[Shotimes] Re: Nunnaly is probably the sharpest SHO guy on the list

[Carl Prochilo]

Mark, I'd have to go back through the archives, but the only person I know
that actually recorded measurements in a controlled environment was Kurt
Metros, and his SHO is about the same as ours.  IIRC, he was having a lot
of troubles with LPM and MAFs.  I thought in all of that work he did, the
55 didn't lose that much compared to the 77.  Not sure it was worth more
than 1 or 2 HP.  Does anyone remember those tests?  Mike K is even more
vocal about the lack of improvement.

Now I'm not about to take my 77 off, but I see there is more consensus
about the MAF upgrade being something to do more down the road after other
areas are addressed.
-- 
Cheers,
Carl Prochilo
92 Ultra Red Crimson

On Mon, January 3, 2005 8:04 pm, Mark Nunnally said:
> 1. I'm not the sharpet guy on the sho list
>
> 2.  The 5.0L mustang, the 3.0L MTX SHO, and the 3.2L ATX SHO all have
> different engine displacements, and injector sizes (and with the 5.0L two
> extra cylinders) yet all use the same MAF curve (in fact the same stock
> MAF
> from the factory).  The MAF is curve doesn't have anything to do with the
> injector size, and trimming an aftermarket MAF to a different sized set of
> injectors is really a hack, old school way to "tune".  (you are basically
> tricking the computer)  The correct way is to simply tell the computer
> what
> size the injectors are, and change the MAF curve to match whatever the MAF
> output is.  You can do this with any of the current "EEC tuner" tools out
> these days.
>
> 3.  This gets pricy, and not really required for just a BOS car.  As Ron
> said, the best bet is to get an MAF (I've had really good results with the
> Pro M 77mm unit) that has a factory curve (same as the stocker, 850 kg/hr
> meter) and run with that.  Ypipe and UDP's will probably give you the best
> bang for the buck.
>
> My j-yard 3.2L with 3.0L intake cams (stock injectors/intake/TB/runners,
> etc) with a Pro M 77 MAF, UDP's, YPipe, and dynocrap catback with the
> stock
> EEC program (no chip) made 216hp/215tq at the wheels on the dyno.  I got
> almost the same mpg as a 3.0L on the hwy, and the car would run 14 flat in
> the 1/4 full weight at just under 100 mph.  All that was the best bang for
> the buck.  Now it's got cams, EEC tuning tools, a datalogger, spend more
> for
> all that than you can for just the original motor and bolt ons!  For just
> a
> relative slight bump in top end hp.  The doller per hp gets mighty stiff
> as
> you keep going.  The above listed set-up I've seen dyno'd on a few SHO's,
> and all of them made over 210 ft/lbs at the tires on the dyno.
>
> mark
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes