First of all, they didn't use the same gasoline. That is like the before
and after pictures for those makeup or weight loss infomercial where the
before picture has the person frowning and slumped over and the after
picture has them smiling and standing up straight.
Apples to apples I say,
-RJ
'95 Dakota Sport 3.9L
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bernd D. Ratsch" <bernd@texas.net>
To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 8:39 PM
Subject: DML: RE: Re: Superchips Dyno Results
>
> Something doesn't look right.
>
> - Bernd
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of Josh
> Battles
> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 3:23 PM
> To: dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net
> Subject: DML: Re: Superchips Dyno Results
>
>
>
> Hopefully I'm reading this wrong b/c it looks like they went from
> 160->190 FT# TQ and 110->130 HP... That seems a little weak to me, my
> V6 dynoed at 130 HP and about 180 FT# TQ just about stock with a trans
> that was filled to the gills with extra fluid.... My curves looked
> nicer than theirs too. :-)
>
> Is it me and that I'm reading this wrong or what? Bernd, Ray? What's
> the real deal here? I've been thinking about picking this device up
> thru Chad and this may have changed my mind.
>
> --
> - Josh
> Lowered 2000 Dakota CC 3.9L
>
>
> ""Chris Hogan"" <chogan@logikos.com> wrote in message
> news:817531784725D411BB9F00508BC97CDC01177602@clavius.logikos.com...
> >
> > ...I asked for some dyno results from Superchips. Here's what they
> > sent
> me for the 3.9L automatic.
> >
> > http://mywebpages.comcast.net/chogan68/Truck/Superchips.pdf
> >
> > Chris
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:46:22 EST