GlassTop09
Senior Member
Yes I do have a printout of it but I didn't initially post it due to my tuner making a mistake & putting it w\ the final dyno run on 12-27-19 instead of w\ the 10-8-19 dyno run which would've given a false gain comparison & created some confusion (the 12-27-19 dyno run is when we made corrections to tune to fix the false misfire data...raised the misfire monitor min enable ECT setting from the OEM 20*F to 80*F to allow the crankshaft to warm up some more to smooth out the firing pulses to the CKP sensor before enabling the misfire monitor & reset the spark timing retard scale for COT protection to help w\ the CKP pulses...later resolved by removal of bad dielectric grease from COP boots\springs & installation of new MC plugs to stop the actual misfires noted on cold starts which drove the COT protection....saw all on tuner's datalog during a cold start & in which we saw the lost HP\TQ on low end.... -6.98 HP\-16.00 TQ @ 324.50 HP\292.15 TQ vs the 10-8-19 final run @ 331.48 HP\308.15 TQ due to sluggish VCT response below 4500 RPM's....which was later found to be from a broken cam follower on 1 intake valve on #7 cyl & some metal trash from oil filter changeouts lodged in lower screen of the B2 VCT solenoid). I didn't get a copy of this 12-27-19 dyno run at that time & had asked my tuner to print 1 out for me but he put the final 4-2-20 run w\ this 12-27-19 run by mistake which inflates the total HP\TQ gains higher than what they really are so I decided not to post it.
The 4-2-20 printout I posted has the actual 10-8-19 final run curve compared w\ the 4-2-20 run curve shown on it (the 348.96 HP\321.43 TQ) that was run just before the final 4-2-20 run (352.95 HP\321.98 TQ) was made which is a more accurate comparison as these 2 4-2-20 run HP\TQ curves are virtually identical curves & overlay each other pretty well except for the slight peak TQ gain & at the top end where the slightly higher TQ curve hangs in for another 100 RPM's or so to allow the peak HP curve to move up the slope the extra 3.99 HP before the PCM pulled spark timing due to the excessive ECT from the extra loading from pushing her to redline after a 20 min cooldown (tuner had let up on the prior run before redline for the same reason as this was the 1st time he saw this happen) for a more accurate total +21.47 HP/+13.83 TQ peak to peak gain vs the 10-8-19 final run of 331.48 HP\308.15 TQ instead of the false +28.46 HP\+29.83 TQ peak to peak gains on the other printout against the 12-27-19 final run. The 10-8-19 final run was the best we ever saw w\ the Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams using the same FBO's until this 4-2-20 session....the better mid\top end HP\TQ gains were mostly due to improved airflow thru the Ford Performance 62mm TB's better porting work vs the BBK #1763 62mm TB which also has a lot to do w\ the ECT rise on the top end that caused the PCM to start pulling spark timing at the top on both runs as we never saw this happen on any prior WOT runs before these last 2 runs during this 4-2-20 session so I know that she is now as fully optimized as she's gonna get w\ these cams w\o FI (which I'm definitely not gonna do now w\ this engine since all the issues I've went thru earlier + the high mileage). These results also show that this Ford Performance Bullitt 85mm CAI will flow better than thought prior as well...even w\ a cone filter dust sock installed AND w\o ram air effect (the entire intake tract is now composed of all Ford Performance components & is now also fully verified to be leak free from all the vacuum leak repairs from all the smoke testing done so all intake airflow is coming thru the MAF sensor section now.....which may also be more of a contributing factor now as well that I didn't think about before as PCM will better calculate WOT load% & up spark timing on a higher lbs\sec MAF readout) so w\ the addition of the FP 62mm TB the FP Intake Manifold's upper end airflow capabilities can be exploited even more which says a LOT of the Lunati's cam lobe design profile used w\ this VooDoo #21270700 camshaft set to move air when paired up w\ the Kooks 1 5\8" LT headers, Kooks Catted Mid Pipe & Pypes Super Bomb Mid Muffler catback exhaust system's ability to scavenge\exhaust it....thru OEM non-ported cylinder heads....but sounds almost like OEM cams are still installed at idle...…almost.
Just for reference, this is Lunati's base VooDoo cam profile design for the Ford 4.6L\5.4L 3V Modular engines. They have 11 more to choose from.....
So yeah I'm a happy camper & am fully satisfied w\ where all is at now engine wise. I have to say also that she looks damn good to me when I raise the bonnet now.....
PS--Here is the other 4-2-20 dyno sheet that has the final numbers on it:
The 4-2-20 printout I posted has the actual 10-8-19 final run curve compared w\ the 4-2-20 run curve shown on it (the 348.96 HP\321.43 TQ) that was run just before the final 4-2-20 run (352.95 HP\321.98 TQ) was made which is a more accurate comparison as these 2 4-2-20 run HP\TQ curves are virtually identical curves & overlay each other pretty well except for the slight peak TQ gain & at the top end where the slightly higher TQ curve hangs in for another 100 RPM's or so to allow the peak HP curve to move up the slope the extra 3.99 HP before the PCM pulled spark timing due to the excessive ECT from the extra loading from pushing her to redline after a 20 min cooldown (tuner had let up on the prior run before redline for the same reason as this was the 1st time he saw this happen) for a more accurate total +21.47 HP/+13.83 TQ peak to peak gain vs the 10-8-19 final run of 331.48 HP\308.15 TQ instead of the false +28.46 HP\+29.83 TQ peak to peak gains on the other printout against the 12-27-19 final run. The 10-8-19 final run was the best we ever saw w\ the Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams using the same FBO's until this 4-2-20 session....the better mid\top end HP\TQ gains were mostly due to improved airflow thru the Ford Performance 62mm TB's better porting work vs the BBK #1763 62mm TB which also has a lot to do w\ the ECT rise on the top end that caused the PCM to start pulling spark timing at the top on both runs as we never saw this happen on any prior WOT runs before these last 2 runs during this 4-2-20 session so I know that she is now as fully optimized as she's gonna get w\ these cams w\o FI (which I'm definitely not gonna do now w\ this engine since all the issues I've went thru earlier + the high mileage). These results also show that this Ford Performance Bullitt 85mm CAI will flow better than thought prior as well...even w\ a cone filter dust sock installed AND w\o ram air effect (the entire intake tract is now composed of all Ford Performance components & is now also fully verified to be leak free from all the vacuum leak repairs from all the smoke testing done so all intake airflow is coming thru the MAF sensor section now.....which may also be more of a contributing factor now as well that I didn't think about before as PCM will better calculate WOT load% & up spark timing on a higher lbs\sec MAF readout) so w\ the addition of the FP 62mm TB the FP Intake Manifold's upper end airflow capabilities can be exploited even more which says a LOT of the Lunati's cam lobe design profile used w\ this VooDoo #21270700 camshaft set to move air when paired up w\ the Kooks 1 5\8" LT headers, Kooks Catted Mid Pipe & Pypes Super Bomb Mid Muffler catback exhaust system's ability to scavenge\exhaust it....thru OEM non-ported cylinder heads....but sounds almost like OEM cams are still installed at idle...…almost.
Just for reference, this is Lunati's base VooDoo cam profile design for the Ford 4.6L\5.4L 3V Modular engines. They have 11 more to choose from.....
So yeah I'm a happy camper & am fully satisfied w\ where all is at now engine wise. I have to say also that she looks damn good to me when I raise the bonnet now.....
PS--Here is the other 4-2-20 dyno sheet that has the final numbers on it: