[gmkillr]

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

 

[mustang-madness]

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.

 

[rixx93gt]

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.

 

[red82gt]

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

That does explain a lot, there were a lot of limitations that had to worked around and the results are good.

 

[67mike]

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!

 

[blk91coupe]

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

 

[ForestGreenGT]

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.

 

[Nutzz]

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.

 

[Jay Allen]

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.

 

[Jay Allen]

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.

 

[tmoss]

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.

 

[gray86hatch]

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

 

[Stitch]

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

 

[MJS]

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

 

[blk91gt]

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!

Thanks Jay.

And also thank you for the % confirmation. I can't tell you how many arguments I've had with people of dyno #s and inertia vs load bearing dynos. I guess it is difficult to understand that HP as a measurment can change depending on the device used to measure it and the maner in which it is measured. At the end of the day though as you said it's about the complete package and what the motor is designed for!. Quite oftem it seems that bragging HP numbers are usually for people too scared to actually drive thier cars at the track and get some real world data and experiance. Beacuse that is where the entire motor combination is going to shine.

I'll certianly be coming to you when its time to dial in a proper cam for my pig of a car

 

[blk91coupe]

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

 

[flyin2jz]

I think alot of people get caught up in the peak number when looking at a dyno sheet. It really has nothing to do with the performance of a vehicle. It has to do with weight and the average tq and hp numbers. Ive seen tons of cars with big peak numbers but the average below the peaks are terrible. Does no good at all to have big numbers at 6500 when the car sees rpms from 4k to 6k most of the time. Just my 2 cents. try it out. U will like it. Kevin

 

[351Freak]

I can't believe he ran a full 2.5" exhaust WITH CATS and still thinks there is something wrong elsewhere...???

There was absolutely NOTHING about this combo that helped the motor make power...

Limited intake side...wheezy exhaust...jeezus...and then throw it on the WORST dyno for power numbers...

Talk about stacking the odds against you...

my .02

 

[351Freak]

90mm TB...

Random 3" cats like on the Vettes...

Full 3" exhaust...

then the bitch will haul...

 

[ledfootky]

351freak what do you mean buy the worst dyno. I mean do you know the person behind the dyno?