Scanguage HP & TQ - Post your results! - Page 2 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech General discussion of 4.0L OHV and SOHC V6 Ford Ranger engines.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #26  
Old 01-12-2008
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin1
wait a minute, so the horsepower #'s aren't going to be accurate?
man that's what I just ordered it for...
he means its not very accurate REAR WHEEL horsepower

its gonna be different on every truck, there are a bunch of variables for this

but for normal driving around, aka not flooring it, the hp reading is pretty accurate crank horsepower
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-12-2008
Austin1's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Athens, Ohio
Posts: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Werty
he means its not very accurate REAR WHEEL horsepower

its gonna be different on every truck, there are a bunch of variables for this

but for normal driving around, aka not flooring it, the hp reading is pretty accurate crank horsepower
ah, it all makes sense now, thanks wert
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-13-2008
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin1
^^ ditto, not too shabby at all....
What performance/engine mods do you have Zach?
I'm assuming on a 4.0 sohc. On another note I was just wondering what are sohc's rated stock from the factory? 170-180ish flywheel?

207 i think

i have headers, intake, exhaust, tuner, and efan.. basic stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-14-2008
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE, Mi
Posts: 2,342
I can't speak for the company. However I know there is a parameter called "torque into Convertor".

I can only assume they take this input and then do the math and display it live?

The next time I data log with my sct I'll compair the two TQ numbers and HP numbers and see how they compair.

Rich
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-27-2008
Austin1's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Athens, Ohio
Posts: 359
Okay, just put mine in last week...my review, ITS AWESOME!!!
did a hp and tq run made 240 hp and 267 ft. ibs of tq.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 01-27-2008
karrbass4life's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 3,072
Nice I want one of these now. But so i can see the depressing MPG figure.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-28-2008
got-dirty's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sliding in the skreets
Posts: 3,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin1 View Post
Okay, just put mine in last week...my review, ITS AWESOME!!!
did a hp and tq run made 240 hp and 267 ft. ibs of tq.

go to a dyno and get the real numbers. i put that down to the ground in my taco, but my scangauge says 304hp on mine.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-28-2008
04Sonicedge's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 529
I had my truck dyno tuned and to the rear wheels my truck WITH a blower is only making a little more than the scan guage is reading for you all with minor mods to no mods.. Not very accurate at all.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-28-2008
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 886
Yea no way u guys are making that much, a Supercharged Ranger puts down like 270-280HP, no way you guys put down 240 with an intake and cat back. My truck put down maybe 240 to the crank with my mods on a good day.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-28-2008
Austin1's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Athens, Ohio
Posts: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04Sonicedge View Post
I had my truck dyno tuned and to the rear wheels my truck WITH a blower is only making a little more than the scan guage is reading for you all with minor mods to no mods.. Not very accurate at all.
Well, wouldn't there be a difference b/c your measuring rwhp and the scanguage measure crank hp?
Your right nothing is going to be more precise than a dynotune, I'm just telling what mine said.
If the 4.0's are rated at 207 hp (I would guess crank) then an intake and cat-back would add to that, so it would probably be close atleast correct?
I'd take a picture but i really don't want to take a picture at WOT......might wreck lol

Last edited by Austin1; 01-28-2008 at 09:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-28-2008
graniteguy's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,221
Whether the baseline is accurate or not is almost irrelevant. It's a fixed starting point. The baseline should give a reasonable measurement for performance mods you add to your truck. In a sense it helps you weed out the BS mods that do nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-29-2008
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE, Mi
Posts: 2,342
Wayne is correct. It's reading may or may not be "true". But it really does'nt matter for this thread. What matters is that we are all using the same tool on the same engine/pcm. Yeah it's not scientific.. but it's not a bad or inconsistant way to compare one ranger against another out on a public forum.

btw, so far I've been playing with fuel mixes and timing. So far I've been able to get 258HP and 262TQ. Most base fuels (93 oct) will limit my timing and power readings. 22-24deg & 240hp at 5000+ rpms seems to be the norm. On 94sunoco I can get to 27deg and 256HP nearly everytime.

