dyno #'s
- Thread starter 94opalgt
- Start date
Something definitely doesn't look right to me with that dyno graph. Like I said in my previous posts I would have expected a higher HP number and I would have certainly expected peak HP to come higher than 5400rpm with the Track Heat HCI combo (perhaps ~5800rpm).
I still think valve float is a possibility given that by 6000rpm the graph is down below 280rwhp but I just wonder if the engine might be running too lean at higher rpm. The 24lb injectors are up to the job but there's no mention of which fuel pump was used. If it's the stock 88lph pump, it won't supply enough juice.
I still think valve float is a possibility given that by 6000rpm the graph is down below 280rwhp but I just wonder if the engine might be running too lean at higher rpm. The 24lb injectors are up to the job but there's no mention of which fuel pump was used. If it's the stock 88lph pump, it won't supply enough juice.
Well Keith
I certainly could not say for sure
Here is a thing or two I've noticed and maybe someone can give more
details about these findings
A lot of the times on these charts where they were done on a Dynojet ....
1) you will see Standard or STD
2) you will see SAE or Corrected
3) some of the time, you see the word smoothing with a value following
that word of 5 a good bit of the time
About 1 & 2
Typically pulls done in the calibration of STD produce higher results
than those done in SAE
About 3
I kinda think it has to do with a filter they can apply to keep the display
from looking so wavy or squiggly
I would like to point out that over the past year .........
I've noticed more and more charts posted with the STD calibration
however
Don't be mislead by this recent change of events
That 300rwhp bench mark we all kind of shoot for
It has been around for several years now
and
It was most certainly derived from the SAE cal :Word:
Grady
I know this has been said a hundred times now, but dyno numbers are nice to look at but ET's and MPH will really show you whats going on especially compared to other cars running there. My car with the old setup has had over 100 pulls on verious dyno's. Each dyno read something a little differently. Results from 420-510 hp. Now what i gained and liked about the dyno was driveability. Thats why my first choice is AFM now because Danny spends 80 percent of the time working on the drivability and 20% of the time on peak #'s. His 488 hp he got out of my car was so much more fun to drive then the 510 hp that i got at the previous shop.
I do admit you can find differences between
types of dynos
how they were calibrated
the tuners ability
etc
But that is the thing about SAE results ........
they at least try to keep things on a fair comparison
Sure there are factors that can skew the data
Now lets talk about strip results
Not all drivers have the same driving ability
You got weather conditions
You got strip elevation
You got track preparation
etc
So you could say like the dyno method of comparing combos .........
it has its share of factors that can skew the findings
I see both as valuable tools one can use
Grady
it was a dyno jet.
the car has a 255 fuel pump
george spends most of his time on the drivability of the car also. who cares how much power your car makes if it drives like a p.o.s. his car makes 725rwhp and is a daily driver. when 5.0 magazine did the article on trick flows new 4.6 intake a couple of months ago, k.j. jones went for a ride in that car wrote a little bit about it in the article.
thanks for posting the graphs for me grady
the car has a 255 fuel pump
george spends most of his time on the drivability of the car also. who cares how much power your car makes if it drives like a p.o.s. his car makes 725rwhp and is a daily driver. when 5.0 magazine did the article on trick flows new 4.6 intake a couple of months ago, k.j. jones went for a ride in that car wrote a little bit about it in the article.
thanks for posting the graphs for me grady
Similar threads
