posted 11-25-2002 07:50 AM                  

Stock: 161.9 HP with 168.5 ft/lbs Torque
w/low juice: 255.1 HP with 250.4 ft/lbs Torque

A full bottle would have made a big difference..

1/4 mile runs were ok but those Dunlops WILL NOT put the power to the ground. The Kat was burning rubber all the way into second. We lowered the pressure to 17 lbs and it still burned quite a bit but not as bad. The Mustang instructor says if I ever get the power to the ground I should break my lowest time.. 12.718.. I offered to help sweep up all the rubber but Mike said he'd handle it...

Run #1:
Time = 13.040 at 108.248 mph. 60ft time = 2.312
Run #2:
Time = 13.054 at 110.169 mph. 60ft time = 2.295

Add to this I was running a flat 10 on the Air/Fuel ratio meter and the stock Prowler ran about a 12 to 13 which the Dyno instructor said meant I was running real "fat" or rich. He says my kat should be able to handle a 200 shot with no problem.. Since the times were only .3 of a second off my best, I was satisfied with the day in whole.. NO FUEL pump problem or starving for gas at all, in fact to much gas!! Another test we did on those two runs was to leave it in drive letting it shift into 4th gear and then only letting it go to third and run to the limiter.. My 4th gear shift point was about 120 feet before the end of the run and the instructor said that was only a couple of tenths so let it bump the limiter.. As you can see the two runs were almost exact in time.

I was really dissapointed in the Dunlop SP9000 as far as traction. The stock Goodyears did not slip anywhere near as much.

I'd like to extend a real big THANK YOU to Mike for the opportunity to help break in the new dyno..

Marty, I hope this helps somewhat..

posted 11-25-2002 08:08 AM                  

Good runs and thanks for the update...

posted 11-25-2002 08:20 AM                  

I think you told me .6 delay with 50% (75 HP) start ramping up to 100 % (150 HP) over 3.8 seconds.

If you had a full bottle and ever get all your power to the ground you ought to shave off over 1/2 second. Your spinning has to hurt. I had a 1.86 60 foot time using .4 delay and 60% start. That alone would put you at 12.5.

Sounds like you had a great time.

posted 11-25-2002 08:56 AM                    

I know some gets lost in the transfer to the rear wheels (I read that somewhere) but come on, almost 50 percent????

I think Fred has more on his car then just NOS so without the juice flowing, it really isn't 100% stock, right Fred?

posted 11-25-2002 09:09 AM                  

Marty, one note on the movie Mike shot. All that wheel spin was while stock, as we were out of juice, and the tire pressure was down to 17 lbs.. You can imagine what it was at 30lbs.... I had the computer dialed in at where I had my best time before, .8 and 2.5 for second stage. I had to dial it up to a 1.6 & 2.8 in order to try to compensate for the wheel spin... I'm sorry I got rid of the old rear Goodyears they would have made good slicks now..

I can't answer the 161.9 HP stock but Mike had a stock one on there when I got there and I think it ran 155 HP but Mike can tell you better.. According to the instructor that was right about where it should be.. He commented to me that he didn't think the 253 HP advertised was correct to begin with. We used the weight factor of 3125 for the car. It also takes in the humidity, air temp and such... I was suprised when he told me that a 150 shot gives you about 100 or so HP at the rear wheels, as mine proved out.

We can't explain the fact of my fuel pump, it is delivering all the fuel the car wants.. It appears that it even wants more "Go-Juice"... I'm looking today to see if they have a 175 shot or if I need to go straight to a 200 shot... I'd like to compare that to yesterday.

posted 11-25-2002 10:23 AM                  

Have Testostrone, Will spend!

posted 11-25-2002 02:33 PM                  

Dynojet 248C V/S Mustang MD1750:

Dynojet 248C is actually an accelerometer whereby it uses a 3000-3200 pound drum that is used to create an inertia load on the vehicle being tested. The vehicle's horsepower (HP) and torque try to overcome the weight/inertia of the drum to accelerate it. As a result the software and electronics try to measure the horsepower and torque that the vehicle is developing to overcome the drum's weight and inertia. The resulting horsepower and torque will be higher than a true loading dyno because once the drum starts rolling not as much power is needed to keep it going. Example -- When pushing a car on a flat road, once the car starts moving not as much power (effort) is needed to keep it going. The software does not ask for vehicle weight or anything like horsepower needed to maintain 50 MPH (a number that is actually put out by E.P.A. and N.H.T.S.A.).

