seems like those numbers are way off for that size engine and heads. MM&FF just tested one 427 big trickflow heads and a super victor it made like 671 on pump gas. weird.

 

I would be very disappointed. You should easily be in the 420rwhp range I would think. You are leaving alot on the table with it being done at 5500. I think you could have made that with the tfs 3 cam. Take it the the track and run it. If it runs what you want piss on the dyno numbers.

 

well, glad to know its not just me. i expected somewhere in the 420-450 at about 6200-6500. when i saw my camcard, i had suspicion the under .600 lift and 230@.050 duration to be way too small for this engine, but in jay i trusted. i don't doubt his skills, but his interpretation of the engine i wanted seems off.

 

Did you have the heads flowed yourself or did you plug in the advertised numbers?
If the head flow is not as advertised, the cam grinders whole approach will be all for not.

 

My solid roller 393 made 416 rwhp through an AOD.. I'd expect you to be there or better.. The hydraulic roller setup isn't optimal, thus the low power band. Is the exhaust 3" or 2.5"?

 

take it to the track before making any final decisions about how you feel.........

 

regardless of cam designer, parts chooser etc. Would it make one ounce of difference if your car which to you and many others looks to be down on power but accelerates faster and turns a better time than other similarily equipped cars that made 50+ more on a chassis dyno? It wouldnt really matter then would it? I hate chassis dynos. The only dyno worth a #### IMO is an engine dyno.

 

I would suggest a bigger TB, maf and 3" exhaust.

 

Ditto. Check to see if you have vacuum at wide open throttle. If so, and I'm guessing that you will, at least upgrade to a 4" AFM Power Pipe and maybe an 80mm RACE Accufab. The RACE version having the 4"inlet, but tapers down to the specific sized blade, in this case the 80mm. I think that would be adequate without going over-sized. And yes, the 3" exhaust won't hurt either.

 

Before you get too worked up on dyno numbers and new changes concider that mustang dynos can read as much as 15 - 20% lower than inertia dynos. The MD600 I dyno'd on (tecmotion in Calgary AB) owner told me hs dyno compared to dynojets in the same city was roughly 18% less. Using that as a base and looking at the automotive math deduced from my trap speed MPH and actual weight:

HP = (((MPH / 234)^3) * Weight)

or

(((111.47 / 234)^3) * 3505 = 378.89

dividing that figure of 378.89 "rwhp" by 18% puts me at 320rwhp - pretty darn close to the Mustang dyno figures.

So id say that your numbers of 371 rwhp could well = 437rwhp on a dynojet, and that man is not bad at all!

Now maybe i'm over simplifying things but I think it's safe to say that if big dyno #s are important to you you should find a dynojet. But the real test of performance is at the track! Mustang dynos are for tuning, not bragging rights.

Just my 2 cents

 

Before you get too worked up on dyno numbers and new changes concider that mustang dynos can read as much as 15 - 20% lower than inertia dynos.

So id say that your numbers of 371 rwhp could well = 437rwhp on a dynojet, and that man is not bad at all!

Now maybe i'm over simplifying things but I think it's safe to say that if big dyno #s are important to you you should find a dynojet. But the real test of performance is at the track! Mustang dynos are for tuning, not bragging rights.

Right On!

My experience is about 14.5% to 15.25% based on my customers that have run on both. Using 15% as an average, that is 426 RWHP through 2.5" catalytic convertors, full exhaust, and a 75mm TB.

And you are right, not too bad at all. Make the changes and I am guessing 450 RWHP to 475 RWHP with the right changes on a dyno jet. But the FACT remains, this is a dyno that will never see the parking lot and the Auto Cross or the Road Course. It is irrelevant.

Good Post!

Why not go to Jay before posting a thread like this? If you have questions or are disappointed why not got back to the person before posting? I see this all the time and it's annoying reading after awhile.

Forest Green, THANK YOU! This is what upsets me the most. When a customer comes to me for help after the point of sale, they are going to get it. How can I fix what is not broke? Check this out. I called this customer this morning as I was checking my e-mail. I knew nothing about this thread, ZERO. I spent 35 minutes explaining EVERYTHING. Mostly how dyno *tuners* should tune and keep their pie hole shut about cams. A simple lift vs Duration number is meaningless in the scope of a camshaft. Once I got to my PM's from the boards I sponsor and visit, I had 22 PM's! Yes I am serious. All about this thread. I came here and read for myself. I can assure you (plural) I was not pleased.

