# Dyno Results: Stock ABA, MSnS, etc



## hellrbbt (Sep 17, 2006)

Figured I would post this...

Went to an end of the year Dyno Day. Cool October air, about 20 cars, 3 pulls for $50. Why not? Building a new engine this winter (hopefully), so I wanted to know what I was at for a good before/after.

Enter my car: 84 GTI, MSnS (MS1 on a v2.2 board using Patatron/midnightGLI mods for spark), mk3 exhaust manifold, TT dual downpipe, test pipe, 2.25" TT exhaust with a magnaflow. Intake is a $20 Autozone Sceptre cone filter. Trans is a tired old 9A with bad flange seals and synchros for 3rd are crunchy laugh. Dyno was ran in 4th gear.

Running lean since I was tuning for mpg's rather than hp's, and I just changed my wideband sensor, the old one was throwing error code 8's on my innovative wideband, and the tune is just all f'd up. Looking at the chart I'm not quite happy with how lean it's running. 

First, the dyno chart:










Second, fuel, spark, and AFR target maps:










So, there is a basically bone stock ABA on MegaSquirt. Enjoy! opcorn:


Edit:

I should note that on this tune I'm getting ~27mpg in town, and 32mpg on the highway (70-75mph, ~3700rpm in a non-aerodynamic brick).


----------



## Prof315 (Jan 5, 2009)

Not too shabby, especially the mpg. You might want to try 2 things though, set your AFR target to 13.2-13.5 @ 100kpa and drop the timing at the top end down to 32-34* max under load. You'll probably pick up 10-20 hp without significantly hurting economy.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Ditto that. Also for mpg work, focus on where you actually DRIVE the car not the whole map. Those top end changes that Jeff recommends will effect that 1% of the time where you have the throttle nailed, that's it. You could leave those areas VERY rich and actually focus on your cruise range (lean afr + more timing) and accel tweaks to get it even better all around.


----------



## Prof315 (Jan 5, 2009)

Good point. When I was running a full ABA in the rado i went as lean as 16.5:1 AFR at light throttle cruise.


----------



## hellrbbt (Sep 17, 2006)

Thanks guys. I've been concentrating on the driving areas, hence I've spent almost no time really concentrating on the top end. I knew I had to richen it up, in hindsight I should have gone in after the first or second run and changed the afr targets and turned up the EGO correction from 0% to something like 50-80%, and just see what happened..

Either way, I'm only going to be driving the car as-is for a couple more weeks, so I may tweak it a bit more, but I don't foresee any more dyno runs to see the results...


----------



## Prof315 (Jan 5, 2009)

thatcrazylaxdude said:


> Thanks guys. I've been concentrating on the driving areas, hence I've spent almost no time really concentrating on the top end. I knew I had to richen it up, in hindsight I should have gone in after the first or second run and changed the afr targets and turned up the EGO correction from 0% to something like 50-80%, and just see what happened..
> 
> Either way, I'm only going to be driving the car as-is for a couple more weeks, so I may tweak it a bit more, but I don't foresee any more dyno runs to see the results...


Why not just reset your AFR targets and timing, fire up TunerStudio, and go drive with VEAnalyze on? Then the next time you hit the dyno you can find out what the changes have done.


----------



## hellrbbt (Sep 17, 2006)

Prof315 said:


> Why not just reset your AFR targets and timing, fire up TunerStudio, and go drive with VEAnalyze on? Then the next time you hit the dyno you can find out what the changes have done.


The main reason I don't want to tune too much right now is that I am currently chasing an exhaust leak. I'm waiting for a new downpipe gasket and manifold gasket to make sure that is it not before the O2 sensor causing my wideband to read a bit lean, thus messing with my tune as far as I understand. Rather be safe than sorry and just replace them first.

That and I have a 20v head and a k03s just sitting around waiting for winter...


----------



## ValveCoverGasket (Mar 20, 2002)

yowzers! thats pretty darn lean up top... and a lot of spark to boot... are you sure the timing is all aligned (ie the number youre typing into TS for spark is actually what the engine is seeing)
im shocked it stayed together at almost 40* and darn near 15:1 AFR


----------



## hellrbbt (Sep 17, 2006)

Yep, afaik the engine is seeing those numbers. It makes me a bit nervous too, but I'm not hearing any pinging/detonation... 

As I said, I'm chasing an exhaust leak which I really hope is throwing those afr readings off. When I was tuning a few weeks ago I don't recall them being that high.


----------



## SirSpectre (Mar 20, 2011)

I went 2 runs before him. I dont have a scanner so here is a crappy cell pic because I cant find the USB cable for my real camera  

Results are 112.83 whp @ 120 tq @ 14.7 AFR with e85. Guy never did a run @ WOT so I'd figure a few more HP there. Few of us also determined the dyno was about 10 hp off when comparing results with other runs and other dyno's so add a few there and crazylax's. BUT here is the graph to see the curve:










This is with MS3x Fully sequential with wasted spark plugs gapped to .052
270 cam, 
Super tech valves
Header 2.25 exhaust
Ported head
Intake cone


----------



## ValveCoverGasket (Mar 20, 2002)

i think you guys both need to add fuel


question though, was that AFR reading off of an additional sensor in the header, or was it one of those clamp on tailpipe readings? ive seen the tailpipe ones show nearly a full point on the lean side before so that might help explain why it looks so bad on the printout...


----------



## hellrbbt (Sep 17, 2006)

ValveCoverGasket said:


> i think you guys both need to add fuel
> 
> 
> question though, was that AFR reading off of an additional sensor in the header, or was it one of those clamp on tailpipe readings? ive seen the tailpipe ones show nearly a full point on the lean side before so that might help explain why it looks so bad on the printout...


Tailpipe. I know the guy mentioned something about the AFR reading on my gauge in the car versus the printout, but I can't remember what he said. It wouldn't surprise me if he said the printout was leaner though.


----------



## SirSpectre (Mar 20, 2011)

Interesting. Maybe it was at WOT then. I know I have WOT set to 13.7 and when it runs there it sits at 13.7 perfectly. I went back to 93 anyway, still think a bit more fuel would be needed?


----------



## Prof315 (Jan 5, 2009)

SirSpectre said:


> Interesting. Maybe it was at WOT then. I know I have WOT set to 13.7 and when it runs there it sits at 13.7 perfectly. I went back to 93 anyway, still think a bit more fuel would be needed?


From what I have found on the dyno ABA's like 13.2-13.5 to 1 for best power.


----------



## ValveCoverGasket (Mar 20, 2002)

thatcrazylaxdude said:


> Tailpipe. I know the guy mentioned something about the AFR reading on my gauge in the car versus the printout, but I can't remember what he said. It wouldn't surprise me if he said the printout was leaner though.


that may help explain why neither of your motors scattered with the AFRs on the printout 

sometimes it can be hard to tell because some folks have an extra port for the dyno WB on their header, and some places will only run the clamp on sensor.


either way, id consider richening it up a bit - only need to do this at full load though, probably leave everything below ~80-85kpa alone if its running fine


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I usually run 12.8-13:1 on most things. If you are on e85 if its 11.5:1 on a gas calibrated wb you are close to max power afr.


----------

