Torrie Turbo Tune. 846 whp on 93 and 945 whp on 100 octane on Mustang Dyno

[nautoncall]

Props off to Torrie for doing some remote tuning on my GT. Made 846whp/729tq on 93 octane at 19psi and made 945whp/828tq on 22 psi on 100 octane on a Mustang dyno. Here are the graphs.

Thanks so much Torrie. Awsome work!!! Thanks for being so flexible and easy to work with.

 

[Xcentric]

Apparently, there is a bit more than a remote tune involved with these numbers.

 

[nautoncall]

First, excuse some of my mispellings (I edited them and still the title reads wrong).

Well, Torrie sent the programs to my local tuner and he put them in and Torrie did all the tuning from 500 miles away...and as those who know Torrie, he did it all via email!!!!!

 

[bonehead]

Think he was referring to the fact that you didn't list your mods. Can't get 900+hp on just a tune!

 

[nautoncall]

It says turbo on the title. Twin Precision 61mm turbos.

 

[tmcphail]

Robert has a TTGT, he purchased the vehicle modified this way and brought me in to finalize the calibration and handle the remote tuning. The car made really good power overall. Race gas used was 100 octane and mustang dyno's on average read a good 15% lower then a dynojet.

 

[nautoncall]

Finally I got pick up my car. Wow, how I missed her!!! Torrie thanks. Jim and Stan(at Speedsouth), thanks. What a monster!! One of these days I hope to ride in a SC/TT car to see/feel the difference. I can see how the SC makes up for the lag.

 

[tmcphail]

No problem, Enjoy !

 

[Jason Watt]

Top job, Torrie has done the tune for my Heffner TT and I have around the same numbers, maybe a sniff more...
Like the carbon fiber welds :biggrin

 

[tmcphail]

Also add 10-15% to those numbers to get relative dynojet WHP

 

[MTV8]

Also add 10-15% to those numbers to get relative dynojet WHP

It seems that many owners of other dyno types already run a correction factor to try and simulate dynojet readings. Great numbers on this car one way or another.

 

[Xcentric]

I'm asking to be educated here. I'm a little confused about the differences between Mustang and Dynojet results. It sounds like the Mustang is the dyno of choice for tuning the engine. But, for actual power measurement after the tune, the Dynojet (with rollers of known mass) should be (or could be) more accurate. F=ma. Simple calculation. No calibration required. Just an atmospheric correction factor. Yes, no???

 

[tmcphail]

It seems that many owners of other dyno types already run a correction factor to try and simulate dynojet readings.

If that were the case I would not have made the statement that I did above.

 

[tmcphail]

I'm asking to be educated here. I'm a little confused about the differences between Mustang and Dynojet results. It sounds like the Mustang is the dyno of choice for tuning the engine. But, for actual power measurement after the tune, the Dynojet (with rollers of known mass) should be (or could be) more accurate. F=ma. Simple calculation. No calibration required. Just an atmospheric correction factor. Yes, no???

http://imageftp.dynojet.com/CMD/Truth_Lies_Dyno Runs_Final.pdf

 

[RALPHIE]

Thanks, Torrie! :thumbsup

 

[tmcphail]

Sure thing. Personally I would always use a dynojet myself but again no matter what you use its a tool at the end of the day. I can complete my individual mission on any one of them.

 

[nautoncall]

Torrie, I'm still a little confused after reading that article. I still don't understand why the Mustang dyno consistently reads less than an dynojet. As you said above add 10-15% for those numbers on a dynojet. That is consistent with what I experienced with my Viper. On the same Mustang dyno that you tuned my GT, the Viper made about 50whp less than a prior session on a dynojet.

As you said, it's just a tool and at the end of the day it allows you "tuners" to get the most out of our cars. For that, we are very thankful!!!!

 

[tmcphail]

Each brand uses their own algorithm to determine output from the rate of change in drum speed.

 

[Brombear]

It isn't important on which dyno you are making your tests, but always do all your pre and post tests on the same dyno at comparable weather conditions. Absolute numbers are irrelevant, you want to know how much better than the previous it is.