I didn't mean a trouble code...but a particular code ON the pcm.

ok fellas just got back from GH and Travis said it passed the leak down test with flying colors and he said he drove it and he said the car drives great! I asked him why AF ratio was off so much per TS he said they were either doing something wrong or the JBA headers have been known to throw the AF off. Regardless he said leave it with me and he will Dyno tune it tomorrow and he will fix it but he said there is nothing wrong with the car. So, thats what I did. He is dyno tuning the car tomorrow

See that's the kind of thing that worries me...I have NO clue where to take my car when I want to get it dyno tuned.

Some say GH, some say TSM and other have other people they "swear" by. I'd like to take it to my friend's shop but I don't know his Ford guy...plus I know his dyno is notoriously 15-20 low and as much as you "shouldn't" care about dynos it still makes my pee-pee hurt, lol.

i here you on that GTO...I mean you saw i was about ready to take a bath and sell a perfectlt good running 5.0 with great miles. Glad Travis came through

Awesome to hear! Glad that Travis checked everything out, and hopefully you will have a good tune after it's done.

Was TS doing a tail pipe sniffer during the initial dyno pull? If so, that may be one of the problems why it was reading low.

This car came in for a tune, we did a base line just like all cars get before we build our custom tune. On the base line pull the car was 15.1 AFR from 2500rpms to 4100rpms so we aborted the run. Checked the data log and it also show 15.1 AFR. Advised the customer that we were uncomfortable tuning the car at this time since we felt the motor might be hurt or will be hurt soon since the car has been run this lean. Coyote motors that see heat of 15.1 AFR for any length of time will have a very good chance of the number 8 problems very soon. We choose not to be a part of it,

Good luck and hope you beat the odds

Tim

By no means was I dogging TS at all. If you look above I said, "Those guys are standup guys." I appreciate you guys concern and appreciate you telling me your opinions...However, I literally was about to return this thing to stock and take a bath on it not to deal with this issue. I was Telling GH's to return it to stock and Travis said that he wanted to do a leak down test to see if it was infact hurt at all. He said it passed the leaked down with flying colors and he drove it as well with no issues. Soooooo....

Glad too hear it, and I promise you if we felt different we would be happy to have tuned your car. We have a different option on what could happen,

Good luck my friend

Thanks Buddy and btw stay away from the chinese philly cheese Steak place down the street it def caused failure in my # 8 cylinder lol. Take Care:)

Now it makes sense. Just because it passed the leak down test doesn't mean that there hasn't been damage to weaken the cyl already.

let me ask this...Being what Travis knows and what he has done to mustangs do you think he would volunteer to dyno tune the car and put his reputation on the line if the #8 cylinder was hurt? I seriously doubt it...

You would be surprised what people will do to try and not be accountable. I knw that another business would do everything to try and tune a car so they could make money. So Tsm not wanting to even mess with it raises some flags. Let me ask you this....why was it not tuned right the first time? Why were those afrs lean? Why did they let it leave like that?

I asked that same question to Travis about well if the car is ok why the AFR's. His response was could be as simple as an o2 sensor, he said that JBA LT's are notorious for running lean until they have been corrected. either way he seem confident that the car was completely fine and that he would have it all corrected after he dyno tunes the car.

re-rx7, IIRC the OP was using a SCT tune so it was not a custom tune. Was the AFR actually lean or was the tailpipe sniffer (which reads a little lean to begin with due to the distance away from the head) using a sensor that hadn't been calibrated for the fuel being used {14.08 instead of 14.64} or hadn't been changed recently since they degrade quickly when using mixed fuels?

Not saying TSM was wrong and GH is right.

What if GH is right and TSM is wrong? Then the red flag I see is that the OP ended up calling TSMs bluff on needing other services to fix his problem that was nonexistent by taking it elsewhere.

What if TSM is right and GH is wrong? Then the OP may be in trouble.

Oh I see now. The thread has been confusing. First he had a custom tune then a canned. Lol idk what to believe! I don't think TS offered other services? I'm pretty sure the guy was using 93 and even if the tailpipe sniffer is further out 3 points is a lot