No cats, 2.5", filter, tune... 165 whp?
 

As the title mentions, I've had a full, custom exhaust installed, with a 4-1 header and 2.5 inch piping, no cats, a K&N air filter, and a tune (tuner doesn't have a dyno in his shop).

Today I've went to the dyno and got the following sheet:

Attachment 192277

Unfortunately, I had not previously dynoed the car in stock form, so I can't really compare gains, however I believe most stock 86s come in 155-165 whp.

Should I start by reviewing the tune first? Any ideas?

Full exhaust, no cats, and tune... your results are normal (160-170 whp depending on the dyno, operator (calibration), and weather.) Full exhaust means end of torque dip and about 15-20whp on this platform. There is so much written about it, I'm kind of surprised that you're surprised by your dyno.

You're not going to get ~200 whp unless you switch to E85.

Want more than that? F.I.

Dynos are useless without a base line, so don't worry about what you've got- this is your new benchmark. Power on a dyno cannot be measured consistently if people use different dyno types on different days with different compensations with different tunes with different environmental conditions with different- Do you get what I'm saying?

My car could make 160WHP on my dyno of choice.
My friend's car could make 180WHP on his dyno of choice.
My car may still be faster if we start in 3rd gear from 20 MPH and go until 75MPH.

Now if someone said " My car made 145WHP, but then I took the cats out, tuned, and got an exhaust and now it's 185WHP" and I said " My car made 155 WHP, I got a catback and it makes 161 WHP" there's a pretty damn good chance you can measure which car has the advantage. Dyno charts are meant to measure CHANGE

Most importantly, can you feel a difference?

I believe I feel the 6k kick much more now! But that could be subjective of course.

I've read all sorts of stock car dynos, some as low as 133 whp. Yes, it was a rookie mistake not to dyno before the changes. Maybe if I need to put back the old exhaust on for the yearly regulatory verification (there's no way it passes sound test right now), I'll revert everything back, and dyno the base car.
I know it would be kind of weird, but it's the only way to compare now lol.

That looks to me like a Maha dyno, much better than dynojets IMHO but they do read lower than a typical dynojet. 165 whp on a Maha is pretty good. The main thing is I don't see a torque dip there, congrats!

I felt the same way. When I did my dyno, I "only" got 176whp with my CS400 headers. So it's probably a safe assumption it was around 150-160whp stock.

Actually by the looks of it, it absolutely looks like it has a torque dip. It does seem reduced though. The HP curve gets pretty close to flattening out for a period of time, which is where this dip would occur. Not trying to be negative to the tune or anything, simply saying the dip is still showing (which is pretty normal for most headers on this car anyway).

Yeah at a second glance, it's just HP curve without torque curve and I see it now. Does seem improved though. Regardless - I think if you ran your car on a Dynojet you'd probably get more 'pleasing' numbers.

You need to do a pull in a set gear (higher gear better), from a set rpm like 4k to a set rpm like 7k, on a set road thats as flat as possible, in both directions, averaging the two runs. Make note of the weather conditions. Do a modification and then repeat the exact same test in as similar conditions as possible.

This is the only way to truly and accurately quantify results.

Would you rather make 160whp and do 0-60 in 6 seconds or make 190whp and do 0-60 in 7 seconds?

Clearly the car making 160whp had a stricter dyno calibration and/or a more conservative reading dyno compared to the 190whp. Had they done a dyno run same time/same day/same dyno the 160whp would have actually dynoed higher.

Your lack of torque dip is really good tho!