Hey guys, wanted to show a few pics and some info regarding my 2016 Jag F Type R (AWD) white/black with black package, lidar detector (Laser Blinder ). I wanted to thank Adam at AA Customs in Plain City, OH (Accent Addict Customs), for doing such an amazing job with the super clean install including my hardwired V1.

For the HP and TQ junkies out there, after racking up 107 miles I figured the stock 550HP and 502lb/ft of torque wasn’t enough. After looking around I found V-Max Motorsports out of CA. VMax Motorsports on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/VMax-Motors...0767/timeline/), website coming soon at www.vmaxtuning.com.

After speaking extensively with them I found them to be extremely knowledgeable, which made me comfortable enough to decide to go with their ECU tune (they OBD flash our cars) and 1.8psi supercharger pulley.
Two days later one of their loaner “slave” OBD flashing tools and a laptop with the tools software loaded on it arrived at my door via UPS Overnight (I was told UPS already came the day I called or it would have come in one day). It was like Christmas Eve because I was already booked on the dyno for the following day.

I blocked off 4hrs but the tuning process is very fast, you don’t need nearly that much time. The “read” portion of the tuning process took about 15 minutes. I then simply emailed the “file” to VMax who immediately remapped it (20 minutes waiting) and emailed it back. I then used their tool to “write” the remapped file onto the ECU which took about 5 minutes and that’s all she wrote. Tuned!

After I was done with the tool and laptop I reused the box they sent it to me in and UPS’d it back to VMax using the RMA return shipping label they included in the box when it arrived. Could not be easier and the best part, no down time or having to pull the ECU and risk shipping it!

First we dyno’d the car stock (AWD DynoJet Dyno) and it made 442awhp/418awtq STD on 93 octane pump gas. Using the factory 550HP and 502lb/ft ratings I came up with a drivetrain loss factor of .80 meaning divide the awhp and awtq numbers by .80 to get crank numbers. For example 550HP Crank x .80 = 440awhp (not quite 442awhp but close enough).

With ECU Tune Only my car made 513awhp and 489awtq STD! Gains of 71awhp/71awtq STD. Crank gains using the DT loss factor above (.80) equated to: 89HP and 89lb/ft STD and brought the car up to 641HP/611lb/ft STD at the crank!

Then the 1.8psi pulley went on that night and the next day we made 540awhp/511awtq STD. Are you sitting down? That translates into a SICK 675HP/639lb/ft STD at the crank!!

After talking with numerous tuners of awd vehicles they all say minimum DT loss for an AWD vehicle making the kind of torque we are is 22%-25% due to the heavy driveline components needed to handle that torque and also because of my steel rotors and our big and heavy 20” wheels and tires. Meaning the factory 550HP/502lb/ft rating is underrated!! Also those with ceramic brakes will pick up another 8-10awhp and awtq due to the lower unsprung reciprocating mass vs steelies!
Using 22% (the minimal factor listed above meaning divide the wheel numbers by .7 and taking the baseline readings we can calculate that our rides are making 571HP/568lb/ft SAE at the crank stock! Thanks Jaguar!!!

With VMax ECU Tune Only, or what they call S1: 658HP/627lb/ft STD at the crank.
With ECU Tune and Pulley, or what they call S2: 692HP/655lb/ft STD at the crank on straight Shell 93 octane!!! I was told if I was to choose to run race gas (ie 100+ octane) the ECU would automatically adapt and I’d pick up another 10-15HP and TQ with no other changes meaning we can crack 700hp at the crank and still be emissions legal.

Dyno graph showing stock, ECU Tune Only (S1) and then with ECU Tune and Pulley (S2) attached. Apologies for the stock run being so short, dynoing these beasts is a tricky endeavor. You have to use a “linked” Dyno and then roll into the throttle (not “stab”) which neither I nor the dyno operator knew when we made the stock pulls. The good news is we captured enough of the powerband to get the peak numbers, although gains were huge from the beginning to the end of the pulls. We gained over 100awhp at 6000rpm with pulley and tune, 536awhp vs 430awhp stock. The dyno operator says he’s sure I gained over 110awhp at lower rpms as well.

The tuning works on all Jag and Range Rover AJ Series III V8s (5.0L Supercharged) even the RWD Jags and RR Sport Supercharged models from 2011+. Those with rwd cars will make higher numbers with lower drivetrain loss but are going to have serious traction problems LOL! Also and just as important I’ve had no issues and as promised no check engine light or other issues. She’s as solid as a rock!

Vmax told me their tune doesn’t trigger the “ECU flash counter” so I can always go back to stock without anyone including the dealer knowing.
Needless to say I’m thinking about doing some exhaust work, maybe decatting the car, maybe having VMax make some longtube headers with X pipe in an attempt to try and break or shatter the 700HP mark at the crank.

The car is now an absolute MONSTER on the road, these are not just dyno gains!!! Floorin it from any speed feels like taking off in an airplane when you just feel pushed into the seat, and it just doesn’t let up past 100mph. I can’t imagine trying to get this thing to hook using a RWD model, thanks to the AWD (Thank You Jaguar!) the car is just a point and shoot rocket! I’m going to borrow VMax’s V-Box and test 0-60mph, 0-100mph, 60-130mph, and 100-150mph in the next two weeks.

I’ll post those results here and on 6speedonline.com and dragtimes.com on their monster 60-130mph and 100-150mph lists. Their moderators verify that the runs were done correctly and not on too great of a decline so that there is a standardization between accepted results. Rest assured (400 great weather miles later) that there is no downside to tuning our cars or tuning with pulley to increase boost a minimal amount. Drivability is just like stock only the car is simply much much faster at all rpms in all gears. It’s the way they should have come from the factory. Needless to say I’m STOKED with my results and every time I drive my car—sometimes for hours after

Next up I’ve got some ADV1 track wheels and stickier tires coming and am waiting on a suspension lowering kit. For now I couldn’t ask for anything more from VMax. Amazing customer service, killer gains and performance which far exceeded what they said I would gain I might add. Nothing but thumbs ups to Frank and crew, Thank You!!!

 

wow, that's quit a gain. Looking forward to the vbox number. Better yet, take her to a drag strip. Because no offense to you, but I don't really trust dyno numbers. gotta see the time slip :-) but that's awesome if the gains are true. becareful, don't kill yourself hahaha

 

Awesome!! This is awesome, I'm looking forward to your vbox results. I've had a tune an pulley on my 2014 V8S and the 1/4...honestly...didn't improve dramatically. Either my tune is crap or it was too aggressive and wants higher octane OR the toque limiting ecu is pulling in the ropes early - because the car does feel quicker from say, 60-130. I need to vbox mine, as well.

I'm getting to the track Friday and gonna fill up with some 109 unleaded and see if anything happens.

Best,
Jay

 

Im very curious if you've already taken care of the O2 sensor reflash, and if not, I assume you know you will probably lose your tune when you do so...

If you'd be kind enough to PM me your cost for the tune, I'm also looking into tuning mine. These numbers look relatively similar to Eurotuned claims. I'm happy to see our cars responding well to tunes.

 

Jamesjaguar, great report! So how does your pulley/software upgrade compare to the Eurocharged pulley/software? I just installed Eurocharged but have not dyno'd it yet.

 

Email me an offer and lets get your car tuned ! (:





sales@eurocharged.com

Thanks,

 

Welcome to the forum jamesjaguar, that's a hell of a first post! When you get a moment stop by our new members area for a short introduction (shorter than this one!) New Member Area - Intro a MUST - Jaguar Forums - Jaguar Enthusiasts Forum

Impressive numbers for sure, but since this is the internet there'll be plenty of people trying to pick them apart. Myself included LOL

Well to be honest, these cars are actually rated 542HP, or 550PS. Seems that Jaguar USA got a little hyped with their numbers. Not that 8hp is a lot, but if you want to talk about numbers, let's use the right ones.

442awhp is low for these cars. 550PS rated cars (F-Type R, XKR-S, XFR-S) have dyno'd anywhere from 470 to 530rwhp stock. Maybe the AWD drivetrain loses a little more than the RWD, (have dyno'd a RWD F-Type and we came up with 15% or to be more exact, 73hp lost. I'd be more inclined to think of the loss in your driveline as ~100hp, rather than a % of the peak power.

