:shrug: will I be tuning it?

No lol. just me :) You can tune it when I get another car to drive around, and need to get crazy with fueling.

Bro I'm a newb to the 2.3 BUT, i have spent my life around performance cars. You will not make 340whp unless your on corn or NO2!

Damn man look at your mods. They're basic at best! You would be lucky to see 320whp on a dynojet let alone a Mustang dyno. I'm not hating I just understand how this works.

It's good to be confident but its better to real!


EDIT for not understanding what a virtual dyno is! Does the car actually get on a dyno? No right? so wtf are we talking about? spin the drums!!

A) Would you hand a customer a chart like that and say: Here look you made 326whp?

B) I would not have laughed. Saying "is it possible?" is quite a bit different than saying "is it possible with these parameters" There is variation, and between dynos and motors 290-315 is possible. 340+ is not exactly in the same realm.


As the man said there are alot of variables. Unless logs are taken back to back on the same stretch of road then HP will go up and down. Comparing 3rd gear results to 4th gear results are even more suspect. And no, dynos don't necessarily prove anything either. You want bedrock results and want to show us all wrong, get it dynoed at one of the cobb locations where there is a ton of data available for bolted MS3s

Sounds good. I haven't looked at the logs but running in 3rd gear, I'd bet that HP spike occurred at some wheelspin since you indicated the road was smooth. like phate indicated.

Also disable dsc ALWAYS

Once you are over 300whp it's time to gear up to 4th gear logs to get good data.


Tappin

No, I get it... LOL.

Agreed, I don't think it will be long before we see 340 WHP out of our stock turbo. K04's in other platforms make close to 340 WHP and some over this number.

I agree with you getting on a Cobb facility dyno, a lot more MS3's have been dyno'ed there and it would great for a base line comparison.

To me this seems to be the way to go! All great numbers (On a Mustang dyno to boot:headbang:)

BTW, Paul Kosta's seems to be the best car on there and thats where most with similar mods should expect to be (Again this on a Mustang dyno aka; Heartbreaker!)

Very very respectable number's for this car.

And if you interested my old 99 Mustang Gt is on there database after i installed a Cx Racing FMIC and v2sq a few years back, I set it up Blow through and She put down over 400 on a stock 2V! Not too shabby. My Cobra was better, when your putting down over 500 whp you know your big time but even still the MS3 is equally if not more fun of a driver!!

Dyno Database Online

Michael Rosetta also.

They (cobalt SS) also have twinscroll k04s with a fat hotside on them. All k04s were not created equal, there are a ton of variations. I think their big HP stock turbo guys (360whp) are using the corn juice too.

Got some more logs, here's one that should make you happy.

320 WHP, 372 Torque, 4th Gear /w Smoothing - Nice smooth curve, can't say wheel spin on this one.

Wait till we get the rest of the tune worked out :firedevil:

Graph looks smooth though :)

Sorry guys. Been busy again with personal stuff. How do I address this without stepping on anyone's toes? I guess the delicate way is the following.

I wanted to help Drenkel because his thread is about being bored with his car with his current mods and I thought the AP would be a great choice for him if he decided to inject meth, tune for e85 etc. (It keeps me from boredom with my car).

The confusion lies in what numbers Piasani gave Drenkel after dynoing. I've seen it mentioned and noticed a few dyno graphs where Piasani quotes crank hp, which as you guys know is sometimes as much as 20% more than whp.

In the end, I just want Drenkel to dyno his Piasani tune and AP tune back to back, so he can see that the AP can produce the same HP but can be user adjusted and tinkered with in the future, whereas his Piasani tunes cannot.

The only thing of concern to me is that his car with an AP custom tune makes the same numbers or better, same dyno, same day as his Piasani tune. Unfortunately for Drenkel, I believe his car was never sprinkled with unicorn dust by Piasani or Mazda.

The good news about that is if Drenkel has a given HP number in mind, he will know what mods it will take to achieve it, given his car is reacting much like the other Mazdaspeeds that I've helped with their maps, and instead of paying for yet another tune, he will be able to adjust the map himself for any new mods, fuels etc.

i can vouch for this, i have a few buddies with a bolted cobalts on anywhere from 50/50 to 80/20 E85 who comfortably put down 340 - 360 on a dynojet. Thats 340whp from a more efficient turbo (they spike 25 and hold 23) an equally (hell if not better, those little fuckers are fast) good engine, AND E85, and a damn good tuner. This is also the same dyno where i put down 320 whp 420 tq fully bolted on E85 and tuned by the same guy that tunes those cobalts, so obviously their stock turbo has a little more to give than ours (or i've got some oomph left on the table but after reading this thread that seems unlikely)

Drenkel, do you weigh 120 lbs?

Edit: see Phate's reply below.

haha, I had to zoom in on that, as well. It says 150.

I'm surprised no one has said anything about the correction factor yet...

@ this point, I'm going to try my best to match or exceed the power that Drenkel's Piasani tune makes (same dyno / same day) , while trying to address the overall feel of a DD that Drenkel wants.

That's all that can be done. Like I tell a lot of folks, there isn't any voodoo in tuning!

That would be a good branding for a tuning team "Voodoo Tooning".

"WOW thanks voodoo tuning how'd you make my car so fast?"

"... don't worry about it" haha

subbed for results. do people normally add their weight in VD? smoothing set to 2 instead of 3 (3 seems to be standard)? what about what the CF?

i can't believe i just read all 5 pages of this thread...but it's been interesting!

