LLama

Of course. It's tuned now... moves along for 6,000lbs. You don't remember willie, he was before your time on here. Anyhow, he's bought in with sniper and become a hero to mustang people. The sniper software is really amazing, and he's put a lot of time/work into learning the ins and outs of tuning... this guy spent 6+ hours a day reading and dealing with the guys that started sniper for 6 months straight. These 2 guys at sniper had something to do with starting 2 or 3 other companies, superchips was one IIRC. Willie gets praised by everyone that deals with him. Unfortunately, sniper only works on fords right now... but I think GM stuff is being released within the next couple of months. Honda in 2009 sometime maybe. I hope it's as good as the ford software... shit kicks ass. If you have the sniper software, he has partnered with dynojet at SML and the rate is $150/hr for custom dyno-tuning... not bad at all. He has a good setup as is though, wideband, datalogging, etc and has done some huge improvements for people by doing "Street tuning"...

http://mach1registry.org/forums/showthread.php?t=77466

http://www.mach1registry.org/forums/...per#post811937

http://forums.stangnet.com/showthread.php?t=742726

Edit: for anyone interested in his services, his website: www.dirtydirtyracing.com

Last tank I got 17.5 on 93 octane. The stock tires in standard are about 31.6x10.4 and I'm going 34.4x12.4. With the 3.73's, I think the offset of having a better gear ratio on the highway vs the added rotational weight will nearly even each other out... I guess we'll see soon. As far as the heads, cams, etc, more properly tuned power = better mpg.

VanillaThrilla

Everything you said makes sense in restrospect, but I disagree about more properly tuned power creating better gas mileage. Well, not so much disagreeing with the simple fact, but I would also assume that having more power readily available would potentially cause you to lose gas mileage when you get an itch in the bottom of your right foot

LLama

Well there's a threshold and obviously other factors, most notable, driving style of me in this suv vs people driving the crap out of their cars racing...

My weakest link (right now) is cruising speed rpms. I tach 1750 rpms @ 60mph, and 1900 rpms @ 65mph. On a flat roadway, taching lower due to the gear ratio change of the tires will help fuel economy, however, the added rotational weight of the tires, and worse aerodynamics of the lift will hurt.

Now, around here where it's hilly as hell, when climbing hills, there will be more of a load on the motor, thus burning more gas. Better heads/cams will improve fuel efficiency in this case because I'm making more torque at all times which results in having to give it less gas-pedal at any given time to compensate for any strain. Just a random fact... my exp has seen little to no towing it's entire life, but last summer my friend towed his 22ft boat/trailer to SML. I estimated it got about 15mpg pulling that so I don't think the tires will kill it too much and they'll help tach lower on the highway... but, as mentioned, the added rotational weight will add more of a load all the time... so i'll have to try it and see.

All heads/cams in the PI motors-mustangs, expeditions, trucks, whatever, are the same. What makes the powerband different is the intake manifold, which will be geared more towards torque than mid-high power such as the mustang one.

I may be dead wrong and get 10mpg... but if I hadn't researched this and didn't think my findings were valid... I wouldn't be doing it. Like I said, we'll see. If I'm wrong, fuck it... it'll still be fun.

Heiss M3

Well today is a crappy day for a cruise. I think we'll just push it back till next sunday

bluesrt2004

Sounds good,its drying up over here but still cloudy.Would yall want to ride out to the dam next weekend?its a longer cruise and a change of scenery...Just an idea?

IM A JOKE

Fuck the cruise.