New tune lower numbers

[07stage1]

The rundown
07 roush stage 1
L&m built 4.6 stock bore and stroke
Stg 3 comp cams
Mild port on heads
Twin gt500 pumps w/jms fuelmax 52# injectors
2.3 whipple @18#s
Jpc intake w/ l&m twin 72mm tb
Sw long tubes into straight pipe w roush mufflers
Steeda 10 rib belt kit
Stock heat exchanger, stock ic res
Tr3650 spec stage 3 clutch

Bought the car in November it was built by stanghi and last summer made 604/589 but the car had driveability issues. So I decided to have it retuned by JMS, initially they told me the car needed more fuel and one of there jms fuelmax should take care of the problem. The car got the fuelmax and retune and made 580/57x, at first I wasn't to happy to hear but I brought it there for driveability issues. After speaking with Monte he informed me that the car was running lean which is why they added more fuel and also said my 2.3 whipple is being overspun by 8000rpms. The car would run out if fuel at 5800rpms before jms tune and now the limiter is set at 6400 because the belt started slipping. The car feels the same power wise but can drag the gears out for a few secconds longer, I understand this blower is extremely heat soaked and was wondering if going to a one size smaller pulley would help the car? The car is daily driver and I was racing a buddy of mine and it was obviously pulling timing in the 90* south LA wether but I just feel like this car runs the same power wise with more fuel delivery. Based on the mods should this car be making more power? Is there any mods that need to be done to make it run better? Just looking for some input. Thanks

 

[Mystickeith50]

Well I would start with a bigger heat exchanger n resivour.

 

[GrabberBlue5.0]

A smaller blower pulley would only overspin the blower even more


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[ochoblanco]

Same dyno or same type of dyno? Obviously the runs weren't done on the same day so was the weather similar? Corrected numbers?

 

[07stage1]

A smaller blower pulley would only overspin the blower even more


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

I worded that wrong meant to say a larger pulley tor drop it down to 16# or so

Same dyno or same type of dyno? Obviously the runs weren't done on the same day so was the weather similar? Corrected numbers?

Unsure if same kind of dyno or not, but yeah all dynos arent the same and I know jms waited till the car was at normal operating temp before any pulls were made
Yeah there are alot of variables

 

[ochoblanco]

Unsure if same kind of dyno or not, but yeah all dynos arent the same and I know jms waited till the car was at normal operating temp before any pulls were made
Yeah there are alot of variables

If the first was a Dynojet and the second a Mustang Dyno, you might see a drop like this without actually losing any actual rwhp. Of course dyno numbers are just that: numbers. If the drivability issue is solved and you are making great passes in the 1/4, your dyno numbers dont matter.

 

[07stage1]

Im not really too concerned about the dyno numbers id just like the car to be more effective. Im gonna look into making it run cooler and probably drop down the boost just a tad to help it from producing so much heat

 

[stkjock]

what's the cooling set up for the blower?

H/E? Coolant tank?

 

[07stage1]

what's the cooling set up for the blower?

H/E? Coolant tank?

Stock whipple h/e and stock ic resivior

 

[stkjock]

oops - see now you did post that in the OP, my bad.

Stock whipple h/e and stock ic resivior

well then IMO, there's the starting point, upgrade both.

C&R or Afco H/E

Canton or the like reservoir.

 

[lito]

8000 is a too high of an estimation, if having the biggest balancer pulley I suggest going down to preceding one, do you have a boost curve?

Obviously a better H/E, reservoir and pump does wonders here.

 

[07stage1]

8000 is a too high of an estimation, if having the biggest balancer pulley I suggest going down to preceding one, do you have a boost curve?

Obviously a better H/E, reservoir and pump does wonders here.

Well may car has been tuned for 2 months now and I still havent received my dyno graph
Ill posr it as soon as I get it

 

[lito]

Generally what happens is a dropoff with rpms, so you see maybe an 18# peak in the low/mid range and it just ramps down from there, going to an smaller pulley generates a more flat boost line, basically the same power, less heat and car feels better overall, the other way the car feels peaky and drops. You may loose some tq down low but is better overall.

 

[07stage1]

Generally what happens is a dropoff with rpms, so you see maybe an 18# peak in the low/mid range and it just ramps down from there, going to an smaller pulley generates a more flat boost line, basically the same power, less heat and car feels better overall, the other way the car feels peaky and drops. You may loose some tq down low but is better overall.

Yeah I need to measure what size pulley the car has and see what size I need
On the dyno it peaked 20# on the hit but fell to 18# throughout the pull

 

[BruceH]

Yeah I need to measure what size pulley the car has and see what size I need
On the dyno it peaked 20# on the hit but fell to 18# throughout the pull

FYI a 2.3 Whipple on a 3v is restricted by the rear intake. Once you go past 17lbs the returns diminish.

Have you datalogged iats during a pull?

 

[svt-bansheeman]

My suggestion is stop putting bus lengths on pick up trucks.

 

[Department Of Boost]

my 2.3 whipple is being overspun by 8000rpms.

What are the upper and lower pulley sizes. You need to figure out exactly what blower speed you are running before you take another step. Guessing won't do you any good. I doubt you are spinning it over 18,000rpm (Whipple's suggested top speed) with a Steeda belt drive kit. I didn't think they made them to spin that fast. I could be wrong though.

now the limiter is set at 6400 because the belt started slipping.

That belt shouldn't be slipping. Those Steeda kits are pretty good. There is something to get corrected there.

I understand this blower is extremely heat soaked and was wondering if going to a one size smaller pulley would help the car?

I think you meant bigger. A bigger pulley, if not a LOT bigger isn't going to do crap for heat soak. You need a better heat exchanger/pump.

Based on the mods should this car be making more power?

About exactly what you are making.

Is there any mods that need to be done to make it run better? Just looking for some input. Thanks

Yeah, put an Afco pro series heat exchanger on it and at least a Meziere 20gpm pump. If not a 55gpm pump.

A good friend of mine is set up almost exactly like you and when he was running the older big Afco and the Whipple water pump it would vaporize the water while it was inside the intercooler. Which is obviously no good. You need cooler water (bigger heat exchanger) and to be moving it through the system faster (bigger pump). My friends car went from making full power for about half a run to running reasonably cool for a screw blower by going with a big heat exchanger and a 55gpm pump. It is a completely different car.

As far as making power goes you are making normal power (aside from the few people with fantasy “hero run” dyno graphs). You are being restricted by the Whipple elbow, throttle body size and CAI/MAF size. My buddies car was running exactly like yours until he gutted/ported the blower elbow, put a 72mm L&M throttle body on it and went with a 123mm CAI/MAF. The car picked up a little over 50hp.

 

[svt-bansheeman]

Wouldnt a faster pump make the IC fluid spend less time in the heat exchanger therefor cooling it less?

You can do a killer chiller with a bigger IC resi. If you dont mind the a/c taking a small hit, it's the best cooling mod for the IC fluid. I personally wouldnt do a KC even though i have one. Nothing better than ICE cold a/c

 

[dysan]

It has been discussed over and over that it is an old wives tale about the water speed cooling it less. The faster you can get colder water through the heat exchanger, the better off you will be..period.

 

[Department Of Boost]

Wouldnt a faster pump make the IC fluid spend less time in the heat exchanger therefor cooling it less?

This has been discussed ad nauseam and it is nothing but a wives tale. At one point there was even a nuclear reactor cooling engineer on here explaining why moving the water faster was better and even including all the equations to support it.

Strike the “slower is better” thoughts from your mind. They are as accurate as the theory that the moon is made of cheese.

It has been discussed over and over that it is an old wives tale about the water speed cooling it less. The faster you can get colder water through the heat exchanger, the better off you will be..period.

THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^