All AFR/FTI/EDELBROCK guys in here NOW!!

[DARK-5.0]

Thanks guys. I'm getting some more motivation from all your responses to track this problem down. I hate C&L too. I bought it used and the jackass said it was a pro-m and its been forever but i could have sworn the picture was of a pro-m too. But then this piece of **** showed but so I gave it a shot. But I agree, with the afr being so dead on, its hard to really blame the maf, it is doing its job. I may still pick up a lightning maf though since I'm gonna have to get it retuned anyway.

Also, the cam is straight up dot to dot right now. That was a big discussion on the local boards. So if I convince myself to take everything back apart, I'm gonna have one of those guys help me degree it. It just sucks that I just sold my dd explorer as I don't have anything else to drive now if I tear this down.

There is roughly 700 miles on this rebuilt shortblock. I would think by now the bearing have set in and it just needs to not be driven like hell all the time.

I'm ready to attack this thing, but I need to gather up some more side money in order to do it. So I'm just gonna have to drive it as is for a few weeks probably. But I need all the feedback I can get so if you guys have more to add, please do. Thanks a lot to Paul for that write up. I'm copying and saving it so I have it as a check list.

Jeremy

 

[final5-0]

Jeremy

Several members have asked about the details of the tune while at the dyno.

I'm mainly interested in the spark details if you got any info.

Grady

 

[bimmertech]

i am pretty sure you got stud mount heads, so i doubt pushrod length will be an issue. rocker adj may be, but i think you got that nailed.

looking at your torque curve i highly doubt that you have an adv/ret cam issue. it is very similar(almost identical) to mine.

i stand firmly behind what i said today, are you working tommorow?

 

[Grn92LX]

Were the valve springs upgraded for the cam? The dyno smoothing was on 3 and you can still see the curve up top a little jagged.

Your a/f looks fine.

 

[Stangfreak95]

i am pretty sure you got stud mount heads, so i doubt pushrod length will be an issue. rocker adj may be, but i think you got that nailed.

looking at your torque curve i highly doubt that you have an adv/ret cam issue. it is very similar(almost identical) to mine.

i stand firmly behind what i said today, are you working tommorow?

I had to buy some longer pushrods for my AFR/FTI/Eddy combo.

 

[Black95GTS]

Were the valve springs upgraded for the cam? The dyno smoothing was on 3 and you can still see the curve up top a little jagged.

Your a/f looks fine.

I was just gonna say that. I think you're a dead ringer for valve float. Right around the 45-4700ish mark. Look how the HP starts to nose dive. I've seen several AFR/FTI/Eddie graphs and typically the HP continues to rise.

I think your MAF is fine.

Adam

 

[bimmertech]

I had to buy some longer pushrods for my AFR/FTI/Eddy combo.

and do you have stud mount or ped mount?

i had to buy longer pushrods for my ped mounts, but if i had stud mounts i would bet i could have used the stock length and still had good coverage.

 

[Stangfreak95]

stud mount

 

[zenboy99]

I put a FTI/AFR combo on my friends stock shortblock, 92 GT, with stud mount and also had to use longer pushrods.

 

[DARK-5.0]

Thanks guys. I wasn't there for all of the tuning, only about the first half. We set the timing back to base 10. So if he made any changes after that, he didn't mention them. The heads are stud mount and the springs have been upgraded. I highly doubt they are floating. Even stock afr springs shouldn't even be floating til high 5's low 6's. But yes the springs are upgraded along with the seals. The pushrods that are on it now are 6.250" x 5/16". I haven't gotten a response back from Ed yet, so hopefully monday.

Ben, we'll mess around with it tuesday, check for vacuum leaks and double check the tps voltage. Whenever I'm driving around, between shifts it kicks up in the revs and also coming to a stop it likes to hang around 1500 with the clutch in until I stop completely, then it will come down. Is this just the computer kinda learning the motor or could it be tps issues.

Jeremy

 

[blksn955.o]

If your running the base 10* at the dizzy. and your timing tables are stock...as in no chip/tuner timing bumps. There is your 20hp esp. with those alum. heads that want can make more power with more timing.

You realize that your stock total WOT spark stock is like 26* or so...with a good alum. head you could prob. go 32-36* total.

 

[DARK-5.0]

Well like I said, we set it to 10 on our first pull which was the one that made the 261 293, so when I was gone, he might have bumped it up. I'll try to swing down there monday and ask him.

Jeremy

 

[final5-0]

Thats what this thread is about. I got it tuned today and it only made that much power. Its fully tuned, the afr is perfect at 13 and its not making the right power.

Jeremy

I'm still in the dark about the wording

"fully tuned"
OR
as you mentioned in a different post "dyno tuned"

Did this guy
1) Burn you a chip
OR
2) Was he playing with the fuel pressure and twisting the dizzy

If method 2 was used and your spark value was at 10

Most definitely ...... power was left on the table

Earlier today, I saw one of the tuner guys post that Kenne Bell has seen a gain of 4 hp for every 1 degree of spark when tuning.

The total amount of spark advance is only around the mid 20's in the stock pcm

Since most combos produce the best power in a spark value range of 32 to 38 degrees, you can see some power may have been lost depending on where the guy had the dizzy or if he modified the spark tables.

Grady

 

[DARK-5.0]

Sorry Grady I wasn't more clear. The car has a SCT chip. So it was tuned by that, not fp and dizzy.

Jeremy

 

[final5-0]

Sorry Grady I wasn't more clear. The car has a SCT chip. So it was tuned by that, not fp and dizzy.

Jeremy

Thanks for the enlightenment Mr. J

Knowing he had access to the spark table, it makes sense he would put the dizzy at 10.

It would be interesting to ask him these things about the spark

1) What was the total amount
2) How soon or at what rpm is that amount seen

You can clearly see his handy work in how he leaned things in the second pull. To me, if he tuned the fuel, as we can plainly see ...

He would have tuned the spark curve as well

If the spark was optimized, then the missing power very well could be explained in one or most likely, more of the things Paul and the others talked about in the earlier parts of this thread.

Grady

 

[DARK-5.0]

Heres something I found out today. Look at my distributor and block marks. If he set it to 10 degrees with the timing light. Why the hell is it so off. I can't remember correctly, does this show it retarded or advanced.

Jeremy

 

[DARK-5.0]

ttt

Jeremy

 

[Rootus]

Heres something I found out today. Look at my distributor and block marks. If he set it to 10 degrees with the timing light. Why the hell is it so off. I can't remember correctly, does this show it retarded or advanced.

That is not an issue. The physical orientation of the distributor does not matter at all. All that matters is what you get with the timing light. If you set the timing at 10* with the light, you're golden.

Now, I didn't read most of the rest of your thread past the first post, so maybe I'm off base. But I had very much the same problem as you are having, with pretty much the exact same combo. I was putting down 265 rwhp, and had no idea why. I thought it seemed like torque peaked a little early, and fell off a little early, much like your dyno graph looks.

So what did I do? I did three things. Unfortunately that means I don't know which was the fix, but I can hypothesize.

1. I replaced my 75mm Pro-M Bullet MAF with an 80mm Pro-M MAF.
2. I replaced my 65mm FRPP throttle body with a 75mm Fox style TB.
3. I replaced my MAC cat-back with a brand new Magnaflow cat-back.

Honestly, there is no reason that #1 or #2 should have made a huge difference, not on a combo in this power range. A/F was okay, I just wanted to maximize flow. It is possible that I got a nice boost from deleting the Edelbrock 94/95 intake elbow, but even then, other people run that same hardware and make good power.

I honestly think something was going on with the cat-back. It was on the car well before I bought it, I had no idea of the real condition, and an exhaust restriction would cause the behavior I was experiencing (early torque peak, early torque fall-off at the top end). I'm sure I did get some benefit from the other parts, but I lay most of the blame on something fishy with the exhaust.

So who knows, it's just something for you to think about, and add to your list of potential options. When I put mine back on the dyno, it did a nice 297 rwhp run, and then we advanced the timing in the 4500+ RPM area until it smoothed out and the final tune was 310 rwhp, 336 rwtq.

Good luck.

Dave

 

[DARK-5.0]

I hope it comes down to something that simple. But I doubt its my exhaust, but who knows. It consists of Mac LT's, straight pipes back to flowmaster 2 chambers and then out the back. I will be checking for leaks like mentioned above so we'll see what we find there. I would freakin love to make 310/336. Did you degree your cam and everything or just leave it straight up?

Jeremy

 

[Rootus]

Did you degree your cam and everything or just leave it straight up?

I degreed it. Had to, really, because Ed provides a spec sheet that requires degreeing the cam, he doesn't provide the cam with any "straight up" values. Makes sense, given the way tolerances can stack up on a production 302.

Sounds like you're working down the right path. I'm sure you'll figure it out.

One other thing. I did notice a nice change in SOTP performance and driveability when I altered the fuel injector timing to match up with my cam. I can't remember off the top of my head what the name of the program was -- but most any current TwEECer user in here would know, it's very popular. It's been too long for me...

Dave