Dyno numbers in! - SCT = thumbs up!

LizardKing 2002 · May 25, 2004

So I went to visit a happy Dyno. Oh well... I know the numbers I got feel happy. But when you look at the timeslip picture... maybe the answer is I got a strong engine. Who the fook knows... maybe we have cleaner air? Maybe the ****n Dyno is wrong.

Betcha I will have a 13.3 on radials by the end of the year. If I get my hands on some DR I will be looking for some very low 13s. If I ain't running 270WHP for that time slip... something is foocked.

LizardKing 2002 · May 25, 2004

StangLou said:
Either you dont know all the mods on your car or something is wacky with the dyno. On a dynojet, my car only puts down 266 and thats full exhaust, pulley's, cai, and a chip. A Mustang dyno is a good bit lower than a dyno. Are you positive its a mustang dyno and not just a dynojet
Im not trying to flame, just those #s are really high for your mods.

CAI don't help you.

The difference between your 266 and my 271.2 is in the L/T headers. ...maybe my chip is better at managing? I am running 94 (alchool based) gas here.

2001Saleen181 · May 25, 2004

Nice numbers dude.. Congrats. My 98 LS1 Trans Am dyno'ed at 348 hp at the wheel when it was only rated at 320. This was with minor upgrades. Maybe your motor was made on a good day and you have the extra power.

But anyway, Congrats on the numbers.

2001Saleen181 · May 25, 2004

By the way. The N/A Saleen was rated at 290 at the motor with pullies, exhaust, and a computer recalibration. Take 10%-15% off for drive train loss and you get about 261-246.5 hp at the wheel. Maybe your drivetrain is in excellent condition.

2000GT · May 25, 2004

LizardKing 2002 said:
So I went to visit a happy Dyno. Oh well... I know the numbers I got feel happy. But when you look at the timeslip picture... maybe the answer is I got a strong engine. Who the fook knows... maybe we have cleaner air? Maybe the ****n Dyno is wrong.

Betcha I will have a 13.3 on radials by the end of the year. If I get my hands on some DR I will be looking for some very low 13s. If I ain't running 270WHP for that time slip... something is foocked.

You don't need 270 rwhp to run low 13's. I think your dyno guy is trying to make you feel good about your car by playing with the dyno software. It happens all the time. It makes you feel good about the shop which potentially equals more business for the shop.

The crap about you having a stronger motor is not going to fly either. The GT's are built on an assembly line. Do you really think they took your GT aside and decided to make it more powerful that thousands of other GT's they make? The build tolerances don't allow for "freak" motors to be built. The tolerances are way to tight. We all have the same base car before we modify it.

2001Saleen181 · May 25, 2004

Hey 2000GT, yes you are correct about the assembly line to a point. Did you know that the piston rings must be individually gapped by hand? So a person working on monday morning with a hang over will definately have an effect on your motor if he really doesn't feel like being there.

CottonBurnerz · May 25, 2004

I say it might be the dyno as well.. take 03trublugt for example (he did the plenum tests btw)

He gained 10 rwhp I believe by doing nothing at all but wait for 2 months to do the second test... how? no one knows..

2001Saleen181 · May 25, 2004

I agree...Too many variables.. But then again he might have that horse power or not.

BETTERBULLITT · May 25, 2004

You don't need 270RWHP to run 13.6's...

I wish I had 270RWHP...

sjrtx · May 25, 2004

271rwhp on a mustang dyno=about 350fwhp, or about 300rwhp on a dynojet. wow! most stock cars make around what 225 at the wheels on a dyno jet? so 75rwhp(86.25fwhp) from just a tune, pulleys,lts and exhaust? dayumm-thats a 33% increase over stock for cheap!

LizardKing 2002 · May 25, 2004

k. I should provide a clarification (suggested by my Dyno person). My new tune SAE CORRECTED SHOULD read 263WHP and 299WTQ.

...and for the whiners that say you don't need 270WHP to run 13.6 - I never said that. In fact I ran a 13.663 with a factory stock 2000GT - with what 225WHP? I ran a 13.570 with 256WHP SAE CORRECTED and 287WTQ SAE on a Mustang Dyno. I'm hoping for a 13.4 with the new tune @ 263WHP. SAE corrected.

I apologize for the ommissions. I left with the slips indicating my difference in HP which where not SAE corrected. The dyno guy corrected me.