Anyway, let's focus on the gains at the wheels, not extrapolate to the crank. The wheel numbers are impressive enough.

Impressive!

For your sake I certainly hope not. 700hp at the crank would be self-destruct levels for these engines. Anything over 650hp is going to be on borrowed time.

Not a chance. You'll have a DTC of P167F-00 code of "Non-OEM Calibration" stored in your PCM now. And it's pretty much un-erasable.

Your exhaust already has an x-pipe in it from the factory.

You should be, congratulations!

 

Let me be the second ;-)

Very impressive numbers!

Small question, I see that the SAE STD correction factor was selected, which isn't used anymore nowadays (it corrects somewhat higher pending on the temp). Could you ask for a printout with a CF for SAE NET or DIN?

 

Good call, but likewise, if we’re going to talk about numbers please check out my numbers to prove how underrated these cars are from the factory. I’d rather take a known drivetrain loss and apply it to a wheel number than assume the crank is on. Think about the new 6 cylinder turbo M3 and M4s rated at 425HP at the crank but actually making 475-485 crank HP. Even the guys at FCA are doing it with the Hellcats. Suckers making 630-650rwhp stock at a supposed 707HP at the crank! Insanity!!!
2016s were only supposed to gain 175lbs with the AWD but somehow a 3650lb car with rwd now tops out over 4000lbs? Not sure what’s up with that? I think a 2015 rwd F type R with the same mods would have a faster trap speed in the ¼ mile and the advantage over a 2016 at any speed at which the car can hook. Off the line however the 2016s would jump for sure. RWDs would definitely put down more power on the dyno due to the significantly less drivetrain loss.
Dynos vary from shop to shop and brand to brand. All I care about is what my car gained on the same dyno over a 36hr period with the same tank of gas with no other changes.


You’re comparing RWD drivetrain loss 18% front engine, automatic, rwd car to AWD drivetrain loss 22-25% industry standard. Apples to oranges. Agreed the wheel gains are what counts and as you said they speak for themselves. I haven’t seen anyone make the gains I have with a 2016 AWD with 400 miles on it. If you read the Car and Driver longterm test of the rwd 495HP F Type the 0-60 dropped .3 or .4 (sorry can’t remember exactly which) comparing new to 40,000 miles! Just like all cars this beast will loosen up with some more miles and get quicker. I can’t wait!
Thank You!

Where is the empirical data that proves 700hp with an AJ series III V8 is past what it can handle? Please link me to a blown engine and the explanation behind it as you are scaring me. What is the weak point specifically? Why do you say 650HP is safe?
I’ve had more than a handful of fast cars in my life running superchargers with less than optimal internals, not saying ours are bad, and never had an issue. Safety is all about the tuning, a forged piston will crack a ringland as quickly as cast piston if there is any detonation. The stock supercharger is capable of more than 700HP at the crank (Gen 7 TVS 1.7L) and is only huffing 13.4ish lbs of boost with the addition of the 1.8psi pulley.
I see no reason to be worried. I saw my AFs on the dyno before and after and Vmax sent me some data logs of engine ignition timing stock and with their tune along with IAT temps to show the blower wasn’t being overspun.

I’ll let Vmax handle this question. They are becoming sponsors on this site shortly.

Yes it does, coming off of very restrictive looking exhaust manifolds going to 2.5” tubing which is far too narrow for a near 700HP car. I’m thinking longtubes (1-7/8”) with 3” Xpipe back. If you’re going to do it, do it right It would also drop EGT and coolant temps.

Thank You! Vbox numbers coming next week due to Thanksgiving. I did make some test runs so far but cannot get launch control to work following every direction in the manual. Can anyone help? I ran 3.4 seconds uphill (.04% incline, not much but not flat or downhill at all) spinning until around 10mph till the front wheels started to get torque with no LC and on 21” ADV1s with 25 series sidewalls. That was my first ever attempt at logging 0-60mph in this car. The second try was on level ground and the 1-2 shift was much faster. Same dynamic mode and autoshifting sport for trans, but I spun like hell in first gear and ran 3.5 seconds. HELP!!!

