pelotonracer2's FiST build

[Harvick]

You're right the curves were much better with the Cobb tune.

Stock: 163whp and 204ft-lb
Cobb Stage 1: 173whp and 247ft-lb

Overall that's really good results from Cobb's standpoint.

 

[rooSTer]

Excellent update pelotonracer2, thanks for posting your exhaust pics, hopefully video is coming soon? hehe

On the cobb tune results any idea what other adjustments were made aside from raising the redline? As others have said I'm a little disappointed but more with the stock results than the cobb tune. I would love to see retest on a Dynojet haha.

 

[pelotonracer2]

Excellent update pelotonracer2, thanks for posting your exhaust pics, hopefully video is coming soon? hehe

On the cobb tune results any idea what other adjustments were made aside from raising the redline? As others have said I'm a little disappointed but more with the stock results than the cobb tune. I would love to see retest on a Dynojet haha.

The Boost logic strategy of the Cobb map is MUCH improved over stock (more boost lower in the power band is blatantly obvious, not only on the dyno but also translating directly to the road and driving experience). Boost taper down (as rpm increases) is also less, so that is why there is an almost 30 hp difference at 6300 rpm. Timing curves are also more aggressive, especially on the 93 map. They have also leaned out the fuel during full warm up operation (which explains why I am getting better fuel economy). I will retest on a Dynojet ASAP, as well as take the car back to Cobb to test the exhaust system against my baseline to see if there is an immediate difference in power (sure the heck feels like it!!!)

 

[rodmoe]

Great work would love to hear some sound bite from the new exhaust inside and out.. do you think you can do away with the sound maker thingy ported into the interior of the car??
Did you happen to weigh the new exhaust vs the old ?

And

I found these floating around the Net Friday Jan 17 Cobb had posted they looked like yours ..

Stock

91 Octane

93 Octane

Best of all Three Runs

Let me know if these are yours I can give you copies and if not i can get them out of here

 

[pelotonracer2]

yep, that's my "stock" 182 hp @ the flywheel Fiesta ST (and tuned flywheel 192 hp). Those are pretty lame horsepower numbers...

The 93 tuned torque numbers are quite good though. Overall I was a bit disappointed, especially since Braden says Cobb Plano doesn't use correction. Uncorrected numbers are almost always higher than corrected, especially on a cold dry day.

I will have to take my car and have it dyno'd on a Dynojet (with correction and input factors known before the test) just for comparison. I'm not quite ready to believe my car makes 15 hp less than what Ford advertises (182 hp v.s. 197 hp). If anything, most dyno tests I have seen puts the flywheel rating closer to 200-204 hp, stock (maybe Ford under states the true power just a hair and for insurance purposes rates it below 200 hp).

 

[stuntdoogie]

I thought Fords advertised power was at the crank like every other manufacturer does.

 

[pelotonracer2]

I thought Fords advertised power was at the crank like every other manufacturer does.

They do. If you take my wheel horsepower numbers, add 12% for driveline loss, you can calculate flywheel horsepower. So...

163 x 0.12 = 182 (flywheel horsepower)

203 x 0.12 = 227 (flywheel torque)

and then with the 93 Cobb map:

172 x 0.12 = 192 (flywheel horsepower)

247 x 0.12 = 276 (flywheel torque)

If a stock flywheel rating of 197 SAE (peak) horsepower is the "target" then you would need to put down between 173-174 hp to the wheels, given an 11-13% driveline loss. Those would need to be SAE corrected numbers, NOT uncorrected. If my @ the wheel results are uncorrected numbers, the horsepower would actually be less than stated in the dyno graph (typical correction for a chassis dyno is 0.96 to 1.0) which would put my car below 160 hp at the wheels and less than 180 hp flywheel. That just doesn't sound right to me, hence my disappointment.

 

[ileftthestoveon]

I thought Fords advertised power was at the crank like every other manufacturer does.

They do. the flywheel bolts directly to the crank. HP at the flywheel is the same as at the crank.

 

[stuntdoogie]

They do. the flywheel bolts directly to the crank. HP at the flywheel is the same as at the crank.

Duh....thanks!

 

[pelotonracer2]

The saving grace here is that no two dynos will put out the same numbers. In my experience (and I have quite a lot), Mustang Dyno's almost always put out lower numbers than a Dynojet (like a 248E for instance) given using the right correction and smoothing input. I know this because out of the 50 cars I've owned since 1986, every one of them I have dyno'd on both units have put out less power on a Mustang Dyno and more on a Dynojet. So I'm not ready to pull my hair out quite yet. lol

 

[pelotonracer2]

They do. the flywheel bolts directly to the crank. HP at the flywheel is the same as at the crank.

Yep, within 1-2% anyways. The added weight of the flywheel can zap some power too. That's why a lighter flywheel equates to better acceleration (less reciprocal mass). Drivetrain or driveline loss is the result of flywheel power being applied through the transmission, (and driveshaft if equipped), transaxle, bearings, brake pads "scraping" rotors and even the wheels/tires themselves.

 

[STooge]

I am relativley unknowledable on dyno info however, is it possible altitude played a factor?
As you say these other videos might be on different dynos but there are a lot of videos out there with the Fiesta ST putting down over 170 hp to the wheels stock and 215 lb/ft tq.

[video=youtube;pQcDw37ZO8s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQcDw37ZO8s&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
[video=youtube;XaOuBXSD12Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaOuBXSD12Q&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
[video=youtube;VPPo1v1as3g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VPPo1v1as3g[/video]

As I said, I have little knowledge of Dynos, I am just curious to find out why these other numbers seem so high in comparison to yours.

Overall, you seem very happy with your results thus far. Happy for you. Keep up the good work and can't wait to see this evolve over time, it looks like its headed for a good time.

 

[pelotonracer2]

Nope, altitude is not a factor. I am at 350 feet elevation.

Yesterday was a near perfect day to do a dyno test too as far as weather variables. Less than 50 degrees at time of test, high barometric pressure, low humidity. I think the common denominator here is that all the above tests were performed on Dynojets and mine was performed on a Mustang Dyno.

 

[STooge]

Yeah, that would make sense then. I am eager to see then what you put down on a Dynojet. Keep it goin peloton

 

[rodmoe]

I Want to hear that exhaust !!

 

[pelotonracer2]

I Want to hear that exhaust !!

Soon my man, soon... lol

 

[pelotonracer2]

STooge wrote: "Overall, you seem very happy with your results thus far. Happy for you. Keep up the good work and can't wait to see this evolve over time, it looks like its headed for a good time."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm happy with the Cobb tune yes, not happy with my baseline. 163 hp is pathetic... 172 hp is even on the lower spectrum for a stock FiST (and that's my tuned number). I'll just take it to a different dyno just for smiles, but will continue to use Cobbs dyno to verify performance as I add mods.

 

[pelotonracer2]

The FSWERKs intake will be installed and dyno'd sometime next week. It is supposed to arrive on Monday. Cobb opens Tuesday, will try to get the dyno time Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday morning if they have an opening.

 

[ileftthestoveon]

Lookin foreword to some numbers!

 

[MKVIIST]

The FSWERKs intake will be installed and dyno'd sometime next week. It is supposed to arrive on Monday. Cobb opens Tuesday, will try to get the dyno time Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday morning if they have an opening.

Glad you're going back to Cobb for the dyno to keep things consistent.

So will you be doing a dyno run with the exhaust + tune and then another one for exhaust + intake + tune?