The Mustang MD1750 dyno is a true loading dyno, because it uses an inertia weight as well as an eddy current motor that is attached to the rollers. This eddy current motor creates a drag on the shaft by way of electricity that causes a magnetic field to try and overcome the torque going through the roller shafts. This current is controlled by software that is always trying to simulate load as if the car is driving in real world conditions. The real benefit from the loading dyno is the ability to maintain a load that allows a tuner to properly go through a fuel map or ignition map and tune the chip for optimum horsepower and torque. It has the ability to also simulate the IM240 emissions test as required in some states. It can check 1/4 mile times as well as times for 0-60 MPH and 0-100 MPH. It can also be used for road testing and simulation for drivability problems. As a result of the loading capability, the dyno numbers from a mustang dyno will come out about 10% lower than the inertia (dynojet) dyno. Further information can be seen at [url=www.mustangdyne.com ]www.mustangdyne.com [/url]

Fred's car produced 161.9 RWhp on the Mustang 1750, which would equate to 179.88 RWhp on the Dynojet.

I have no real explanation as to how Chrysler got 253 hp at the flywheel, but perhaps the measurements were done under ideal conditions and a lesser load than seen on the drivetrain. I don't know a whole lot about engine dynos and the standards for measurement so maybe someone with some knowledge can comment.

posted 11-25-2002 02:56 PM                    

Where do manufacturers get their hp ratings from? Something like a formula based on the size of pistons + number of pistons + .....?

Even at 170 hp, that about 83 hp lower then stated.

As a complete novice to engines and dynos and such, I am just curious as to where ANY manufacturer gets the posted numbers from.

When I owned a 99 Vette, I bought a number of bolt on goodies for the car. Each advertised their do-dad would increase hp by 5 hp, or 10, etc. I sat down and totalled it all up and all the bolt on parts would have given my car a boost from 345 to 550 hp. Ha! and I know that wasn't right.
Maybe car manufacturers do something like this???

posted 11-25-2002 03:18 PM                  

quote:

---

"...I don't know a whole lot about engine dynos ..."

---

posted 11-25-2002 03:20 PM                  

The HP rating Fred posted were "at the rear wheels" For people looking for performance, that is the more important reading. Now that Fred has a base run, he can make modifications and dyno again to see what, if any improvement he gets.

posted 11-25-2002 07:23 PM                  

The stock was 172.6 HP at rear wheels.

Than made run with SSS muffler and achieved 174.1 HP at rear wheels...

In Feb. 2000, I ran my stock Prowler on Dynojet Dyno and had 178.1.

posted 11-25-2002 10:15 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laddie Roussel:
Back in April this year. I ran a stock Prowler on same type Mustang Dyno model at Gerhardt Diesel Performance center.

The stock was 172.6 HP at rear wheels.

Than made run with SSS muffler and achieved 174.1 HP at rear wheels...

In Feb. 2000, I ran my stock Prowler on Dynojet Dyno and had 178.1.

---

posted 11-26-2002 06:59 AM                  

Personally, I would rather spend my time, energy, and dollars on modifying my car. For me, a big part of the pleasure I get out of owning a Prowler is turning it into my image of what I want to drive. The engine is what it is as far as I'm concerned.
Trying to build some kind of a class action suit against Chrysler seems like a longshot at best and would take a lot of time and effort away from the time I spend figuring out what I am going to do next with my kat and having fun driving it.

You, as well as others may certainly have your own reasons for wanting to pursue this. If I feel the need for more power, it will bring me much more satisfaction researching a way to add a larger nitrous shot, installing stronger valves, or upgrading my pistons and fuel delivery system.

Just my opinion.

posted 11-26-2002 07:43 AM                  

YES I GET WHAT THE CAR IS ABOUT!

What I "don't get" is running on dynos, and modding, and dragging, and not caring what the stock HP was to start.....Even as a matter of curiosity? Ironically your thread started the wheels turning (please pardon the pun ) about true stock HP, yet you seem to not be interested at all in the stock dyno results which surprised/ shocked me when you posted them.

And, YES, if I never knew the dyno numbers, I would never have known or questioned the HP on the car. The car is just beautiful at any angle and I have no intentions of dragging it....Just cruising and stylin'.....

But your thread sparked curiosity, that's all.

You are happy blasting through a 1/4 mile at 12.718 seconds. Theoretically, if the car actually had the horsepower it was originally rated at, wouldn't it make you even happier that you blasted the 1/4 mile at 12.5 seconds or something like that?

posted 11-26-2002 08:03 AM                    

In
a galaxy
far from nebbu

Star Trooper: "Hey buddy, you have four flat tires."

Prowler owner: "You either get it or you don't."

Star Trooper: "I'm smelling gas too."

Prowler owner: "You either get it or you don't."

Star Trooper: "Look at the smoke coming out of your hood, aren't you curious as to what is causing that?"

Prowler owner: "You either get it or you don't."

Star Trooper: "Holly #$%!, dude, your car is on fire..."

Prowler owner: "You either get it or you don't."

Star Trooper: "Well, it's toast now. Will you get what's left of it off my street?"