This thread was posted at 8:22pm last evening. My e-mail came in at 10:02pm. Now had I been consulted first, gave an opinion/answer/etc and THEN the customer came to the internet for opinions on what I thought, NOT that I agree with that but I do understand inexperienced engine guys want help and most are impatient and want it NOW! But tossing me under the bus when the blame should not be pointed at me is upsetting. I guess welcome to the internet age and business.

To ANYONE who buys products from ANYWHERE and goes to the *dyno* and is not happy.......Here is what I think. A chassis dyno gives you a number based on the COMPLETE package. From the air filter to the end of the exhaust, it is a reference point based all of on that. The tune up, the MAF size, the TB size, the intake manifold as it matches (aligns) to the head, how good the heads are, the PR length, the valve train geometry, where the springs set up correctly, the S/B [OMG, what a crap shoot there!], where the rings filed correctly, what bearing clearances, is the PCV doing it job or is crank case pressure causing ring flutter and hence cylinder pressure? The list goes on and on and on.......To lay blame on any one part, is ludicrous. And I did not nor do not see any of those parts coming into question.

 

dyno numbers

The RPM where the torque peak and the HP peak is at tells you how big a cam really is, sooo, your cam is too small.
JOE SHERMAN RACING ENGINES

 

The RPM where the torque peak and the HP peak is at tells you how big a cam really is, sooo, your cam is too small.
JOE SHERMAN RACING ENGINES

joe knows hp. look him up. :salute:

 

Jay told me the same thing- billit cam, new lifters, pushrods, timing chain and gears, etc...
all i wanted was a camshaft.
He did mention though that HP numbers may be lower than expected but that the car will be faster.
track is what matters, so test and report.
good luck!

 

Did you run it at the track yet?

 

On a dynojet your numbers would be over 400. But I would think you would be around 450+ with those heads and custom cam.

 

It is thread like this that really get me worked up. I wish that anyone in here that has commented negatively (including the cam being too small) would know all of the facts before they opened their mouth and really showed their worth.

-What ET did the DYNO run going around the auto cross track? Yes, AUTO CROSS. Does an auto cross application need TONS of low end and midrange? Where's the *dyno* graph?

-This is a 94/95 car with those electronics. With a "Big Cam" it ain't gonna act right and I do not want that call about how it will not idle and drive.

-This is a 3400# car. What is going to keep the mass moving? HP above 6000 RPM? Uh, no.

-It only has a 3.55 gear.

-The customer listed on his build sheet a 6000 RPM to 6500 RPM shift point.

-Now for those who "think" the cam is too small
Hydraulic Roller, no lash. This is NOT a solid roller.
230/237 at .050
.600"/.570" (with 1.72)
146/153 at .200"
113 LSA with a 110 ICL is a small cam? Remember, 94/95 car.......

-Why don't you talk about the 2.5" exhaust with catalytic convertors and tail pipes? Oh ya, has a ball socket to boot. Last time I checked we ran exhaust like this on 302 street cars. A very restrictive exhaust will not hurt the engine at low(er) RPM's but absolutely kill it on the top. Hmmm.......exactly what happened here.

-Or, may be the 75mm TB? Same thing. A 75mm is for a street car. Not a guy with a 408, 225cc intake ports, a carb style manifold.

I called Mr. Puffpaff this morning and we spoke for over 35 minutes. I told him what I thought the issues were and gave him guidance. I would hope that those who wish to pile on w/o knowing the facts would get the facts first.

Thank You.

 

My how things seem so different now that more light has been added to the subject. Good response Jay.

 

Im going to have to agree w/ a few of the guys here, and say if you want big hp #'s then why did you go to a mustang dyno? You have everything stacked against you here too as Jay said, the t.b., exhaust, gearing, cats, etc...
If you want max h.p then fix all of these things and go to a dynojet if h.p. #'s are that important to you. Better yet, take it to the track and see what she'll do. Good luck!

 

A "Dyno Tuner" is just that, not a custom cam specialist. The individual that told you the cam was too small is basing that soley on the results from this mustang dyno, period.

 

X53254

 

jay has been great to work with. i didn't mean to put him in a bad light. i just needed to figure out why it did what it did. there's alot of different opinions and advice out there, but one thing i believe in is dynos. screw the numbers, its how the curve looks. i don't drag race this thing so peak power is not the concern i had at all, it was that it produced a good power curve until about 4600 where it started to level off and finally peak at 5500 and drop off nearly as quickly as it came on. the dyno shop said in their experience with these engines, the biggest area of concern is the cam. some of you share that concern. some of you say the throttle body and exhaust is corking it. i knew the exhaust was going to be a bottleneck, but running tailpipes with a torque arm/panhard makes bigger pipes impossible. i really didn't think it would be worth 50horse, but maybe i was wrong? anyhow, i am going to the track in a couple of weeks and see how it works for me.

