92 Fox Notch Build: Stock, Light And Sticky..what Next..

Discussion in '1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-' started by EZE183, Mar 19, 2014.

  1. IMO the seat of the pants meter doesn't register till about 20hp, it is in fact a a guestimation. But my Oh sh!t factor is pretty accurate :nice: And if my little ecam, that doesn't even have a .500 lift, .498 to be exact, is putting out 280rwhp_320rwtq on racer Brad Brands dyno at Atlanta Chassis Dyno, it's the addition of my personal Oh Sh!t factors that make my gt40p, ecam, cobra intake put down the numbers they do. Just from those dyno numbers with an ecam should tell ya "Hey, some truth to this is VERY possible". Cause I'm showing numbers on a Dyno from a racer where his sh!t has to be perfect with his turbos and set ups. It's not a run of the mill shop, it's what they do, they race. And my little ecam numbers should make ones LQQK :eek: at the Oh sh!t factors. So that's what this forum is all about, providing experiences with trouble shooting and ideas. There's my idea, my experence and my numbers to back it up from a true racer's dyno. If anyone doesn't like it, believe it or whatever my dyno sheet is on the sticky with the name, number and address of Atlanta Chassis Dyno.


    Also there are TONS of videos from Brad racing at events on youtube. So I've laid down my little ecam numbers with actual hp numbers and actual torque numbers and have proven my case for actual Truth, what YOU got to present your case?
    ....Other than "Nawww, just can't be."
    Maybe it's more torque, i dont truly know, but my Oh sh!t factor is dyno proven, take it or leave, Free Country :flag: ...whaut WHAUT!!!
    #41 Grabbin' Asphalt, Mar 21, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2014
  2. I tend to take "fuel economy" threads with a grain of salt. There are way too many variables to take a mileage as scientific fact as well as a fact that the testing is not done under controlled circumstances, nor does everyone perform the test the same way.

    For me to begin the believe stated claims, one would need to show me a certification that the odometer is calibrated and displays accurate info when used for mileage, and to actually fill with a measured amount of fuel rather than depend on the nozzle to click off at exactly the same point each time a tank is topped off. Also, the same environmental (temp, humidity) conditions would need to exist as well, and the same route driven (engine load up hills, tailwind, etc).

    In other words, the data needs to be more controlled than typically done with the usual "top off the tank and hit trip reset" method. That's why I tend to not be so positive when i hear someone gaining 1/2 MPG off a mod, when one can probably achieve the same effect by filling up their car at a different pump with a nozzle that turns off slightly earlier than the first one.

    I just see this sort of testing as optimistic at times and sometimes exaggerated just like HP numbers are
  3. I agree, long road trips on the interstate in OD is the best way for someone to get a ballpark. Straight driving till you're about as close to E as possible before the fuel pump runs dry, which I don't recommend, but get it close :nice:
  4. Now scroll down, and see that it is.
    tannerc91gt likes this.
  5. "Naw, Naw can't be Naw......"
    Show me your dyno numbers to disprove it Guy ;)
  6. You just "backed it up" by saying that you have a pretty accurate SOTP dyno... Then provided numbers for an entirely different combo.
    And then added a video of someone going far faster than either combo would ever be capable of as certification that you know someone with a fast car so I should believe you.

    Honda forum
  7. Well at least we are not talking about putting magnets on the fuel line..............
  8. "Prove magnets don't work" :rolleyes:

    People forget that some of us have been in this game for 25+ years, have been there and seen that, and the proof isn't even findable anymore. Meanwhile yeah, it's a free country, anyone can have an opinion, to spout total bull:poo: as fact does us all a disservice and does nothing but discredit its purveyor. 20 RWHP from pulleys and an electric fan is the heartiest, most hay-filled bull :poo: I've seen in a long time.
    tannerc91gt likes this.
  9. Wow. Just wow.

    The only thing I'd like to add here is that efficiency and HP are conversely related, not inversely related as mentioned earlier. Someone said removing the smog equipment makes the engine less efficient but frees up HP. Where is the logic in that statement? That's like saying I'm a man, but I have lady parts. The whole point of modding engines is to make the air flow, fuel delivery, and timing events more efficient to make more power.

  10. Hah.

    not quite. I kept waiting for it to start moving as a GIF.
  11. The MAF was a C&L 73mm and the Tb was 65mm. Both predated the head and intake installation. I had installed some 1.7 roller rockers, and lost about 1.5 mpg, and later installed the TFTW heads, and got the 1.5 mpg back. In the end, with the 306, I got the same 20 mpg around town I always got, even factory stock.
  12. If i could work to get 26-28 MPG out of my fox, id drive it more than my Taurus. I get a COMBINED 21 MPG in our absolutely horrible Honolulu traffic.
  13. 1. Yes pretty good SOTP dyno to the parts I just added -True
    2. The numbers for my combo is the addition after the pulleys and fanregarding just the addition of an ecam, gt40p heads and cobra intake which we all know those numbers are well beyond numbers for an normal #'s for an ecam, gt40p, cobra intake. If I didn't have those pulleys and electric fan I would be in the area of 255-260rwhp.
    3. The video is showing the dyno is from a VERY good shop that doen't fudge numbers, they race.
    4. I thought you could piece that thought process together so I numbered it here to help you stay focused.

    * by passing the smog pump pulley (not just deleting smog pump) was a complete smaller belt way I used. I bypassed the smog, A/C when I tested my Oh sh!t factor. I since then use my A/C, but if I ever go to thetrack I will put on the shorter belt and by pass it all :nice:

    * all of this has nothing to do with fuel economy. Figured i would type that to keep you and others focused ;)
  14. Just going to have to agree to disagree.
    Through all your snide comments you're bragging up a car that only makes 280 with an H/C/I swap. Hardly Guinness worthy

  15. You know its quite easy to Re-read my previous posts and see where the snide comments stsrted inconjuction with yours and mr. NAW NAW, because I was was pretty plain jane expressing MY experiences that seem to be under valued to OTHERS experiences. Simply showing what CAN be achieved with a little ecam is is not bragging, its an ecam cam petes sake.