LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

Question about dyno'ing!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 09:08 AM
  #1  
LT1ponykilla's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,035
From: Greenville, SC
Question about dyno'ing!

I always see where people say the differences in 2 dyno's could be alot. Im getting my car dyno'd here in a few weeks and its a Mustang dyno for dyno tuning. From where I hear these dyno's will be about 20hp or so less than a standard dyno. Is this correct?
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 10:13 AM
  #2  
LT1ponykilla's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,035
From: Greenville, SC
ttt
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 10:23 AM
  #3  
Grease's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 870
From: Cuyahoga Falls, OHIO
Mustang dynos give lower readings than Dynojet according to most people, however they are better for tuning. Regardless, when alot of people post their dyno results, they include "dyno know to be low"
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 10:38 AM
  #4  
LT1ponykilla's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,035
From: Greenville, SC
I will have some numbers to post in a few weeks. Thanks man.
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 02:51 PM
  #5  
LPEdave's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,007
From: Folsom, CA, USA
Re: Question about dyno'ing!

Originally posted by LT1ponykilla
I always see where people say the differences in 2 dyno's could be alot. Im getting my car dyno'd here in a few weeks and its a Mustang dyno for dyno tuning. From where I hear these dyno's will be about 20hp or so less than a standard dyno. Is this correct?
If there was a figure like 20hp, it would have been known already. The whole point is that you can't compare the numbers from different dynos, especially different brands. For example a Mustang dyno includes the weight of the car and estimates of wind resistance. A Dynojet does not. If the guy enters 100lbs for the weight of your car, or enters 10,000lbs, you'll get different HP numbers out. No such thing on a Dynojet. So while the Mustang is a great dyno for you to use for your PCM tuning, don't try to rationalize why your numbers look different to the majority of folks that have used a Dynojet, they're just gonna be different.

Dave
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 03:06 PM
  #6  
Grease's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 870
From: Cuyahoga Falls, OHIO
Question

How does wind resistance and weight of the car affect rwhp? If I ran my car on a dyno and made 405rwhp then had 3 of my buddies jump in the car and make another run it shouldn't affect the power output, only the acceleration of the car down the road.

Also, if the standard for SAE horsepower is the same around the world shouldn't 405 SAE rwhp on a dynojet be the same as 405 SAE rwhp on a mustang dyno as well? Since a chassis dyno is a measurement tool just like a torque wrench they should all be calibrated the same.
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 03:20 PM
  #7  
LT1ponykilla's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,035
From: Greenville, SC
I know that rwhp on a tuning dyno will differ from a dyno made just to see hp results.
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 03:21 PM
  #8  
LPEdave's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,007
From: Folsom, CA, USA
Originally posted by Grease
How does wind resistance and weight of the car affect rwhp? If I ran my car on a dyno and made 405rwhp then had 3 of my buddies jump in the car and make another run it shouldn't affect the power output, only the acceleration of the car down the road.
Great question. When I went through this discussion, I contacted the Mustang folks (http://www.mustangdyne.com/) and was told that they include those parameters (along with others like temperature, etc) because it gives a more realistic result.

I don't agree with them, but that's what they told me.

Dave
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 03:30 PM
  #9  
97BBlackZ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 997
From: garland, tx
Originally posted by LPEdave
Great question. When I went through this discussion, I contacted the Mustang folks (http://www.mustangdyne.com/) and was told that they include those parameters (along with others like temperature, etc) because it gives a more realistic result.

I don't agree with them, but that's what they told me.

Dave
It gives the mustangs an excuse for losing
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 03:33 PM
  #10  
LT1ponykilla's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,035
From: Greenville, SC
Originally posted by 97BBlackZ
It gives the mustangs an excuse for losing
A Mustang dyno isnt a dyno for Mustang's. It's the name or brand of the dyno.
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 03:42 PM
  #11  
97WRAITH's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 436
From: ontario,canada
So you figured out the problem you were having after you had your cam installed?
Old Feb 17, 2004 | 04:45 PM
  #12  
LT1ponykilla's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,035
From: Greenville, SC
Originally posted by 97WRAITH
So you figured out the problem you were having after you had your cam installed?
Yeah! Bad valve adjustments. I had a total of 3 cylinders on 0 compression. Not too good but she sure runs fine now.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Steve69SS396
Track Kill Stories
15
Aug 10, 2015 02:45 PM
alex5366
LT1 Based Engine Tech
12
Feb 17, 2015 09:07 AM
95z_28_camaro_4_Ivan
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
2
Dec 19, 2014 08:48 PM
Hurin
Suspension, Chassis, and Brakes
4
Dec 13, 2014 07:38 PM
dansam
Midwest
8
Jul 20, 2002 01:10 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:41 AM.