It's been interesting to see what brands of fuel allow for increased timing.
94 sunoco has been the best and shell 93 seems to be 2nd. Worst has been 92 speedway.

Also, I've been playing with acetone. (have for years on different cars) It does make a difference with the proper base fuel and balance of timing and a/f settings.

Rich

Last edited by wydopnthrtl; 01-29-2008 at 11:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-29-2008
greygooseranger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 3,293
Very interesting... :)
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-06-2008
HarryTasker's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by NicksterSVT View Post
11hp 24lb ft of torque

lol
per inch of driveshaft
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 06-03-2008
SparkYZ's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Granada Hills, CA
Posts: 679
I hit 228hp at WOT on the freeway...

I dont see how that can be right, all I have is a Gibson cat back.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 06-04-2008
got-dirty's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sliding in the skreets
Posts: 3,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkYZ View Post
I hit 228hp at WOT on the freeway...

I dont see how that can be right, all I have is a Gibson cat back.
your right its not. its maybe, but probably not even crank hp.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-04-2008
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE, Mi
Posts: 2,342
It's a calculation based off of "TQ into convertor" Power measured in this way depends on many variables. IMO the most reasonable way is to make a 3rd gear pull from off idle up to 5600 rpms. These are the numbers I post..

I had not read this parameter in quite a while. Just by chance I happened to this morning on the way in! I hit 243hp at 5400-5500 rpms. (DA was 1145ft Here is a link for DA )

Even though it may not be the same number as a engine dyno. It is a way that we can compare one truck to another in a reasonably consistant manner.

Rich

Last edited by wydopnthrtl; 06-04-2008 at 10:19 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-05-2008
poor_boy_custom's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: LAREDO, TX
Posts: 101
145 Hp & 154 Ctq On My 3.0 Automatic,

Someone Get A Dyno And Then Compare With The Gauge Please

Last edited by poor_boy_custom; 06-05-2008 at 07:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-05-2008
Melt's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,392
they are still 149 free shipping on http://www.stuffforyourranger.com/

if im gonna spend that kind of money on an electronic accessory for my truck, its gonna be a gps.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-06-2008
vansnxtweek's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,666
Man my dern horsepower aint gotten any higher than 180 lol
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-25-2008
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
little bump required.

pulled 336 peak HP today
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-25-2008
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE, Mi
Posts: 2,342
Cool!!

For some strange reason mine seems to remain at the 240-250 area even when spraying? The TQ will climb a little.. but the HP won't? Oh well.. I have timeslips that prove I'm puttin down a few extra ponies.

EDIT: Just went out. On my 87 octane tune pushing 16degrees of timing I got 240hp at 5100 to 5500




Rich

Last edited by wydopnthrtl; 10-25-2008 at 02:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10-25-2008
trucks423's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by zabeard View Post
little bump required.

pulled 336 peak HP today
nice!
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-25-2008
GrafixGuy's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 8,703
when are you guys getting the reading? at top speed?
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-25-2008
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE, Mi
Posts: 2,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by 07SPORT View Post
when are you guys getting the reading? at top speed?
Max HP on a stock longblock would occur in the 5000+ area. Max TQ will be best seen in 3rd right after the TQ convertor locks up. (manually putting it in 2nd = 3rd in reality)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Those with scanguage's I need your help Sonic04Edge General Ford Ranger Discussion 7 04-10-2010 05:26 PM
K&N 63-1108 measured results wydopnthrtl 4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech 11 11-13-2006 08:01 AM
04 4.0 k&n 77 series results afi_pilot85 4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech 14 09-18-2005 09:17 PM
Two years of 1 year oil changes with Amsoil: Test Results (big scan of lab results) n3elz Ranger Products, Company, & Member Reviews 22 06-02-2005 08:53 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:19 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.