thats a nice mod list but do you have any other work done to the trans?

 

Stock F23 transmission, stock clutch

I have a cobra HE for cooling, and the fans are on all the time.

 

is that required even on stock pulley?

 

im running 15.54 injector pulsewidths with 83% injectory duty cycles with all the mods i have...

my tune is set to start off with 11.5 af ratio and then towards the top in progress to 11.0 for safety

 

for less than $100 total for the setup, you should do it. Our CR will have higher temps and anything to cool it down will help. It doesn't help that we can't monitor IAT2 temps since our ecu can't read the TMAP.

 

im trying to find the calculations for figuring out power loss for pulleys anyone know where that is or what it is

 

i've never heard of that calculator.

 

negative my **** is fine, did compression test and leak down test. The dipstick just wasnt pushed in all the way. didnt pop out. The breather is spitting oil now no longer 'foam'

I can read post blower temps, just not pre blower temps. pre blower temps dont really matter though anyways.

you did go with the 2.5 Bar map right? if you wired it up in accordance with the diagram in my how two the IAT you are displaying is post blower, not pre.

 

Boarderline pulley and injectors are too big. lol.

Hope you have new internals.

 

lol...decided to screw the map and went straight MAF tune. I guess this could be why I'm not seeing temps. MAP is disabled.

edit: I think I might work on the Map/Maf blend. someday.

 

Being able to read IAT2 after the blower would be a good thing. I just would like to know how you tuned your VE after adding the 2.5 bar MAP sensor?

 

talk to bigworm, the tuning is way over my head, i just sit there and nod haha.

 

i think i answered this in the other thread, we didnt tune VE. I'm an engineer, not a rocket scienist

However, by disabling, or not having a map you will mess with other aspects of fueling. transit fueling, map hyst's for enabling and disabling functions (PE, DFCO, etc), thats only to name a few. GM uses multiple sensor inputs to create "virtual" sensors for alot of different things. if you want an example of this, go pull your knock sensor.

even beyond that i believe map is still used to help calculate the second axis of the spark tables (see discussion in pjk's thread a while back with witt). I havent had time to prove or disprove that yet. anyways, end rant..

steps needed to tune for boost are this:
disable dynamic airflow
rescale map
disable some annoying codes
tune IFR, PW, offsets then MAF

forget VE, the point i've been trying to make is that you shouldn't "delete" or "disable" map. the best route for our cars is to use the 2.5bar tmap in the lsj-stock location and allow MAP operations to work normally.

on the 2.0L it isnt... the 2.8" on the 2.4L will be putting those 60's at about max. my guess 85%. which means without meth he'd not be able to drop any lower, safely.

horsepower is a theoretical number derived from torque, this just doesn't make sense.. the point of the smaller pully is more boost, more boost = more torque+power

 

Ok that makes since now, I was just woundering what you where doing with the MAP. You are just putting the 2.5 bar MAP and leaving the tables the way they where.

 

What a douche bag, 2.0 has potential... the rest have potential for headaches...

 

Yes..the 2.0 has GREAT potential......

Since at 8psi Im 1+ second faster than Stg 2 + alot of boltons in the 1/4 who are boosting 17+



The 2.4's have the potential.

Dont get pissy because a lesser model than yours is faster

 

ugh I really don't like a reply like that, but whatever.

The 2.0 does have good potential.

So does the 2.2.

And so does the 2.4.

If all things were equal, besides displacement (2.0 and 2.4) sure the 2.4 would yield higher tq/hp numbers. There are also good things to be said about 2.0's and "square motors". They have their advantages.

 

2.4 FTW!!!!!

good luck pjk91, i have 60's and a 2.9" on the car right now.. tuning should be finished tomorow.. if all goes well....

 

Dont get me wrong, I know the 2.0 has its positives.

Was merely stating stock for stock, the 2.4 is alot better of a motor. Mainly for the VVT.

 

im getting 60s and a dyno tune next week....im hoping for good numbers. but its on a mustang dyno...arent they a lil inaccurate for our cars horsepower wise???

 

Mustang dyno's are whp.


Dynojet(egojet) "guesses" your crank HP...which is inacurate because your never certain what the exact drivetrain loss is.

it varies by transmission....one FWD car could have more of a loss than another FWD car.

 

o man,i cant wait to see her back on the track with 60s and 2.8!

 

yo pjk let me know how that turns out with the pulley n inj setup

 

oh ok cool. sry for the noob, but ive never been dynoed nor had experience with them. thanks