LFX Dyno Thread

[djcolopi]

Curb weight for the 2LS is 3769lbs; weight of gasoline is 6.183lbs/gal. We have a 19.5gal tank so 120.56lbs there. 1/2 tank is 60.28lbs and a 1/4 tank is 30.14lbs. So 3769 - 90.42lbs (estimating a 1/4 tank) is 3678.6lbs and add 205lbs for the driver and the additional 50lbs putting the weight at 3933.6lbs. Rough calculation to answer your question.

[djcolopi]

The google spreadsheet has been updated! I will take screenshots later today and attach them to the thread on the forum.

[Moncadari]

Originally Posted by djcolopi

The google spreadsheet has been updated! I will take screenshots later today and attach them to the thread on the forum.

Cool! thanks!

[crc91]

Nice numbers man, either or factory freak or something those are incredibly good numbers for a manual car and unheard of numbers for a non tuned auto car


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[V6Pwr]

[djcolopi]

Originally Posted by V6Pwr

Thanks for posting over here! Ill add you up on the google doc once you post up the rest of the information I need!

Type and make of dyno: (ex. dynojet model 248x, mustang, etc.)
ODO at the time of the dyno:
Temperature:
Manual/auto:
Gear used(3rd or 4th):
Modification:
Correction used(STD or SAE):
Result:

[derek1387]

I updated mine from the latest run today....

[djcolopi]

Originally Posted by derek1387

I updated mine from the latest run today....

Awesome! Good improvement in power! However, I am surprised that your tq output is below 400ft*lbs tq.

[derek1387]

We will get there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kenny Camaro]

Went to Dyno Days and hit the Mustang dyno at Vector Motor Sports.
58 F
27,300 odo

[djcolopi]

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

Went to Dyno Days and hit the Mustang dyno at Vector Motor Sports.
58 F
27,300 odo

Posting it upside down and sideways lol
Your tq seems on the low end, especially with the bolt-ons in your sig

[Kenny Camaro]

Originally Posted by djcolopi

Posting it upside down and sideways lol
Your tq seems on the low end, especially with the bolt-ons in your sig

Sorry Danny! Can't figure out why it keeps doing that. Took shots from every angle and when it uploaded couldnt find one that was the right way. It's a mustang dyno and they usually read lower than dynojets, and this one is notoriously low. A guy with a 722rwhp on his mustang cobra said it was the first time he pulled under 800. They had a 500 prize for high pull and he came for that. It was his first time on their dyno. The torque numbers were low, but look at the arc, it stayed nearly even from 2900-6800. Stayed up in the higher torque range well.

[djcolopi]

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

Sorry Danny! Can't figure out why it keeps doing that. Took shots from every angle and when it uploaded couldnt find one that was the right way. It's a mustang dyno and they usually read lower than dynojets, and this one is notoriously low. A guy with a 722rwhp on his mustang cobra said it was the first time he pulled under 800. They had a 500 prize for high pull and he came for that. It was his first time on their dyno. The torque numbers were low, but look at the arc, it stayed nearly even from 2900-6800. Stayed up in the higher torque range well.

Damn man they need to throw away that machine it seems like its an extreme outlier that would not even be included in a random statistical sample ill add you up later today!

[Kenny Camaro]

Yeah, that guy could be disappointed with his numbers and exagggerting. Did some google searches on Mustang Vs. Dynojet readings. General consensus is the Mustang reads lower, like 10-12 percent, if that's the case, I was doing good getting 271/229. Those times 12 % or 10%, would be great numbers, so it is what it is. I probibly would not have even done it if it wasn't such a good price,$50, and came with a free day at the drag-strip. Thanks Danny.