[cellsafemode]

I find dyno numbers to be believable in the sense that you can't really take absolute numbers from a dyno serious as a cross-comparison to other dynos.

So if it says 290, meh... maybe it said 290. like mentioned before, dynos are only good for self comparisons. The fact that it said 290 and not 260 when someone else's numbers showed 260 for similar changes shouldn't matter to you.

Dyno's aren't comparable to eachother because they aren't calibrated to a standard by a trusted third party.

[Dustya]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

I find dyno numbers to be believable in the sense that you can't really take absolute numbers from a dyno serious as a cross-comparison to other dynos.

So if it says 290, meh... maybe it said 290. like mentioned before, dynos are only good for self comparisons. The fact that it said 290 and not 260 when someone else's numbers showed 260 for similar changes shouldn't matter to you.

Dyno's aren't comparable to eachother because they aren't calibrated to a standard by a trusted third party.

Thats why I said you want to look at everything on a percentage base.. You can use % for a rough idea of the gains you would see. Even if one dyno shows 290 then shows 319 after tune for a gain of 10% horsepower One could easily say if you dyno your car at 240 you would see similar 10% in horsepower gains.

Its so much better if they just claim a % value in increase over a dyno number as all dynos are different.

Dyno's are good for tuning getting things dialed in right making sure your AFR are right no knock timing etc... But there are so many people out there that use dyno numbers as a dick measuring contest.

This is another reason I do not believe their numbers.

[GhostEye07]

On a Mustang Dyno tune with E85/Intake/2nd Cat Delete my HP was 295 RWHP.

[Dustya]

Originally Posted by GhostEye07

On a Mustang Dyno tune with E85/Intake/2nd Cat Delete my HP was 295 RWHP.

What was your base before all that do you remember ?

[KMPrenger]

Guys...IPF is the real deal. Not one of the bigger names, but I trust them. Why? B/c back in the earlier 5th gen days, when tunes were coming out for the LLT V6 (10 and 11 model year) before the LFX, IPF was one of the first to get decent gains and were verified multiple times via owners getting their cars dyno'd before and after. Other tuners were not getting those kind of results.

I personally had an IPF tune on my 2010 Camaro V6 and there was no doubt...no question the car ran stronger. It especially woke up in low end TQ and throttle response. It made the car more exciting to drive.

But it was also one of the more expensive tuning options, and it appears it is again in this case.

Once the LFX came along, it was easier to tune, and so other more common tuning options came along and IPF kind of fell off the map a bit on the forums, but they still offered tunes for it.

Originally Posted by Camarolover85

Headers huh? Interesting. I called them and they're calling me back. I told them "Headers don't exist you know that right?"

I'm sure the guys that do the tuning know what they are talking about. Its more likely that they are thinking of simply a cat delete as a header, instead of a true header. Whoever put up the page description didn't get it correct. It would be nice it they'd fix that.

But this is what makes IPF also a bit more unique than other standard canned tunes. They offer a stock tune, which they will recommend for you if you are at or near stock. But if you are someone that has done all the basic bolt ons/deletes, then they have this modded tune which was developed just for you to get the best results.

I don't know if the same tuner is there (guy by the name of Arno is who I worked with on my tune) but he was very helpful with me and I appreciated him for it.

In the end, while the description is kind of wrong, the crank numbers they are posting, I think are mostly believable. rwhp numbers are debatable, but then again, that's all dependent on what dyno was used.

[Camarolover85]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

Guys...IPF is the real deal. Not one of the bigger names, but I trust them. Why? B/c back in the earlier 5th gen days, when tunes were coming out for the LLT V6 (10 and 11 model year) before the LFX, IPF was one of the first to get decent gains and were verified multiple times via owners getting their cars dyno'd before and after. Other tuners were not getting those kind of results.

I personally had an IPF tune on my 2010 Camaro V6 and there was no doubt...no question the car ran stronger. It especially woke up in low end TQ and throttle response. It made the car more exciting to drive.

But it was also one of the more expensive tuning options, and it appears it is again in this case.

Once the LFX came along, it was easier to tune, and so other more common tuning options came along and IPF kind of fell off the map a bit on the forums, but they still offered tunes for it.



I'm sure the guys that do the tuning know what they are talking about. Its more likely that they are thinking of simply a cat delete as a header, instead of a true header. Whoever put up the page description didn't get it correct. It would be nice it they'd fix that.

But this is what makes IPF also a bit more unique than other standard canned tunes. They offer a stock tune, which they will recommend for you if you are at or near stock. But if you are someone that has done all the basic bolt ons/deletes, then they have this modded tune which was developed just for you to get the best results.

I don't know if the same tuner is there (guy by the name of Arno is who I worked with on my tune) but he was very helpful with me and I appreciated him for it.

In the end, while the description is kind of wrong, the crank numbers they are posting, I think are mostly believable. rwhp numbers are debatable, but then again, that's all dependent on what dyno was used.

Deleting a cat isn't a header, especially when it says "cat delete" after headers. Either way, It's not a big deal, I just thought it was weird and I wanted clarification as to what they were referencing or if it was just an oversight by a nerdy intern. But, they never called me back as promised so I'm pretty strong in my belief that if you can't return a simple phone call you don't get my business. I don't think the numbers are unbelievable by any means but I'm not deleting my cats for a tune. I'm sure it would run better but I don't think I'd pay $700 for the right, that's just high.

[WhiteLightening]

If you ever get a call back from them let me know! I'm curious!

[WhiteLightening]

Has anyone heard anything about the claims this company makes? Any contact with the company?

[Camarolover85]

Nothing here.