Had the crank pulley installed and loaded the VAP tune. They claim 450HP (crank) so it's a 70hp bump. I assumed that should be noticeable but honestly if feels exactly the same. Maybe I'm just expecting too much from a heavy car and modest power increase. I'll be getting a few dyno pulls soon just out of curiosity.

 

Laughing, no it is not. Not being mean. My dyno before the tune was 278 at the wheels and 320 at the wheels, I got the 400 tune on my Base F-type and HP and TQ are subjective, meaning one dyno says one thing and another says another thing. Seat of the pants is the BEST dyno.
I dyno'd my 93 vette years ago and gained 28 hp just by going to another dyno on the same day. All this to say dyno numbers are about bragging and NOTHING else.

 

I dynoed my V6S the day after having the larger crank pulley fitted and I applied the stage 2 tune (450 hp), and the result was very disappointing, IIRC max hp of some 280. Note this was a brand new dyno, only a few days old.
Not because the tune was weak or no good, but because the car once on the dyno suffered badly from heat soak and the ECU pulled timing big time and piled in too much fuel, giving a woefully rich AFR of around 10:1
Even the dyno operator commented on how crap it sounded compared to how good it should have sounded, it sounded like a long drawn out strained wet fart.
My best guess is this was because I had a 60 km run to get to the dyno on a warm day (approx 85 F) and I didn't let it sit long enough before the pull.
We then tried letting it sit for 30 minutes and ran two more pulls but it still ran crap and gave the same ***** results.
However these dyno pulls were the only time I have ever detected the ECU pulling timing, all the rest of the time it has run strong and as I have commented here a few times already it feels waaaay stronger and quicker than stock.
I have a theory that the AJ126 and AJ133 don't like dyno runs in less than perfect conditions and/or with an inexperienced operator and will pull timing at the drop of a hat.

 

Here are some videos by Viezu. They constantly put out example videos for the V6 model Jaguar F-Type sports car.

Here's the link to the Viezu YouTube channel, for your specific engine.
https://m.youtube.com/@ViezuTechnolo...ry=Jaguar%20V6

 

What brand of dyno?

 

You'll have to dyno it before and after in order to compare gains.

 

Mainline dyno.
Found the scans, attached.
Bottom line - power with just tune (Stage 1) was 222 kW = 298 hp (and AFR just over 12 the whole way),
power after Stage 2 tune (lower pulley plus tune, read-out mislabelled as Stage 1 still) was 223.8 kW = 300 hp (and AFR just over 10 the whole way).
With minor increase in ambient temp and minor decrease in air density.
So a measly increase in max power but as I said before it was obvious that the ECU was pulling timing and adding mucho fuel.

 

Interesting and disappointing but that matches my butt dyno results unfortunately. There shouldn't be anything about running on a dyno that would cause the car to behave differently than it would out on the road really. Even if it's heat soak - that's real world driving aside from maybe a little more air flowing over the intercooler.

 

I would ask VAP directly. I guess they have experience with this!
There are plenty of people who reported significant butt dyno increase. +70HP you SHOULD feel.

 

I just noticed that according to these read-outs the runs were in 4th gear.
AFAIK the correct gear for dyno runs in F-Type is 6th gear which has a 1:1 ratio.
I wonder if the runs really were in 4th gear and if so did that effect the results????
Also, the second run (with pulley and tune) was only two days and some 100 km after the pulley was fitted and the tune was applied, maybe just maybe the engine/ECU/whatever needs more time/mileage to take full effect. I doubt it but possible!

 

For tuning impact, road vs static is a large enough difference that speed (gear) based compensation is inside of most ECUs.

For temperature the ECU already compensates with the IAT and the knock sensor. So for any application the IAT could be compared at static vs rolling.

 

This is important. You want to do dyno runs in the closest gear ratio to 1:1 available. In 6sp manuals that's typically 3rd or 4th but for the 8spd ZF box it's not.

I'm booked for my dyno runs on Friday and I've had the pully and tune for many months. I just don't have a baseline for comparison. We'll see...

 

Not exactly the same car or VAP tune as per OP query, but my V6 R-Dynamic has pretty much the same engine as the V6S (380ps variant = 375bhp). I would suggest that claiming 450bhp at crank with lower pulley and tune only is a bit ambitious. My car went into VIEZU last year for lower pulley and tune, plus to have the VAP 200 cell cats fitted. The car had already been fitted with a smaller upper pulley (58mm +6%), but had not been mapped to make use of additional air flow. The car had been driven for two hours prior to baseline run and ambient temperature during the day reached 24C (75F). Baseline reading on VIEZU's Mustang Dyno came out at 373bhp, 386ft-lb (523Nm). So pretty much on the button for power, but mild bump in torque from the top pulley additional boost.

The car was then fitted with the VIEZU bottom pulley and the VAP 200 Cell Cats, with a first 'guess' remap flashed to the ECU. First power run produced peak crank power of 418bhp, 423ft-lb (573Nm). The car was left to cool for 20 mins while the VIEZU Techies tweaked the map before second power run. Final figures were peak crank power of 447bhp, 437lb-ft (592Nm), but VIEZU noted the ECU was pulling timing due to high IAT and given cooler air conditions there was still more power and torque to come from the pulley/tune upgrade. Although the car had been fitted with the larger Alisport (supplier to VIEUZU/Paramount) Intercooler radiator and a Pierburg CWA150, I subsequently discovered a few weeks after the dyno runs the fuse for the Intercooler coolant pump had blown, so the increased IAT from additional boost was not being dealt with as efficiently as it should. I subsequently discovered the Pierburg CWA150 is rated at 15 amps, as opposed to the stock pump being rated at 10 amps, so uprated the fuse to prevent further drop out. So yes given a functioning Intercooler cooling system and lower ambient temperatures, there is definitely more performance in the car.