I’ll do the full spectrum of runs then. 0-60, 0-100, 60-130, 100-150. 60-130 and 100-150 will be 6speedonline verified.

Someone else asked about SAE vs STD. I have both graphs, here’s the SAE. I guess I should have posted both. More and more tuners are using STD so that’s why I posted those. DIN reads higher than STD and is used in Europe.

 

This is really about my car and I wanted to keep this on topic. You can post sales about your product on a new thread. Thank you.

I'll post more pics of my wheels soon. Also, the springs are taking longer than expected because the car is AWD.

 

I have no doubt that many of the current Jaguar engines are underrated from the factory. I've seen several put out torque numbers way over the specification

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

I’d rather take a known drivetrain loss and apply it to a wheel number than assume the crank is on.

Has anyone else put an AWD F-Type on the dyno yet? I'd hardly call the losses for the AWD system on the Jags "known". Let's see some more to compare.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

Think about the new 6 cylinder turbo M3 and M4s rated at 425HP at the crank but actually making 475-485 crank HP. Even the guys at FCA are doing it with the Hellcats. Suckers making 630-650rwhp stock at a supposed 707HP at the crank! Insanity!!!

Sure but we are talking about Jaguars, not BMW's or Dodges.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

2016s were only supposed to gain 175lbs with the AWD but somehow a 3650lb car with rwd now tops out over 4000lbs? Not sure what’s up with that?

The F-Types are very much overweight compared to the specs. Several members of this forum have weighed their cars, they have been considerably heavier.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

RWDs would definitely put down more power on the dyno due to the significantly less drivetrain loss.

Until there are a few more stock AWD cars dyno'd i'm going to have to say, maybe...

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

Dynos vary from shop to shop and brand to brand. All I care about is what my car gained on the same dyno over a 36hr period with the same tank of gas with no other changes.

Exactly, the gains at the wheels are what counts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

You’re comparing RWD drivetrain loss 18% front engine, automatic, rwd car to AWD drivetrain loss 22-25% industry standard. Apples to oranges.

Actually it was ~15% on the F-Type we recently dyno'd. Other's have calculated as low as 10% for the RWD cars.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

Agreed the wheel gains are what counts and as you said they speak for themselves. I haven’t seen anyone make the gains I have with a 2016 AWD with 400 miles on it.

So far you're the only one I know of to come forward with this sort of data for the AWD R. So what else can we compare your gains too?

Frankly i'd prefer to just leave the drivetrain losses to one side until there are a few more AWD F-Types to compare with, let the gains at the wheels speak for themselves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

Where is the empirical data that proves 700hp with an AJ series III V8 is past what it can handle?

A couple of ex-Jaguar engineers. One of whom is a member of this forum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

Please link me to a blown engine and the explanation behind it as you are scaring me.

I have no intention of scaring you. The last thing I want is for someone to wreck the engine in a brand new car. There have been a few 5.0L engine failures reported on this forum, without searching for them all here's one https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/x...ailure-119001/ caused by a lean-out. And then two or three others in that thread "have the same problem". There are others too.

You won't find any properly documented failures as a result of a tune though. Because that's bad for business...

And if someone is trying to get an engine replaced under warranty do you think they will put it out on the internet that they had a tune in their car?
I can tell you as a moderator on this forum i've had a couple of people ask me to delete their posts about work done on their cars. Because of warranty claims.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

What is the weak point specifically?

The bottom end; big end and crank bearings get a beating at extreme power levels. Also if you have a lean-out or heavy detonation for whatever reason (fuel pump or sensor failure, or injector failure), the pistons in these things are cast and not so tolerant. (like what happened to that XKR in the link above)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

Why do you say 650HP is safe?

Because one failed at "around 670hp" after a couple of months at that power level. But admittedly it was an overly lean tune. An XFR in Russia.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

I’ve had more than a handful of fast cars in my life running superchargers with less than optimal internals, not saying ours are bad, and never had an issue. Safety is all about the tuning, a forged piston will crack a ringland as quickly as cast piston if there is any detonation.

The internals are OK, just that they were not really designed for 700hp, cast pistons for example...

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

The stock supercharger is capable of more than 700HP at the crank (Gen 7 TVS 1.7L) and is only huffing 13.4ish lbs of boost with the addition of the 1.8psi pulley.

