Gained 20hp and 25ft-lb torque
#16
#18
#19
Originally Posted by Dr_jitsu
G-Tofu,
If you claim that a stock G produces 246 then I know that the numbers are false. Of course it is possible that some dynos produce inflated numbers. On the dyno that my car was tested on, stock G always produce 210-220 and Rev-ups close to 230. This data is culled from hundreds of cars. So yes, I know 246 is bull.
If you claim that a stock G produces 246 then I know that the numbers are false. Of course it is possible that some dynos produce inflated numbers. On the dyno that my car was tested on, stock G always produce 210-220 and Rev-ups close to 230. This data is culled from hundreds of cars. So yes, I know 246 is bull.
i never dynoed my G stock but as of a couple of months ago when i dynoed it was at ~264rwhp w/ all the mods you see in my sig
#20
Originally Posted by Dr_jitsu
G-Tofu,
If you claim that a stock G produces 246 then I know that the numbers are false. Of course it is possible that some dynos produce inflated numbers. On the dyno that my car was tested on, stock G always produce 210-220 and Rev-ups close to 230. This data is culled from hundreds of cars. So yes, I know 246 is bull.
If you claim that a stock G produces 246 then I know that the numbers are false. Of course it is possible that some dynos produce inflated numbers. On the dyno that my car was tested on, stock G always produce 210-220 and Rev-ups close to 230. This data is culled from hundreds of cars. So yes, I know 246 is bull.
This is on dynojet
And on dynapack with same mods I dynoed 262. So i dont think both times the dyno got screwed up and dynoed only my car unusally high.
Last edited by Klubbheads; 09-18-2006 at 01:16 AM.
#21
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Falls Church, VA
Posts: 1,000
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not trying to make up the number or anything.... I saw the number with my naked eyes.... stock 2006 5AT with FI exhaust put down around 224hps on the same day.... while stock 06 06MT got 246hps... you can call it "bull" if you want, but it's the FACT.....
Originally Posted by Dr_jitsu
G-Tofu,
If you claim that a stock G produces 246 then I know that the numbers are false. Of course it is possible that some dynos produce inflated numbers. On the dyno that my car was tested on, stock G always produce 210-220 and Rev-ups close to 230. This data is culled from hundreds of cars. So yes, I know 246 is bull.
If you claim that a stock G produces 246 then I know that the numbers are false. Of course it is possible that some dynos produce inflated numbers. On the dyno that my car was tested on, stock G always produce 210-220 and Rev-ups close to 230. This data is culled from hundreds of cars. So yes, I know 246 is bull.
#22
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: NorCal
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jw0039
4DrSkyline
G35pm
Thanks for noticing I was running lean. From what I understand 12.8/1 makes the most power for a N/A G35 motor. What are your guys thoughts?
If the G needs more fuel I have a set of 440cc injectors and was considering purchasing an adjustable fuel pressure regulator. The injectors aren't necessary with my hp, but the adjustable fuel pressure regulator wouldn't hurt.
G35pm
Thanks for noticing I was running lean. From what I understand 12.8/1 makes the most power for a N/A G35 motor. What are your guys thoughts?
If the G needs more fuel I have a set of 440cc injectors and was considering purchasing an adjustable fuel pressure regulator. The injectors aren't necessary with my hp, but the adjustable fuel pressure regulator wouldn't hurt.
Take that for what it's worth, since others may say I'm still running too lean for their likings. For me, I trust my tuner explicity and I asked for a "safe" tune over absolute power. So I'm fine with the A/F ratios he dialed in for me.
As for larger injectors and an adjustable fuel pressure regulator, I don't think they're needed in your case yet. Others have been supporting some good (270+ whp) numbers on stock injectors. Unless you're going radical with a built N/A engine, I don't think you'd need them. If I recall correctly, the returnless fuel system on the G wouldn't work properly with a fuel pressure regulator. You'd need a return fuel system. Again, I could be wrong, but regardless I don't think you'd need it for an N/A engine with bolt-ons.
Last edited by 4DrSkyline; 09-18-2006 at 10:03 PM.
#24
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 4DrSkyline
The person who tuned my car set up my car (04 AT sedan) to run 14:1 at around 4k rpm and slowly taper down to about 13.2:1 at redline. These are ratios taken from the tailpipe. The A/F before 4k is hard to categorize accurately, since the automatic transmission doesn't always fully engage (for lack of the correct terminology) until around that rpm range.
Take that for what it's worth, since others may say I'm still running too lean for their likings. For me, I trust my tuner explicity and I asked for a "safe" tune over absolute power. So I'm fine with the A/F ratios he dialed in for me.
As for larger injectors and an adjustable fuel pressure regulator, I don't think they're needed in your case yet. Others have been supporting some good (270+ whp) numbers on stock injectors. Unless you're going radical with a built N/A engine, I don't think you'd need them. If I recall correctly, the returnless fuel system on the G wouldn't work properly with a fuel pressure regulator. You'd need a return fuel system. Again, I could be wrong, but regardless I don't think you'd need it for an N/A engine with bolt-ons.
Take that for what it's worth, since others may say I'm still running too lean for their likings. For me, I trust my tuner explicity and I asked for a "safe" tune over absolute power. So I'm fine with the A/F ratios he dialed in for me.
As for larger injectors and an adjustable fuel pressure regulator, I don't think they're needed in your case yet. Others have been supporting some good (270+ whp) numbers on stock injectors. Unless you're going radical with a built N/A engine, I don't think you'd need them. If I recall correctly, the returnless fuel system on the G wouldn't work properly with a fuel pressure regulator. You'd need a return fuel system. Again, I could be wrong, but regardless I don't think you'd need it for an N/A engine with bolt-ons.
your statement about the returnless fuel system may be correct. I know the fuel return system from AAM converts the G to a full return system and includes a fuel pressure regulator. im going to do some research to verify your statement.
its your G so you have the right to run as rich/lean as you please. "safe" is cool. since i have a drift capable 1995 FWD dodge neon im going for all the power i can get. I'm going to have to borrow some Petroleum from our good ol friend Bush when my tune is complete!!! And on days when i don't feel like talking to George i'll drive my Drift neon!!!!
#25
#26
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mike@DW
No need for larger injectors or an adjustable fuel pressure regulator. You will not be able to adjust AFR's at different rpm points with an AFPR, it will add/subract fuel accross the board.
ECU = logically it controls AFR and timing
Tire = contacts the road when you drive
Break pedal = makes the break pads contact the rotors
The only reason i suggested an adjustable fuel pressure regulator was in case the motor was running lean due to a lack of fuel. we established it isnt necessary. i think we're trying to find out if we can even use one with our returnless fuel system. (not that its necessary)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
THMotorsports
Suspension-Vendor
257
12-18-2018 05:43 PM
thechitoguy
G35 Sedan V35 2003-06
12
10-01-2015 05:25 PM