Having remedied the Intercooler cooling issues, I can confidently state that out on the open road the butt dyno definitely can tell the difference with the 72bhp bump in power, but more so the 98lb-ft (133Nm) hike in torque. My V6 R-Dynamic is basically now a lightweight P450. My friend runs a F Type R and there is nothing in it between the two cars on a rolling drag, albeit he has the edge (slightly) from a standing start.

So returning to the OP, my view is yes, you should definitely be able to detect a 70bhp/circa 100lb-ft hike in performance, even though the car weighs in at 1.6 tonne.



PS: Readings were taken with the car in 5th gear.

 

You should be noticing a massive difference.

When I first installed the crank pulley + tune on my V6s, I noted a significant subjective difference.
I did not bother to go to a dyno, but I did note that I was hitting higher speeds at various landmarks along my typical routes.
As one example among several: there is a section of road where I come out a turn at about 60 km/h in 2nd gear. I can then accelerate through the rest of 2nd, 3rd, and get into 4th before having to brake. There's a road sign that I would consistently pass at about 110 km/h during these runs, prior to getting the pulley and tune. After the pulley and tune I was passing the sign at 120 km/h.

Of course this is not a perfectly rigorous measure, but all that to say that: yes, there should be a noticeable difference.

 

Interesting post! I am surprised you match an R from a roll, I don't think the weight difference between a V6S and an R would make up for the hp difference between the two which makes me think with a good supply of cold air your car is indeed making a bit more than 450. The highest hp run on your dyno chart produces a lot less early torque, that just how the run went?

 

I dyno tested my car before and after my Stage 3 VAP tune the summer of 2022. Same dyno, same gas (meaning new 93 octane Shell gas each time) and 6 weeks apart during summer conditions in Chicago (upper 80's and fairly high humidity). I posted the results (dyno graphs) on one of the VAP tune threads. I just tried to find them but searching this forum is a little awkward and I couldn't find them right now.

My (Mustang) dyno test at the wheels showed the pre-tune max values to be 376 HP and 337 ft-lbs torque, and showed my post Stage 3 tune values to be 434 HP and 423 ft-lbs torque. This is a gain of about 15% in HP and 28% in torque.

My comments echo Luc's. There is a very noticeable and substantial gain in torque after the Stage 3 tune. The supercharger spins up very freely upon acceleration after the tune.

Mike Werner at Eurotoys (who I would highly recommend) here in the Chicago western suburbs does mostly Jaguar work from what I've seen and commented after he drove my car with the tune "This is what this engine and car was meant to be."

If you are not getting this, I would work with the guys at VAP. Maybe your tune to the ECU didn't take for some reason.

 

@bfrank1972 Quote: "Interesting post! I am surprised you match an R from a roll, I don't think the weight difference between a V6S and an R would make up for the hp difference between the two which makes me think with a good supply of cold air your car is indeed making a bit more than 450. The highest hp run on your dyno chart produces a lot less early torque, that just how the run went?".

Couple of additional items that level the playing field when I'm up against my friend's R:

1. My car is 60kg (132lb) lighter than stock, (and I'm nerdy enough to have a spreadsheet with the savings listed). 862 items on the car have been removed/replaced with carbon or titanium/drilled (a hole weighs nothing ). Big gain items like 20kg from Antigravity battery and racing battery tray, 10kg from lightweight Tarox 2 piece discs (plus the loss of rotating mass), right down to individual bolts.
2. The V6 has a higher differential ratio 3.31 compared to the V8's 2.56, so on a rolling drag when I'm in the torque band, the shorter gearing is in my favour.

And as you point out, with a working fuse and Intercooler cooling system, I probably have a bit more than 450bhp at the crank.

Yea, good spot on the final torque curve. The car is fitted with full Mina Gallery intake, which of course contains a lot of aluminium piping. This is a classic case of aftermarket intake systems not adding any power, but instead sapping it due to heatsoak. The first power run benefitted from colder air and no heatsoak, but the second power run after only 20 mins pause, suffered from heatsoak until the airflow increased and negated the engine bay temperatures. Obviously out on the open road with decent airflow, heatsoak is not an issue (and the intake noise is just glorious), but needless to say, now that VAP have released their carbon intake system, I now have my next upgrade lined up

 

Love it, starting a weight reduction journey myself. 132 lbs is pretty impressive. You look into lightweight forged rims? A lot less rotational and unsprung mass like your brakes. I have the Mina intake myself and have always said "I'll pay the small hp price for the sound" but looking at that dyno I dunno!

 

@bfrank1972 I'll tidy up my spreadsheet and DM you a copy to help you on your way with your weight reduction journey The car is fitted with the forged carbon blade wheels that are 6.6kg (14.6lb) lighter than the stock Gyrodynes, and the satin grey base wheel colour matches perfectly with the Silicon Silver body colour, so not looking to change the rims (yet). I wouldn't worry about the Mina intake unless your doing lots of dyno pulls. Out on the open road, there is literally tons of air flowing through the car and heatsoak will not be an issue (ditch the engine cover ).

 

My wallet is afraid.