Not sure what the capability of the supercharger has to do with the longevity of the engine here?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

I see no reason to be worried. I saw my AFs on the dyno before and after and Vmax sent me some data logs of engine ignition timing stock and with their tune along with IAT temps to show the blower wasn’t being overspun.

Overdriving the blower is not really an issue. If the AFR's are still on the safe (rich) side then you will probably be ok against detonation within the tune. But if I were you i'd be looking into some other safeguards, like better intercooler pumps, and an OBD gauge with alarms and datalogging, keep a close eye on vital signs. Can you confirm that your car received the K309 update to the ECU for the O2 sensor calibration?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

Yes it does, coming off of very restrictive looking exhaust manifolds going to 2.5” tubing which is far too narrow for a near 700HP car. I’m thinking longtubes (1-7/8”) with 3” Xpipe back. If you’re going to do it, do it right It would also drop EGT and coolant temps.

Then you should probably read up a little on how 4-1 headers have not worked well with these engines because of the firing order causing volumetric efficiency losses on cylinders 6 & 8.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesjaguar

Someone else asked about SAE vs STD. I have both graphs, here’s the SAE. I guess I should have posted both. More and more tuners are using STD so that’s why I posted those. DIN reads higher than STD and is used in Europe.

Avos will say thank-you

 

And don't get me wrong, i'm very much pro-tuning, i love it. An F-Type here that i've been involved with ran 11.732 @ 122.28mph tonight at the track, and we want to see it go faster still. But we want to be sure that it's done safely, and I wish the same for your car.

 

Agreed. Not just jags but BMW’s turbo I6s, the v8 biturbo 5.5l AMGs plus the cars I posted about above. Great trend, hope it continues!!

Quote:

Has anyone else put an AWD F-Type on the dyno yet? I'd hardly call the losses for the AWD system on the Jags "known". Let's see some more to compare.

I don’t know, I figured you might? I know that other AWD and RWD cars that used the same DJ I did (2014 GTR, new Z06, new M5, etc) pulled lower than average numbers compared to other linked AWD DJs. Actual drivetrain losses can and have been calculated for years using Bosch rolling road or Maha dynos that the OEMs use though you don’t see them published. As far as the 22-25% AWD drivetrain loss, I don’t know of any awd tuners that go any lower regardless of make or model of car. Manual trans, front engine, rwd = 15%. Auto, front engine, rwd= 18%. Look around at any respected and well known tuner and these are the numbers they use. Add in a transfer case, another driveshaft or torque tube, another differential, heavier than rwd front axles and it’s easy to see where the other 4-7% drivetrain loss comes from. I posted both 20% loss and 22% loss. Both are on the low end. On my 2013 F250 superduty 6.7L diesel awd I was told to use 30-35%. The more powerful the car the heavier the driveline needs to be the greater the losses.
Hopefully we’ll see more dynos soon but my sole ¼ mile vbox pass (came on a pathetic 3.96 0-60 spinning again) was 11.4@126mph no launch control and again with the 21s with 25 series sidewalls. All our dragstrips are closed for the year here and won’t reopen till May. Sucks.
I see you ran 11.7@122 in a rwd F Type R with someone else’s tune at a real drag strip with prepped launch pad. I’d say for a 400 mile car that’s 350lbs heavier and hot from being driven for an hour before making a run my car is making some power even with the greater drivetrain loss.

https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/f...-145479/page5/

https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/a...e-img_0308.jpg

Please refer to your first post in this thread. All manu’s are underrating now unless they SAE certify like GM did with the Z06. Insurance rates stay down and we get more HP than advertised. You agreed with me above so not sure why the change in position.

How much HP does it take for a 4000lb car + 200lb driver to trap 126 in the ¼? Don’t hold me to those numbers because I may slap the stock wheels and tires back on for next weeks vbox testing.

Can you help with figuring out how to launch control this thing? Again followed every direction in the owners manual (pic attached) and nada. Not once. Ever.

Quote:

The F-Types are very much overweight compared to the specs. Several members of this forum have weighed their cars, they have been considerably heavier.

