These are the dyno #'s and graph's of blackminitubbedlx cobra. These were with the HP turbo street kit on 14psi, 22 degrees of timing and at 5500ft above sea level. (picture is large so graph can be seen better):

Dyno Graph (Uncorrected @ 5500 ft. above sea level & SAE)

I'll have more pictures and video as the week goes on. Look at this kit know, because it will be the one to have!

~Matt~

 

Do they have a website ?

Keep us updated on the quality and fit ,looks pretty good in the MM&FF article

 

We are working on the web site and have an offer made by a member of turbomustangs to aid us in this project. We appreciate all the feed back keep it coming.

 

Heck if you need any other help on a site, shoot me a PM.

 

dyno sheet

this is a 347 with street kit and a t-66 upgrade

 

please tell me that does not say 710hp/777tq

 

nope, it does

 

Excellent numbers for the twisted heads and outta da box intake with a '66 turbo at 12 psi. Hmmmmmmm........ most will argue that a "TURBO GRIND" cam will make more power than the AFM-B4, I think that's great numbers for a stick that's supposedly cut for a blower too. Keep up the good work, Brent.

BTW, what were the A/F ratios looking like? Was this with race or 93 octane gas?

 

Holy Shnikies. LOL. Those numbers are great. In all seriousness, does this kit have a downside (besides splitting a block?) I have seen so much great stuff that this looks like the new king of the street kits. My, my, my. I love it, though. Keep up the excellent work and keep producing the kit for at least 6 more mos., please. If I don't get one, I may have to kick my own ass for waiting so long.

Ken

 

thanks for the compliments. We ran an 50/50 mix of race gas and 91 octane pump gas(highest available at pump in new mex). We only did this just to be on the safe side. we did'nt want to take any chances. The car had 42# injectors with 50 or so lbs of base fuel pressure. The air fuel ratios were around 12.0's at the beginning of the run, and on the lean side at the end of the run. That is why we did'nt raise boost past 12 psi. With some more injector and boost we think 800 is not out of the question.

 

Jimhp,

Could you say what was lean? 12.5, 12.8, 13.0, 13.5? The reason I am asking is that I am going to the dyno as soon as this freakin' snow leaves and I can get to it. Now "IF" you say the ratio was around the 13 range, would it have mattered if you had straight C-16 race fuel?

I take it that this car has just the EEC IV computer and no add on aids? If so, that is amazing although 50 psi base is a lot on those injectors.

What was the compression ratio with that motor too?

 

at the end of the run the afrs were passing 12.8 in a hurry ie: 13.0. The car is a customers car so we decided not to push it. I am surre that with straight c 16 the detonation threshold is higher, but we were'nt out to break any records or head gaskets.
The eec iv is stock, no piggybacks. The reason that we had the static pressure so high was to get the injectors to flow enough at that level to keep the car alive. We started at 8 or so psi boost and the fuel curve was a little on the lean side. A little fuel pressure later the curve was fine. When we jumped to 12 psi boost we raised the fuel pressure from around 43 to around 50.


thanks for the feedback

 

by the way the cr is about 8.8:1 on that car. It's basically a good combo except for the blower cam

 

curious to the second graph...I always thought that the HP and TQ were supposed to cross at 5200 or somewhere around there.

 

They cross at 5250 if I'm not mistaken. However, look at the left and right of the graph. The numbers have been changed to fit both HP and TQ curve into the same graph. When looking at the TQ curve look at the numbers on the right, when looking for HP look at the numbers on the left.

 

Ahh, never seen a graph like that. I've only been to one dyno before though. Thanks for the correction.

 

I will get in touch with the Dyno edge about our dyno runs so we can post them using the correct software instead of using pictures, thank you Snipe656 for pointing that out to us. We really appreciate all of the feed back and God bless.

 

has anyone got any proof or insight into why a turbo cam would have made more power or torque, or is this mabye the better style cam to go with for turbo's...

 

What it basically comes down to is the difference in pressure between the intake and the exhaust, the closer these two variables are to each other the more of a '' NA cam '' you can use. In a perfect world the NA cam will allow for the most air flow wether it is turbocharged or not. As far as our test went the motor was a 347 with a p 96 on the turbine side I did not take pressure readings on the exhaust side but I am sure from just the variables mentioned that a turbo cam would probably make more HP. Thanks and God bless.

 

Ok, but wouldn't cylinder head flow and valve angles and combustion chamber shape etc. have to do with that also. I could be wrong but I think that the proper cam would be dictated possibly from intake and exaust flow, and boost pressure.