I'm just a newb to all this but I've gathered that the accepted parameters for a VD around here include:

1. use a 4th gear log
2. add occupant weight (just hurting yourself if you don't)
3. smoothing set to 3
4. CF set to 1.01 (unsure of why this is)

yeah, ok that's what i thought. although, for the longest time i was not putting in my occ. weight.

Occ weight + anything in the car that is not OE like a 300lb sub box and amps.


Tappin

sounds like i need to start accounting for the tools, frisbee golf discs, soccer balls, football, ball pump and the box of comics i have been too lazy to mail out to my buddy in CO that are sitting in the back of my car! haha

I wish. Weighed in this morning at 152 butt Nekkid. Why would u think 120?

Also I see people saying add correction 1.01.... Wouldn't that make my numbers HIGHER?



EDIT: I see where u got the 120. That was a typo in first VD. 150 is me on a good day. I just redid the VD with smoothing of 3, and me weighing 157 (clothes) and it still had same exact power output. Let's not nitpicking the small stuff guys.

nope. it usually takes off ~10hp from my graphs.

1.01 is used because it is closer to actual dyno #s. Dynojet setting on VD is 1.09, so no, it would not be higher on 1.01.

Haven't read the last two pages of the thread. That being said;

The AP will flash over the Piasani reflash just fine. Did it myself, and I also had a tune by Joe.

Had no problems with his tune, but since I moved to the UK I needed to get the AP to retune the car myself. (Got Intake/TIP/TMIC upgrade) Allready had HPFP as Joe's tune was pushing my car beyond what the stock pump could do at only 58f.



By the way, on all stock parts I netted 263WHP/260WTQ on a dyno here in the UK using Joe's tune. A stock 2011 WRX made almost exactly 225 WHP on the same dyno the run before mine. So that should give everyone a good idea of comparison. Also worth noting that those numbers were on pull number 5 as the first 4 pulls didn't get logged due to an electronics error, and I had allready driven the car for 2 hours to get to the dyno day. So the car was heatsoaked as all hell. The car also dumped a bunch of fuel and pulled timing at one point during the run due to what I assume was bad knock due to the serious fucking heatsoak.

So 260WHP on all stock parts with those horrible conditions is pretty impressive IMO.

i'd say so! it's advertised at 263hp/280tq at the crank! you basically lost no power. torque looks about right though.

Drenkel, VD is made with many calculations (weight being one that is somewhat important), and is actually relatively accurate (typically within 10 hp and 10 wtq as evidenced by people who have used VD extensively, and then hit the dyno).

You are right, 7 lbs (with clothes) would be knitpicking, but if you are going to post VD logs, we are all looking for them to be accurate, given many of us use VD and are familiar with what VD plots typically look like.

The correction factors are 1.09 for dynojet, which is 9% more than VD's 0 correction factor and much different than the 90 percent Mustang dyno correction factor.

When I go dyno, it will be on a Dynojet. I'm looking under options and profiles and don't see a place to enter a correction factor of 1.09 - Can someone point me in this direction so I can use the 1.09 for future charts I post?

If I click on SAE it opens up the baromoter box... but if I put 1.09 in there it says like 9000 HP lol

1.09 is the default CF. to change it, you have to go to "options" and hit the "custom" radio button. at that point you can edit the "1.09" to "1.01". i believe the reason people do 1.01 is the 1.09 on VD seems a little more generous than a real dynojet.

When you choose dynojet, it is set to a 1.09 CF by default.

Edit: Onelovesoccer beat me to it above. LOL

I found it. It was already set to Dynojet, with a 1.09 correction factor.

Re-reading part of the thread.....Dude, who the fuck is tuning your car, you or Rob? Rob knows more about tuning these cars than 99% of the people on this forum, so I suggest you let him do his thing. If you have questions or ideas, let him know, he'll be able tell you why or why not things should happen. I feel like you're the sort of guy who would tell your doctor that they're wrong, and try to tell him what prescription you needed. Pressure, Load, AFR, Timing: Rob knows whats up, end of story. What you read on other forums for other cars does not necessarily apply to us. Stick around here and you'll find this stuff out.

Once he makes some bad ass power with your car and proves the Piasini tune isn't anything special, then go play til your content.

Got revision 3 from @rfinkle2 - gonna load it up and do some driving around. Will get some more logs tonight after work.

Rob, can you call me? I had a couple questions.

Rob is tuning the car, I'm learning with him. Where is all that hostility coming from?

and remember, this time set your CF to 1.01, smoothing 3 when you do VD!!

Quick question... having problems calibrating the MAF in 2 areas... When driving I'm usually between -1.9 and 0, however:

On idle, I'm at -5.7
When driving, and I completely release the throttle it drops to -5.7

I've checked the g/s values and looked in ATR... those values are already at 0... when I hit M and try to enter .943 it doesnt do anything because they are already at 0...

Where should I adjust LTFT for idle and engine braking?

Put your car in neutral. Turn on AP and monitor g/s. You should idle at 3-4 g/s. Now, start logging. Next, while logging, apply light throttle...you will see rpms climb a couple hundred rpm but g/s should stay between 4-5. Hold the throttle here for 5 seconds, then end log.

When you look at the log you will see 2 ltft values. The first portion will be different than the portion where you applied light throttle. Use the values where you applied light throttle to adjust your 0-5.7 breakpoints.

-xxxxxxxx whatever at idle doesn't matter anyway. Let the trims do their thing.