 

Jay:

I do NOT know how you keep your sanity dealing with idiots like this?:salute:


Original Poster:

You deserve a HUGE kick to the BALLZ from Jay! Shame on you! You painted a VERY DIFFERENT picture from the truth by the original post and it's LACK OF FACTS!

 

I agree. Combo should be perfect for that high gear and auto-cross! Take it to the TRACK!

 

Why would you say this (above) after you said this?

I would be very disappointed. You should easily be in the 420rwhp range I would think. You are leaving alot on the table with it being done at 5500. I think you could have made that with the tfs 3 cam.

Isn't this a classic case of getting facts first before you say something that is incorrect?

Oh, and BTW, just because something has a power peak at 5500 RPM does not mean it is "done" as you say. If this engine had 1 7/8 headers with 3.00" exhaust, X-Pipe, No cats, good mufflers, turn downs, do you think it'll still peak at only 5500 RPM?

I already have a very good idea of what will/won't happen.

The RPM where the torque peak and the HP peak is at tells you how big a cam really is, sooo, your cam is too small.

The minimum cross section does not effect this?
The intake manifold runner length does not effect this?
The plenum volume does not effect this?
The cubic inch will not effect this?
The style of the cylinder head will not effect this?
The header primary diameter will not effect this?
The header primary length will not effect this?
The exhaust CFM will not effect this?
As the cam is advanced or retarded, this won't effect the RPM range?
As cylinder pressure is changed (compression ratio) that does not effect RPM?

Joe, I grew up watching you and admiring you. You are one of the pioneers! But sir, to make a statement based on no factual data on the combination and then have that statement to be false, isn't doing anyone any favors.

Thanks.

 

thread

Why not go to Jay before posting a thread like this? If you have questions or are disappointed why not got back to the person before posting? I see this all the time and it's annoying reading after awhile.

 

LOL i have to agree with Jay..If you have 302 parts on a 408 engine then you gonna have 302 power period..It all works together! Sounds like he worked some magic with that cam if you ask me, he had to make that cam work with the most hated computer setup.

 

Ok my 302 heads, TB, MAF all went from 11.60 to 10.38 with the addition of 106 ci.
I can't count how many times I have heard this b.s. on here.

I agree the exhaust is a problem if it is not 3" but my 302 made 350 on a mustang dyno.

Tim

 

happened to me before once too ( so far) - on another site if you recall - probably going to happen to both of us again periodically.

No sense working on a coronary over it, Jay. Those that know you well enough never suspected the cam was anything but what was worked up for the data we all know gets asked for.

I (we) get guys asking "how much power" all the time, it's natural. I don't commit because of the list you posted above of affecting factors.

 

ok, so got my new combo to the tuner...about friggin time! here it is...
408 all forged, 10.4:1, 225 cnc pro comp heads (2.05/1.6), super victor efi, 75mm tb, 80mm maf, 42lb inj, jay allen billet cam, linkbar lifters, 1.7rr's, 1.75 bbk longtubes, aluminum flywheel, g-force t-5, frpp alum driveshaft, 3.55 rear and so on.

I have one question for you, did you submit this info on your build sheet originally when you first went to Jay or did the parts change after Jay made the cam? But I will tell you one thing his product is supurb and great quality, also Jay did not try to up sell me either Billet core, titiunm retains ect.I allready knew I wanted this items as well as he did.The cam Jay made for me was way more then I expected and Iam very pleased with the out come.

Thanks Matt Paul

 

I can vouch for the incredibly annoying '94-'95 computer. I did a Whipple blown 8:1 347 with a mild cam in a '94 GT with an AOD, and tried just about everything to get a decent a/f across the band and have the car idle without stalling and run well when warm.

Just pound your head against the wall, you'll get about as far. Very long and frustrating story short, I re-wired almost the entire car to an A3M with an aftermarket street rod harness, went with a stand-alone computer for the AODE and an a fan controller module sold by some dude on ebay, and had a custom chip burned for it. Now it runs and drives about 99% perfect, and the customer is happy. Crazy 5.0 SN95s.

-MJS

 

I said that because they seem low even on a mustang dyno. I'm sure the cam will do good. Just going by what he originally said. "Not impressed with these numbers." He said that not me. I just gave my opinion as did alot of people. Then when I found out it was a autocross car with a high gear it might work better since it should have alot of midrange torque. JMI