kit too and 5 speed manual trans. With offroad midpipe, Borla mufflers, and delete plates along with custom dyno time tuning at Brenspeed we got 439/383 with the factory 17" wheels. Switching to 18" wheels dropped me about ~15-20 hp & tq.

 

[dli1314]

nice numbers! congrats! i bet the car is a blast to drive.

Christ I need to dyno mine again because at Vortech mine with the power cooler laid down 385rwhp. If it continues to be the same it's time to find a better I guess.

you also have to take into account that it was dynoed on a dynapack so it's going to be giving you higher numbers than a dynojet would be giving you.

correct me if im wrong, but i believe a dynapack measures BHP whereas a dynojet measures WHP (since you can't actually see how much power it's putting to the ground with no wheels on the car)

probably explains the higher numbers with the CAI and 93 octane tune as well. i'd be interested in seeing the numbers from a dynojet.

 

[firemanken]

i'm not sure but from what i've been reading the dynapack is more accurate than a dynojet because the wheels are off... i guess there is less of an error factor.

 

[Cerwindel]

Those are pretty darn good numbers for an auto and non-intercooled. What was your baseline? Autos put down 240-250 stock.

Auto - 306 RWHP ..

Brenspeed 91 Oct Tune, Pulleys, Tunable Induction Intake, and a smile..

I am getting tired of the " Pretty good numbers for a auto " BS.. Auto, Manual etc, it matters not.

1 guy might have little lower HP's via auto, one might have higher.. SAME for the manuals... In the end its all the same..

So, Pretty darn good numbers for "non-Intercooled". Period.

-C

 

[Cerwindel]

I have a 06 Mustang GT Vert with auto tranny. I just had a vortech non-intercooled supercharger installed yesterday. The dyno numbers are 401 rwhp and 371 rwtq. I thought that was good with the auto tranny. The car runs great with the custom dyno. I also have 410 gears and corsa axlebacks.

I don't know what it would do at the track. I have no plans to take it there because I wouldn't run it unless it had a roll cage.

KK Next 2 Mods - Call Bamachips or brenspeed.

Buy CAI+Tuned package.. Make sure you tell them EXACTLY what you have installed..

Enjoy the 30-40 more ponies!

-C

 

[tungsten07]

Auto - 306 RWHP ..

Brenspeed 91 Oct Tune, Pulleys, Tunable Induction Intake, and a smile..

I am getting tired of the " Pretty good numbers for a auto " BS.. Auto, Manual etc, it matters not.

1 guy might have little lower HP's via auto, one might have higher.. SAME for the manuals... In the end its all the same..

So, Pretty darn good numbers for "non-Intercooled". Period.

-C

yeah but isn't it a fact that a auto tranny eats up more horsepower than a manual tranny?? that's what I've always been told.

 

[DarkFireGT]

Auto - 306 RWHP ..

Brenspeed 91 Oct Tune, Pulleys, Tunable Induction Intake, and a smile..

I am getting tired of the " Pretty good numbers for a auto " BS.. Auto, Manual etc, it matters not.

1 guy might have little lower HP's via auto, one might have higher.. SAME for the manuals... In the end its all the same..

So, Pretty darn good numbers for "non-Intercooled". Period.

-C

Hate to break it to you, but your dyno guy is inflating his numbers. Again, without a baseline on the same dyno, the after numbers don't mean a whole lot. But 306 on an auto with intake, tune, and pulleys just isn't happening, considering a stock auto puts down 340-350. That means you picked up almost 60 horsepower with intake, tune, and UDP. Not happening. There's a dyno shop an hour from here that does the same thing. A guy with a Terminator on spray put down near 500hp, then went to a more reliable dyno, and put down about 425, which is dead on for a 75 shot. Not flaming you, please don't take it that way. I'm just saying you might want to look for a different dyno shop.

 

[firemanken]

I've got a few places around me that use different dynos (dynojet and mustang) I'm going to wait until the weather cools a bit and see how the dynojet, mustang and dynapack all compare.

 

[Cerwindel]

Hate to break it to you, but your dyno guy is inflating his numbers. Again, without a baseline on the same dyno, the after numbers don't mean a whole lot. But 306 on an auto with intake, tune, and pulleys just isn't happening, considering a stock auto puts down 340-350. That means you picked up almost 60 horsepower with intake, tune, and UDP. Not happening. There's a dyno shop an hour from here that does the same thing. A guy with a Terminator on spray put down near 500hp, then went to a more reliable dyno, and put down about 425, which is dead on for a 75 shot. Not flaming you, please don't take it that way. I'm just saying you might want to look for a different dyno shop.

I can assure you my baseline HP was not 340 .. I can tell you it was higher then 250

There is a TON of assumptions thrown around in regards to the baseline HP's.. Truth be told, each model is different, You "ASSUME" its 240 - 250 range, which is fine.. Id like to see some data you have to make this assumption fact, sounds more like a dislike for autos then it does cold hard numbers.

As for dynos, I have seen different dynos give many different numbers, I have seen auto and manual Gt's with same mod's come out with more HP for one or the other.

Until we have cold hard facts on each and every unit, only Mrs Cleo can predict the exact HP..

at 240 Baseline your looking at 20% ++ of loss..

Tit for tat, in the end, the dragstrip is where it all matters. But, in the meantime, drop the " Good for auto " Crap, its baseless..

Thanks,

-C

 

[tom281]

Post some strip numbers then.......

 

[DarkFireGT]

I can assure you my baseline HP was not 340 .. I can tell you it was higher then 250

There is a TON of assumptions thrown around in regards to the baseline HP's.. Truth be told, each model is different, You "ASSUME" its 240 - 250 range, which is fine.. Id like to see some data you have to make this assumption fact, sounds more like a dislike for autos then it does cold hard numbers.

As for dynos, I have seen different dynos give many different numbers, I have seen auto and manual Gt's with same mod's come out with more HP for one or the other.

Until we have cold hard facts on each and every unit, only Mrs Cleo can predict the exact HP..

at 240 Baseline your looking at 20% ++ of loss..

Tit for tat, in the end, the dragstrip is where it all matters. But, in the meantime, drop the " Good for auto " Crap, its baseless..

Thanks,

-C

I have nothing against auto's. You're taking it the wrong way. If you know your baseline, what was it then? Different dynos do show different numbers, but if we knew your baseline, it would give us a better idea of what you're seeing. I've seen several autos dynoed on the same day as manuals, and know for a fact that manuals put down 10-20 more than autos. It's fact, not an assumption. There's nothing wrong with autos, they are great for bracketing. I was just stating some facts.

 

[Cerwindel]

I have nothing against auto's. You're taking it the wrong way. If you know your baseline, what was it then? Different dynos do show different numbers, but if we knew your baseline, it would give us a better idea of what you're seeing. I've seen several autos dynoed on the same day as manuals, and know for a fact that manuals put down 10-20 more than autos. It's fact, not an assumption. There's nothing wrong with autos, they are great for bracketing. I was just stating some facts.

I have no issues with facts, but not exaggerations ...

I would say maybe 1-2% Difference.. NOT 5+% Diff in basic DT loss..

Maybe on the older stangs.. Not on the S197..

All im saying is, its semi insulting when you stereotype autos as inferior.. Period.

-C

 

[DarkFireGT]

I never said they were inferior, you inferred that. They just have more drivetrain loss. It's a proven fact. Even in the S197's. I've seen it, as high as 5%. Dyno numbers and 1/4 mile times don't lie. That said, with a good torque converter and tune to firm up the shifts, they will murder a manual.