StangLou · May 25, 2004

There are guys here in the 12's with 250hp or less! You dont need a lot of hp to get good et's. Granted it helps, but its not needed. Your times are nice, but they are by no means indicating you have the hp your mustang dyno is stating you do. Sorry just not happening. If you had it done on a dynojet I would still be very skeptical of those #'s but it would be easier to believe.
Honestly I could care less what a dyno says these days based on jumps Ive seen with this mod and that mod. I just like to have an idea as to what mine is putting out. We arent trying to flame you like everyone said, we are just pointing out how unrealistic those #'s are on a Mustang dyno of all things.
If yours is putting out that with your mods then at that shop my car should probably be around 280 or so on a mustang dyno with your tune. Granted you probably have a more aggressive tune than me due to your "special" gas lol but... Nah its not even worth arguing about lol.

numbers

Jackie Chan · May 25, 2004

with those mods and your driving you should be in the 13.1 range. 13.4 is slow for a coupe and your mods if you can still pull 1.9 60's with good weather

LizardKing 2002 · May 25, 2004

Its ok guys. I feel like a numbnut when it comes to this Dyno stuff. First time around one. I see there is quite a bit of controversy around them (or my numbers).

I have well over 500 runs combined on my mustangs (no kidding). Give me track numbers and I can analyse the 'dickens' out of them and use the numbers as 'cash to the bank'. This Dynometer stuff seems about as contreversial as G-Tech. I guess they should be used for tunning tools more than anything else - which is why I am extremly happy. My 'but' dyno concurs with the MustangDyno... I got a decent power jump from the tunning.

Jackie Chan · May 25, 2004

LizardKing 2002 said:
Its ok guys. I feel like a numbnut when it comes to this Dyno stuff. First time around one. I see there is quite a bit of controversy around them (or my numbers).

I have well over 500 runs combined on my mustangs (no kidding). Give me track numbers and I can analyse the 'dickens' out of them and use the numbers as 'cash to the bank'. This Dynometer stuff seems about as contreversial as G-Tech. I guess they should be used for tunning tools more than anything else - which is why I am extremly happy. My 'but' dyno concurs with the MustangDyno... I got a decent power jump from the tunning.

im in the same boat as you, i have yet to get my car dynnoed, i dont really care unless its going to get tuned while its on one either.

03-s281 · May 25, 2004

2001Saleen181 said:
By the way. The N/A Saleen was rated at 290 at the motor with pullies, exhaust, and a computer recalibration. Take 10%-15% off for drive train loss and you get about 261-246.5 hp at the wheel. Maybe your drivetrain is in excellent condition.

Mine dynoed at 232rwhp corrected stock from Saleen.
and the computer said that made it 288fwhp
They car only had 900miles on it when run was made.
I wish I would have made 260

8yourZ06 · May 25, 2004

There is several varibles that can contribute to what your numbers can be on a chassis dyno. Chassis dyno's can differ one to another. Making one or two runs won't cut it...U need to make several to est. a average of all your runs. A friend of mine ran his 96 Imp. SS on Muscle Mustangs dyno in Missouri..only thing his car had at the time was a ram air intake and slp exhaust..first pull he made like 230 sumthin and the second pull he made 250 sumthin..And somehow I doubt with those boltons and stock rubber this guy is hittin 13.5s but I can't say it aint true..I can't prove him wrong

Just my 12 cents

twogts4us · May 25, 2004

My 02 GT 5 spd with Flowmaster AT catback, 3.73s and an SCT chip netted 233 Standard RWHP (not SAE corrected, which would have inflated the number here in hot-n-humid FLA) on the dyno (don't ask me what kind, I have no idea). But these seem like honest, real, down to earth numbers, factoring in the fact that an 02 5 spd GT stock will dyno about 220 RWHP.

LizardKing 2002 · May 25, 2004

I have made 6 or 7 pulls. 2 'tuned and 4 or 5 with just baseline.

Here is a graph on of one of my runs for all you none believers!!!!!

Just kidding.

This is the one sheet I kept. Keep in mind these numbers are not SAE corrected and the big 271.2WHP run should actually read around 261 corrected and ~295 on the torque side.

KJ Hoppus · May 25, 2004

looks like they put you down for 3200 as your weight. i dont know if that changes anything.

Dyno numbers in! - SCT = thumbs up!

LizardKing 2002

LizardKing 2002

2001Saleen181

New Member

2001Saleen181

New Member

2000GT

2001Saleen181

New Member

CottonBurnerz

Banned

2001Saleen181

New Member

BETTERBULLITT

sjrtx

New Member

LizardKing 2002

StangLou

Active Member

Jackie Chan

I didn't read this.

LizardKing 2002

Jackie Chan

I didn't read this.

03-s281

New Member

8yourZ06

New Member

twogts4us

LizardKing 2002

KJ Hoppus

New Member

Similar threads

Dyno numbers in! - SCT = thumbs up!

New Member

New Member

New Member

Banned

New Member

New Member

Active Member

I didn't read this.

I didn't read this.

New Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency