More XE cam dyno results.
I'm not sure exactly how STD differs from SAE, but the dyno numbers in my sig, corrected using STD standards gives me 351.21 rwhp and 362.91 tq. If there is a direct correlation between the two, I'd say you are right around 335 rwhp, SAE.
Good numbers either way.
Good numbers either way.
Last edited by 97bowtie; Aug 28, 2003 at 04:59 PM.
Ok there seems to be some doctoring on this Dyno, I calculated his correction factor to be 1.017 not 1.04, therefore; you only dynoed 343.24 RWHP, reason being is I calculated my dyno correction factor here locally & it was .097, my dyno sheet says .097 aswell, I calculated yours several times & its 1.017 not 1.04, your graph is doctored!
Originally posted by bunker
Ok there seems to be some doctoring on this Dyno, I calculated his correction factor to be 1.017 not 1.04, therefore; you only dynoed 343.24 RWHP, reason being is I calculated my dyno correction factor here locally & it was .097, my dyno sheet says .097 aswell, I calculated yours several times & its 1.017 not 1.04, your graph is doctored!
Ok there seems to be some doctoring on this Dyno, I calculated his correction factor to be 1.017 not 1.04, therefore; you only dynoed 343.24 RWHP, reason being is I calculated my dyno correction factor here locally & it was .097, my dyno sheet says .097 aswell, I calculated yours several times & its 1.017 not 1.04, your graph is doctored!
Using the formula as found in there i calculated the same 1.017 correction factor. So taking 351/1.04*1.017 gives us 343.4 SAE HP and 343.6 SAE tq. Not too shabby.
WHEW, nice, still over 340. Another FYI, http://www.superflow.com/support/cycledyn-theory.html
according to that, SAE hp is SAE J1349 standard of June 1990. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.23 InHg (99 kPa) of dry air and 77 F (25°C).
STD hp is also a SAE correction, just to a different temperature condition. SO therefore if it says STD or SAE STD or STP it is the slightly higher (lower normalization temperature) readings. If it just says SAE hp then it should be SAE J1349.
Soooo.............I say funk the dyno and I'll just go get some track times
Originally posted by SkarodoM
LOL... take a breather buddy.. the correction factor isnt a big deal really. I'm just picky about consistency & whatnot & most people don't know any better anyway.
STD is what alot of race guys use & has been around for a long time, it's just #'s corrected to 60deg F & 29.92" vs. SAE being 77degF and 29.23 or 29.6 (cant recall offhand).
LOL... take a breather buddy.. the correction factor isnt a big deal really. I'm just picky about consistency & whatnot & most people don't know any better anyway.
STD is what alot of race guys use & has been around for a long time, it's just #'s corrected to 60deg F & 29.92" vs. SAE being 77degF and 29.23 or 29.6 (cant recall offhand).
I called the shop and he said "i'll get them to you next week.............." ripoff mustang shop bastards. I think the 343 SAE-J calculated above is correct though.
-brent
Originally posted by Gripenfelter
On an XE 230/236 in a 383 LT1 I pulled 378rwhp and 383lb ft of torque through a 700R4 with a 3200 stall.
The dyno guys said if I had a T56 it would have been 400rwhp.
On an XE 230/236 in a 383 LT1 I pulled 378rwhp and 383lb ft of torque through a 700R4 with a 3200 stall.
The dyno guys said if I had a T56 it would have been 400rwhp.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ad356
LT1 Based Engine Tech
12
Apr 11, 2015 10:30 PM
racecarz28
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
2
Mar 30, 2015 09:55 PM
IgorT.455/406
LT1 Based Engine Tech
4
Mar 12, 2015 03:39 AM
armedtrigger
LT1 Based Engine Tech
10
Feb 24, 2015 08:30 PM



?
