93 octane and HP/TQ numbers

[geophb]

Those torque numbers seem a little off for only having a a tune and exhaust. What shop did you take it to?

I know the 5* 93 performance tune is good for 75hp and 92 tq on its own. But I have never seen an exhaust and K&N drop in produce that much additional hp/tq on top of that. Typically a full exhaust is good for around 10% additional hp/tq and a K&N is negligible with at best 5-6 hp to the crank. So by those numbers that exhaust is producing an additional 180 +/- torque. I want to say there's one of three possibilities here. A, their dyno is off. B, Ford under reported the actual numbers for the Ranger. Or C, if accurate that's an insane increase and the factory exhaust is incredibly restrictive.

Im betting possibility A.
Dynos are great in showing power differences between runs (as comparison). The actual numbers are more or less meaningless. An uncalibrated dyno can show you any number you want.

Sponsored

 

[Porpoise Hork]

Im betting possibility A.
Dynos are great in showing power differences between runs (as comparison). The actual numbers are more or less meaningless. An uncalibrated dyno can show you any number you want.

Agreed. Having a baseline run with little to no upgrades on it, then adding the mods to it would be a much better way to determine what gains the upgrades have actually produced. Either way the numbers he got are still quite impressive.

I am curious where he took it, cause if close I may try to swing by there to see what mine produces with the same tune but mostly stock exhaust.

 

[Wbflyer]

Holy Sh#t. How the hell does that 2.3 make that much power without a mushroom cloud???

 

[HTX1811]

I thought it was high. I have the SPD hi flow cat downpipe as well. They did my 2018 5.0 and 2017 GT350 on the same dyno within the last two years. Those numbers were spot on where one would think so I don't know.

This was at 98 degrees in Houston with high humidity as well.

I do know the truck will run like a rapped ape so it definitely has more power.

HP Motorsports in Katy, TX.

 

[thellamafarm]

The highflow cat down pipe will do that.

 

[benandluna]

Even stock I’m very impressed with the pull on these trucks. I was a little worried how weak the truck might feel compared to my x3m40 which was a tuned i6 turbo. Definitely looking to tune this engine next year.
I test drove a 4 cylinder Tacoma and wow was it so sad. Even the v6 didn’t pull much. The truck felt heavy compared to my new ranger. Love it.

 

[canyonslicker]

Great so living in CA now I have to mortgage my house and take a second on my truck for a fill up…

Thanks ?

 

[HTX1811]

Great so living in CA now I have to mortgage my house and take a second on my truck for a fill up…

Thanks ?

Cali. The land of fruits and nuts. You get what you vote for I suppose. Or what the masses vote for.

 

[Racket]

[insert pitch for the Alternative Fueling Station Locator] - if you can find E30 it's relatively affordable and 94 octane. I've found it to not hurt mileage and provide noticeable power. For the extra money that is and less than 10% 93 octane.

 

[Doc]

93 unleashed tune stock (muffler delete)

 

[LowKeyTremor]

https://www.tfltruck.com/2019/01/20...power-numbers-on-93-octane-fuel-dyno-results/

Since that would be highly misleading, unethical, and I imagine to the point where it’s flat out illegal - I didn’t need a source to tell me that was not the case.

Now if I had realized that, and nothing heavy had been done, I might short the stock and just wait till the avoidable material hits the fan

anyways, you’d have to ask yourself why they would do that. There’s really no good reason, other than achieving better numbers, while misleading people into thinking they are getting these performance figures while putting in the recommended 87 octane. Just kind of saying it out loud, it shows me anyways that it is highly highly unlikely!

EPA, CARB, etc., although a bunch of nobody’s with too much say/power than deserved, they would be at the last one/group that I would want aggressively coming at me!

Of course, this is just my speculation, but based on what happened to VW, anything like that, whether it be miles per gallon, or whatever, is pretty much a good way to pay one heck of a fine, followed by some sort of compensation or a fix.

Am I the only one who feels this way?

 

[Loweredon33s]

Dyno done.
+155 crank HP and + 274 crank tq compared to factory published numbers.
320 hp at the wheel and 438 tq at the wheel.

What gear was that pull made in? The torque is unusually high for the horsepower. Usually those numbers are much closer together on our trucks especially when you don’t have a bunch of other modifications.

 

[JohnnyO]

Great so living in CA now I have to mortgage my house and take a second on my truck for a fill up…

Thanks ?

Cali. The land of fruits and nuts. You get what you vote for I suppose. Or what the masses vote for.

I ran several tanks of everything and tracked the mpg. It was slightly better with 89 over 87, enough that the extra cost is a wash. Most locations of the chain where I get my gas have E15 88 which costs less than 87, so I normally get that and if I can't then I get 89. Saw no difference in mpg running 93 but mine is a stock tune.

Sponsored