Diablo Dyno tuning - Results from McNews

**PaCharger** · 11-24-2007, 07:24 AM

Got up to McNews Automotive in Dillsburg, Pa about 8:45am, strapped on the dyno and got started pretty much right away. Ray McNew was doing the tuning...great guy, patient, thorough and will have my business for retuning after each mod moving forward.

I only have one graph right now, even though we did 19 pulls - yes 19!
I don't have it scanned in, but trust me...we weren't looking to cook the books for HP. My goal was to get a survivable Air/Fuel Ratio and his goal was to learn these cars, get the bugs out of the diablo/dynoject/chip master revolution software dance, while also learning what tables on the dodge were tunable..how sensitive etc... We used SAE 5 smoothing, so the HP and TQ numbers are lower than standard, but again...we didn't care what the number was, we cared about the relative movements - that's tuning.

We used a sniffer in the port side exhaust (runs a bit leaner than a wideband).

Notes and Results:

Stock Pull - 282.32hp and 317.27 tq
93 cai Pull - 294.72hp and 342.56 tq

AFR was lower on the stock pulls, an eyeball avg would put it around 12.8 or so. The 93 cai stock tune was slightly leaner after 4200 rpms and moved to about 13.1.

After 17 more pulls with a stock motor, mopar cai and zoomers exhaust we were able get the afr down to high 12's and flatten the fuel line with a max of 296.xx hp and 342.xx tq.

So...stock cars...self tuners - stop screwing with Johanns tune...it's pretty much spot on....he's that good.

We danced around alot of the tables and took a very sound approach, get the fuel right, then start looking for power. Spent time on the VE and Spark tables...found as expected that the knock retard is very sensitive and will ROB you of power. At WOT I found even a momentary 1 degree knock would take timing for 1 to 1.5 seconds. At the track that's 10% of your run.

Adding timing on the tuner for stock cars is a waste of time and likely going to slow you down.

I have a million other thoughts after learning a bit during the day, but probably would be irresponsible to post conjecture. I'll be getting back on the dyno when the headers and cam go in. I think the headers will help me scavange exhaust better and then perhaps add some timing. The cam will be a huge change and require more work on the dyno.

Good day...now I'm getting ready to head to Cecil for probably the final runs of the year at the track

BTW...anyone in the central PA area that would like to get a dyno day together at McNews...PM me. Ray was open to the idea and could be a good way to have some fun car time come Jan or Feb when we can't do anything other than shovel snow.

__________________

**slideway** · 11-24-2007, 10:05 AM

Great write up thanks, What was your average coolant and ambient temps.?

**roswald0511** · 11-24-2007, 10:52 AM

What was the cost?

**InferAl** · 11-24-2007, 10:53 AM

Good write up, Man alot of pulls

**JonzMgnm** · 11-24-2007, 12:39 PM

Very nice of you Doug. That's certainly great info for all the stock guys who have a lot to gain from the 93CAI tune (and safely). Way to go Johann.

**Mike@Diablosport** · 11-24-2007, 01:54 PM

Good to see you guys taking a sound approach to tuning these cars.
I hope you get some positive results at the track to go along with those solid numbers.

Thanks
Mike

**HoP1** · 11-24-2007, 02:43 PM

A bit of advice. Data log KS sensor voltage 1 and 2, KS ST retard. Data log at idle for a good minute, save the file. Data log another file throw some revs save this file as well. Do this before you put the camshaft and headers in.
Now do the same test after the camshaft and headers. Because of the base circle change on these camshafts I'm seeing a lot of valve train noise at idle and during normal engine operation, it's apparent that the rocker arm geometry has changed significantly because of this. Adjustable rockers anyone? Anyways do this test and you'll be surprised how much more active the knock sensors become. That way your tuner is not running around asking why are we pulling more timing it should be the opposite. Good luck.

**Hemi31** · 11-24-2007, 03:41 PM

We have known about the pushrods for almost a year......thats why the 5.7 guys run aftermarket pushrods in longer lengths.

**HoP1** · 11-24-2007, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by Hemi31

We have known about the pushrods for almost a year......thats why the 5.7 guys run aftermarket pushrods in longer lengths.

and running 6.1 length push rods does not fix the problem in a 5.7. In trojan's car he needs .070 longer than a factory 6.1L. Getting a set of longer push rods is the quick cheap and easy way of attempting to correct the problem. It does not fix the original problem of changing the rocker arm geometry, that's why an increased rocker arm ratio is needed to correct it. At the cost of $3,500.00 I agree it's steep and most would just opt for a set of longer rods, but at the present nobody has any idea of what length of push rod is needed. Trojan originally had 402's custom longer push rods, we measured them to stock 6.1L push rods and they where smaller on the intake by .030 and .025 on the exhaust. That's why he is now running the Manley 6.1L push rods. Anyways not to high jack the thread, just try the test for data, it's amazing the sensitivity the program has for the knock sensors.

**PaCharger** · 11-24-2007, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by slideway

Great write up thanks, What was your average coolant and ambient temps.?

Good point...we actually were INSIDE...so it got warm. I'm sure we could have artificially moved HP/TQ numbers up...but we kept opening an closing the bay doors to keep the IAT close to the same. We did btw, move the IAT temps so the car won't artifically introduce more KR at warmer temps

Originally Posted by roswald0511

What was the cost?

Most tuners are charging $100-$125/hr for tuning.

Originally Posted by InferAl

Good write up, Man alot of pulls

Yes it was...he really wanted to learn, so did I...goto the Track Forum and you can see we made good..new best ET's and Trap speeds!

Originally Posted by Mike@Diablosport

Good to see you guys taking a sound approach to tuning these cars.
I hope you get some positive results at the track to go along with those solid numbers.

Thanks
Mike

Mike - Thanks to you and Johann teaching us and being patient. Great tool, but Guys, must be used in SAFE measures.

Originally Posted by JonzMgnm

Very nice of you Doug. That's certainly great info for all the stock guys who have a lot to gain from the 93CAI tune (and safely). Way to go Johann.

Stock new bests for me...not sure what other cars out there are running with just a Mopar CAI, Zoomers, 180tstat, Drag Radials and a tune...and going 13.269 and trapping 104mph speeds!!!! ....er...safely!

**BoiseHemi** · 11-24-2007, 05:40 PM

Holy crap that is a lot and I mean a lot of pulls, but hey better to be safe than sorry! Enjoy the new tune!

**Hemi31** · 11-24-2007, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by HoP1

and running 6.1 length push rods does not fix the problem in a 5.7. In trojan's car he needs .070 longer than a factory 6.1L. Getting a set of longer push rods is the quick cheap and easy way of attempting to correct the problem. It does not fix the original problem of changing the rocker arm geometry, that's why an increased rocker arm ratio is needed to correct it. At the cost of $3,500.00 I agree it's steep and most would just opt for a set of longer rods, but at the present nobody has any idea of what length of push rod is needed. Trojan originally had 402's custom longer push rods, we measured them to stock 6.1L push rods and they where smaller on the intake by .030 and .025 on the exhaust. That's why he is now running the Manley 6.1L push rods. Anyways not to high jack the thread, just try the test for data, it's amazing the sensitivity the program has for the knock sensors.

the aftermarket rods from Smith Bros are supposed to be 6.630 and 7.845 with milled heads which is .005 longer than the 6.1 on the intake and .005 shorter on the exhaust.Sounds to me like he had stock 5.7 rods in the car.

**Hurst Equipped** · 11-24-2007, 06:30 PM

wow, 17 pulls for 2Hp gain.

**Flanman** · 11-24-2007, 06:34 PM

Nice right up. Thanks for the great information.

**InferAl** · 11-24-2007, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by HoP1

and running 6.1 length push rods does not fix the problem in a 5.7. In trojan's car he needs .070 longer than a factory 6.1L. Getting a set of longer push rods is the quick cheap and easy way of attempting to correct the problem. It does not fix the original problem of changing the rocker arm geometry, that's why an increased rocker arm ratio is needed to correct it. At the cost of $3,500.00 I agree it's steep and most would just opt for a set of longer rods, but at the present nobody has any idea of what length of push rod is needed. Trojan originally had 402's custom longer push rods, we measured them to stock 6.1L push rods and they where smaller on the intake by .030 and .025 on the exhaust. That's why he is now running the Manley 6.1L push rods. Anyways not to high jack the thread, just try the test for data, it's amazing the sensitivity the program has for the knock sensors.

6.1 pushrods only work for aftermarket cams and non milled heads. For the .030 milled heads they are too long