So I had another dyno tuning session. Goal was to dial in the tune on 91 gas and tune 100 race gas. Things didn't go as smooth and as fast as I hoped. When installing wideband we ended up ruining the thread in the 02 bung, took around an hour to make it work. Ran out of time and couldn't do tuning for 100 gas. The good news have hit as high as 453 to the wheels on 91 gas with Mustang Dynometer which is around 485 to the wheels on Dynojet , to translate into crank hp is around 535hp. Very impressive numbers for our 4.2 engine!
The bad news however , had to dial the tune back down to around 430 to the wheels as that seems to provide the most safety for the application . Next is 100 race gas, expecting to see at least 20 to rear wheel hp gain over 91.

 

Impressive for sure (pending some parameters like a/f ratio)

Can you show the dyno graph? Just because its a bit odd to heave peak power so low in the rpm range.
Which Mustang Dyno are you actually using? there are so many different ones they make.

 

Avos
Scaling was off on RPM since it was based on speed and not connected to ignition directly, was readjusted for later runs. Not sure on the model of Mustang Dyno , was mentioned that it was a more recent model.
Here is one of the graphs

 

535hp on a supercharged 4.2 I highly doubt Alex if it was turbo charged I'd say yes but not a low efficient supercharger like the Eaton .

 

Don't know what to tell you Steve..
on same dyno newer 5.0 mustang with headers, intake and tune was at 460, same Dyno where with pulley only mod I was at 359..

 

Is that torque correct? 584 ft lb is 791Nm which sounds a bit high!

 

@u102768
That was because the rpm was not in sync with true rpm, in the graph you see the calculated torque to the rpm.
@AlexJag
Was it 2 small rolls per wheel dyno , or one large drum?
And what was the correction, ie sea net J1349 or sae std J607 or din?

 

Torque is correct in the actual Dyno graphs in 4th gear which is around the same as hp, around 435 mark. If Dyno is done in third gear torque jumps up past 500 , so we kind of assumed it as incorrect and use 4th gear only. Not easy to Dyno our car as 4th gear has to be eased into and at higher RPMs otherwise it downshifts.
Two small rolls on this Dynometer
Have no clue on correction , assuming he used same setting as last time, didn't look like it corrected much , probably makes sense since it was not a hot day.

 

The 2 small rolls cause more resistance on the tires then what you experience on the road or large drum dynos, so they will give a lower hp number obviously when its pure rwhp that you want to show.
As it also matters on how you strap down the vehicle/tire pressure etc, the best way to use these type of dynos is to also do a coast down after a run to measure the resistance, that will take out some of these effects and allows for a closer engine power level/better way to compare between runs.

Anyway, the numbers are pretty high, around what some get from a tuned 5.0, and that makes me doubt somewhat the results you show form that dyno.

 

Long time ago: 4.0 , 2.6H TS with 1.90 SC ratio ( 16.7PSI ) and AFR 12.5 : 522bhp / 640Nm Stock tune - excluding possibility to change AFR by fuel pressure. AFR 11.5 - about 8hp less.

 

Avos Dyno verified by comparing other cars and what they should make with mods,including my own pre-mod Dyno numbers, and they are spot on.

Also been plenty of times at the drag strip to approximate my power. One of the closest is friends 556hp 2012 cts/v, My car keeps up and in most cases beats the cts/-v at the track on 1/4 mile and 1/8mi.

My car went from 13.3 with 107mph trap to 12.5 and 112 trap on same track, same 60 ft. Got to keep in mind DA elevation are minimum of 2000 on local tracks here. Confident car would be in low 12s at sea level track.

Never seen another xkr at the track , Or any jagaur with a 5.0 but would love to take on a 5.0 one .
There was a 4.2 xjr one time with puley, exhaust he was running 8.6 in 1/8mil where I was running 8.1
Btw forgot to mention the runs were with no cats on, so iv gain very minimal if any power compared to high flow cats, since high flow Dyno numbers were near identical.

XJR-99 not much gain from the leaner Afr, how is stock tune that lean? did you stick to 11.5? Stock internals?

 

@ 12.0 it was fine - until the orginal cast piston was damaged two weeks after this video clip. . The intake side was a botlleneck. Missed 2PSI boost because of that.

 

Why not run a little richer for safety ? Or you think it just gave out from pushing more power than it can take ?
Re intake bottle neck , I'm suspecting even with our dual intakes at minimum 1.5psi there , working on iliminating this with custom airbox setup

 

We have analysed the damage quite a lot. Most probably it was not because of detonation - just too much cylinder pressure for the cast piston.

 

Do you know how much better 4.2 is as far handling power ?

 

4.2 SC: Mahle forged 4032 pistons, oil squirts, a bit stronger rods, superior knock control vs AJ26 4.0

 

XJR-99 4.2 is your current setup? Whats the projected power output?

 

Nice curves. It would be nice to see what they looked like down low off idle. I think most detonation damage occurs where the tune is compensating for the pressure rise at low RPM.

 

I run a custom Ken Bell sc on my 05 Nissan Frontier 4.0 V6 and am currently at 475hp crank looking to go to 525 which is double factory 260. I custom built the motor and adapted the sc from a LS Chevy kit. According to Ken Bell you need to run a vacuum gauge in front of throttle to know if your current intake system is a restriction. and any vacuum is a restriction at wot. so if you have 1,5"vac. you indeed are loosing 1.5psi boost to intake restriction. love to see ya'll taking the Jaguar setups to better than factory numbers

 

@AlexJag
Could you estimate which upgrades contributed to which increase, so based on the 330 rwhp stock (if correct) and comparable to the latest run (if that was good as well) where you had 450rwhp, so 120 rwhp increase right?

As example, I would have guessed (give or take) 15 to cats, 15 to pulley, maybe 10 to intake, and about 30 for a (relative safe) tune (ignition and a/f), so in total about 70 max extra rwhp,

@Brutal
In another link Alexjag mentioned he had only about .6 psi, so not that much more to gain there anymore, so therefor my 10 rwhp estimate is already on the high side (based on relatively small updates done before on the intake, like K&N filters).