What are you seeing for actual weights for rwd coupes? I’ve seen 3650-3700lbs advertised and in the rags but haven’t seen one on a scale. Wish they weren’t such pigs.

Quote:

Until there are a few more stock AWD cars dyno'd i'm going to have to say, maybe...

My friend, I’m just going to let that one slide. In the history of the automobile awd vehicles have always eaten more hp and torque than their rwd or fwd counterparts. Addressed above, additional driveline parts add mass and friction that don’t exist in rwd or fwd cars. This is fact, not disputable.

100% agreed!!! ¼ mile times from the strip are the most credible especially from around the world and averaged, but again I can only do what I can do with one car where I live now.

No chance. You must be assuming the factory power rating to be accurate and deducing from there. A Jag is a car like any other. It uses the same ZF 8 spd as dozens of other cars. Search reputable tuners and see what they use for DT loss, I posted this above already. You also posted prior that you assume a 100HP loss for my car. Not sure if you were inferring that you buy into the static loss vs percentage loss, that’s been disproven for decades.





I don’t disagree but it goes both ways. Again Jags are nothing special, lots of cars have awd and they all have similar drivetrain losses. I honestly would be interested to know what the rwd guys are gaining with the same pulley and other ECU tunes, not to directly compare but out of curiosity. You’re right, we need more cars and data to average out, I’m doing the best I can with dynos and soon more vboxing.

Quote:

A couple of ex-Jaguar engineers. One of whom is a member of this forum.

Did they specifically develop the AJ Series III V8s? Exactly what is the weak link, what info did he share, do you have a link? Thanks!

So one engine blew because it potentially went lean. It had a pulley, couldn’t find anything about a tune. You know as well as I one or even ten failures means nothing with as many of the blown 5.0L v8s as are out there around the world at this point. There will always be defective parts, bad gas, bad tuning, etc. Did the Jaguar engineer member comment on these failures? Any issues with fueling? Thanks!

I’d really only warrant a stock car failure as legitimate proof of a failure. Who knows what some hack tuner could have done to the tuning, obviously it wasn’t the design of the engine that failed, it was the tuner.
[QUOTE]
The bottom end; big end and crank bearings get a beating at extreme power levels. Also if you have a lean-out or heavy detonation for whatever reason (fuel pump or sensor failure, or injector failure), the pistons in these things are cast and not so tolerant. (like what happened to that XKR in the link above)[/Quote]

The reciprocating assembly should be fine as long as there is oil pressure, and it’s at operating temp. Detonation kills more motors than anything. Next is overheating then too much rpm. Those are the three main killers of all engines. Yes we have cast pistons (posted this above too) but again detonation will hole a forged piston just as quickly as a cast one.

Were all the cars in the link tuned (sorry only read about the first one) leaving for CA for Thanksgiving in a few hours. Again wondering if the engineer has any input on the fuel system from pump to injectors? Thanks!




A 5HP briggs and Stratton motor will fail if it’s too lean I’m sure you know this but again the tuning was obviously the reason so you can’t blame the engine design here.
Trust me I’d rather be rocking aftermarket 2618 pistons with thick ringlands and billet 4340 rods and crank too But, again, as long as you keep the detonation away, revs down (no need to overspin a positive displacement blower engine) and heat down it will live. Those 5.5L benz TT V8s are making 750HP+ and 900lb/ft+ tuned with cast pistons and no issues.

Quote:

Not sure what the capability of the supercharger has to do with the longevity of the engine here?

Blower discharge temps play a huge role in not only the ECU potentially pulling timing and dumping fuel, but also durability and longevity of the engine. Lower EGTs also keep the ECU from pulling the reigns. Overspinning them just makes heat and as we know heat is a killer.

[Quote]Overdriving the blower is not really an issue. If the AFR's are still on the safe (rich) side then you will probably be ok against detonation within the tune. But if I were you i'd be looking into some other safeguards, like better intercooler pumps, and an OBD gauge with alarms and datalogging, keep a close eye on vital signs. Can you confirm that your car received the K309 update to the ECU for the O2 sensor calibration? [/Quote]

Agreed, even with 1.8psi + pulley it’s not close to tapped. Thing is I have a +10mm crank pulley sitting on my desk. It’s been collecting dust for 2 months now, not sure what I’m going to do with it. Wish someone made a larger blower swap kit. Again agreed on logging (which vmax did for a few months before releasing their tuning and pulley packages) important PIDS. I’m definitely not running hot presently ECT or EOT wise, but if someone made a more efficient and proven IC I’d be first on the list no question.

