SouthFL.02.SS

Ok, I had the cam put in about 3 weeks ago. I wasn't planning on getting a tune, but I had some drivability issues with the A/C on, plus had some surging at idle, so I decide to go for a full dyno tune w/ Edit.

389 RWHP @ 6000
378 RWTQ @ 5000

This was on a Mustang Dynamometer(that's what the printout sheet says on its header), so how do I adjust these figures? Mods below.

PacerX

iTrader: (4)

Adjust them up.

You're over 400rwhp on a Dynojet.

SouthFL.02.SS

Woohoo!

SouthFL.02.SS

Oh yeah, we put the stock MAF back on before the pulls. Anyone want a GMS MAF? I can always use it as a paperweight.

ssfiress

how do you like that C1 south fl? does it have a choppy or smooth idle? i was thinking about the T1 but ive heard good things about the C1.

Slowverado

south, did you buy that C1 from me?

Inspector12

iTrader: (29)

I'm a C2 man myself I like the choppy idle! The C1 has a smoother idle specs are as follows.
C1-222/222 566/566 112cl
C2-224/224 581/581 112cl
They are getting simular numbers out of both but the C2 is a tad more aggresive and has a choppier idle! I've herd both and there both nice sounding I give the edge to the C2 in the sound department.

SouthFL.02.SS

After the tune;
with A/C on - smooth (cause the revs are 100 higher)
with A/C off - nice, subtle choppy lope.

Love the cam! Would have gone a little bigger if I would have known the tune was in order. But the cam pulls hard, and works great with the 4.10's.

SouthFL.02.SS

Why yes I did! What's up! As you can see already, havin' some fun over here.

Inspector, it's .566/.566 for the C1, I like the C2 also.

Bill00Formula

iTrader: (4)

Congrats! I have C1 cam w/ stage II heads. Where did you get dyno tuned? Breathless? Did you pick up hp? I had mine tuned by someone about a year ago that hadn't done too many LS1s at that time. Didn't address the idle at all so I have the hunting for idle issues. You going to take it to the track?

Bill

SouthFL.02.SS

Yes, Breathless.
As for the speculation of adjusting the numbers higher due to the Mustang Dyno, I asked the tuner if these numbers were already adjusted and he said they were. I'm happy with these figures! (afterall 400+rwhp is pushing it for my mods.) Seat of pants confirms hp increase, as power delivery is smooth and fluid, the torque curve is a plateau from 2500 to 5200, where it slowly tapers off. I'm gonna try to go to Moroso on the 9th, but without drag radials, I'm not gonna to too well.

Jabroni

Careful, the C1 is 222/222 .566/.566 on a 112, not .582 lift.

Slowverado

congrats man, i'm so glad you like it...and very happy to see those good numbers, since i'm dealing with a bigger motor and bigger cam i am optimistic on what numbers i should make now.

AINT SKEERED

iTrader: (2)

I have the c1 hammer cam and love it. A great little sleeper cam. I dyno'd 389 hp and 382 tq but the motor only had 400 miles on fresh rebuild and since then put a ported tb and asp pully. But also put in a 12 bolt.
What this cam looses on top in has it down low for the street. I can leave at a lower rpm and still come out screaming and my graph , hp does not really fall all the way to 6700 rpms. tq peak is lower than my stock motor stock peaked at 4400 and the hammer peaked at 4200 rpms but held strong past 5000.

enjoy the little cam

Inspector12

iTrader: (29)

Yes you guy's are to good to get a mistake past ya'll. My friend just got his C1 cam and I posted the wrong specs, but I corrected it. Thanks for the correction guys I was at work when posting and I've looked at so many different cam specs I was on overload 222/224/230/237/240/566/567/581/605
ETC...

BigTex

iTrader: (16)

Matt, I tried to tell you that cam would be a good shoice.

Inspector12

iTrader: (29)

Alright I found out why I posted the wrong lift on that C1 earlier. The friend that purchaced a C1 from MTI pulled the card out and it said 222/222 582/582 112. Now I know that is wrong but the box says C1 on it I guess he got the wrong cam in the box. So just make sure you check your part numbers against the numbers on the cam cause he/we could have made a mistake if I hadn't read this post we may have never thought twice about it until it was in. Just a little food for thought!

EdmontonSS

I had a recent magazine article that spelled out the difference between dynojet and mustang dyno's. Even tho the mustang dyno operator says the numbers are corrected they are corrected to SAE, not "dynojet numbers". Dynojet numbers are no more accurate than any others, just different. The dynojet has a single load (the weight of the roller) it places on your drivetrain, so your engine may be making 420 hp with a light load, however on a mustang dyno the weight of your car should be taken into consideration, and the mustang uses some "intertial damper" that simulated the actual load on the cars drivetrian during an all out race. The mustang numbers are always lower with our cars because our cars put a heavier load on the drivetrain than the dynojet does (all this due to the weight of our cars). Although the amount of the load shouldn't change your engine output, the heavier load creates more losses in the rear-end and tranny... from what i understand. I am going to do my best to find a Mustang dyno to use from beginning to end on my car and keep accurate weight measurments as well. Hopefully this will alllow to identify tranny and rearend problems as weel as act as a tuning tool I believe the Mustang dyno does a far better job of measuring "road horsepower" as opposed to "dyno roller horsepower" (flame suit on, i know dynojet are popular around here!)