I honestly don’t know about the 02 sensor cal update. I’ll have to call my dealer and give them my VIN to check. What is it exactly? My car was delivered only a little over a month ago. I’ll let you know when I find out, thanks for asking.

A properly designed header will always gain power vs a log manifold. Granted positive displacement blowers always make the least gains. I didn’t know anyone made LTs for our cars yet. Any links, pics or details like dimensions, whether or not they have a high velocity cone/spike merge collector and what diameter it necks down to?
The five most important characteristics of LT header design are:

1) Primary diameter, 1 7/8” is the proper size based on blower displacement, engine displacement and rpm limitation.
2) Primary length, the longer the more torque and HP you make period.
3) Collector design, one/spike merge collectors and the neckdown diameter are crucial to making max power and torque.
4) Amount of Primary entering the collector at zero angle or how much of the primaries are perpendicular to each other before the collector.
5) No non-parallel cut and welds, this should go without saying but sadly there are headers out there with cheater bends


Tri-Ys are inferior unless you’re running a narrow rpm band naturally aspirated aka NASCAR. With blower the firing order doesn’t mean a thing.

 

Congrats brother! Someone has to be the beta testers and I guess that’s us! Keep us posted with yours and I’ll do the same with mine. What are the RWD ¼ mile and 60-130 records do you know?

Keep up the good work

 

Vmax is in the process of testing the pulley for durability now for their
+10mm crank pulley for the 5.0L AJ Series SC V8s. That's all I know other
than I have one but was told not to install it until they give the OK

 

According to dragtimes, I have the current f-type record: 11.69 @ 120.2 - need to get a vbox, hopefully the 60-130 numbers are better.

 

I have seen reports where Jaguar had the 5.0l engine running at 750-800hp during testing. I do not know where this is coming from stating that the engine cannot handle 700hp especially at the fairly low rpm levels the engine endures.

 

Congrats on the record!!! Definitely get a Vbox, well worth the $500. Guessing from your location you were at ATCO or Englishtown? Great tracks on the East Coast. Congrats again bro!

 

I agree 100% about the low rpm keeping things safe. 750HP I believe would be attainable with the supercharger we have. 800HP not sure if it could do it, would be great if true, but would probably be kicking out a ton of heat.

We really need a vendor to supply a larger supercharger. The displacement of the supercharger is the limiting factor as far as potential HP and TQ on any supercharged engine no matter how large or small the engine is.

Thanks for passing the info along!

 

I'd written out another long response but the browser crashed and I lost it... awesome....

I haven't got time to sit down and write it again now.

About the weight, a V8S RWD convertible weighed in an 3930lbs without the driver. WaltB weighed his https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/f...-point-129743/

About the engines making 750-800 yes they did, I have no doubt that you can get that sort of power. My comment is, how long will it last at that level? The story I heard is that during the development when they did run 750-800hp the engines failed "relatively early"

Engine failures? https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/x...blowing-52009/ also have heard from forum members who work in service departments of Jaguar dealerships, a number of stock cars saw bottom end failures "oil starvation" apparently, it just happened to coincide with them driving the engines hard.

I don't keep a folder of links for these things so it will take some time to gather what you are asking for. People tell me things, not always in writing...

Regarding the headers, just search here on the forum for "headers" you'll find the info from Buckhead, Count Iblis, FrickenJag, and lots of discussion about the earlier AJV8's as well (which would also apply to the AJ133).


This is the first time I saw a bigger crank pulley for an AJ133, who made it? Why did you think it was necessary? Last nights 11.7 @ 122 was with stock pulleys, we haven't touched the engine at all.

In any case i'd prefer to step back a bit from this thread.

It's your thread.

It's your car, it's your money, you're going to shoot for the moon regardless of what anyone says. So go for it and let us know the result.

If I find anything more to answer the questions i'll post it up, but now I've got to get back to work....