Dyno #'s, a little suprised...

86GT-Top

Founding Member

Aug 26, 2002

244

0

0

Bergen County, NJ

Aug 24, 2004

#1

• Aug 24, 2004

• #1

Well, my school has a Mustang Dyno, and i got to put my car on it on Thursday. I was expecting between 180 and 200 at the rear wheels since my car is pretty stock. my mods are ford motorsport shorty headers, off road-h, mac cat-back, K&N cone in the fender, bumped timing, smog delete and a/c delete. My #'s were 224 HP and 296 TQ. im suprised about both, what do u think?

 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master

Apr 10, 2002

9,039

6

79

Charlotte, NC

Aug 25, 2004

#2

• Aug 25, 2004

• #2

Dyno numbers vary significantly not only from dyno to dyno, but even between different set ups on the same dyno. Something as minor as a few pounds difference in rear tire pressure, or a tie down strap being a couple of clicks tighter can vary readings by as much as 10-15HP. While it's fun to do, comparing numbers between cars, taking them as absolutes, or even comparing runs done on the same car at different times is pretty much like comparing apples and oranges. They're fairly useful for sorting out tune issues during the same strap-down session on the dyno. Beyond that, it's entertainment more than anything else. Your e.t. and trap speed tell you more about what your car is putting out - and it seems like a fairly average 5.0. So - great numbers!

 

Venom4.6

Founding Member

Jun 30, 2002

1,356

0

0

Saint Louis, MO

Aug 25, 2004

#3

• Aug 25, 2004

• #3

I think the Mustang Dyno's put out higher #'s than a DynoJet.

 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master

Apr 10, 2002

9,039

6

79

Charlotte, NC

Aug 25, 2004

#4

• Aug 25, 2004

• #4

Venom - I thought it was the other way around....

 

Mike86Stang

Advanced Member

Apr 11, 2000

10,296

0

77

Red Lion, PA

Aug 25, 2004

#5

• Aug 25, 2004

• #5

I'm with Mike, ussually Mustang dyno's put down less HP than dynojets ...

 

cardudeusa

Founding Member

Oct 22, 2002

1,744

5

48

Home of the Florida Gators!

Aug 25, 2004

#6

• Aug 25, 2004

• #6

Yeah, from what I've heard a Mustang dyno gives a lower reading than a Dynojet.

 

88stangmangt

Active Member

Nov 25, 2003

2,332

1

48

Stafford,VA

Aug 25, 2004

#7

• Aug 25, 2004

• #7

still 300lbs is nice either way........................

 

super302

I'd do anything for free Bapples

May 29, 2004

2,878

1

0

Davenport, IA

Aug 25, 2004

#8

• Aug 25, 2004

• #8

Nice numbers considering the few mods, i heard mustang dynos are either 10% less than others, or 10hp less than others.

 

super302

I'd do anything for free Bapples

May 29, 2004

2,878

1

0

Davenport, IA

Aug 25, 2004

#9

• Aug 25, 2004

• #9

Just wondering, is it an auto or manual??

 

88stangmangt

Active Member

Nov 25, 2003

2,332

1

48

Stafford,VA

Aug 25, 2004

#10

• Aug 25, 2004

• #10

with those #### it has got to be a good ol 5 banger...................

 

FrdMustangCpe

New Member

May 27, 2004

493

0

0

Sin City, NV

Aug 25, 2004

#11

• Aug 25, 2004

• #11

i wonder what my car would do?

 

86GT-Top

Founding Member

Aug 26, 2002

244

0

0

Bergen County, NJ

Aug 25, 2004

#12

• Aug 25, 2004

• #12

88stangmangt said:

with those #### it has got to be a good ol 5 banger...................

Click to expand...

Lol, nope, AOD baby...well...im not proud of it, i'll be picking up my pedal assembly hopefully this weekend so i can get the 5 speed in this thing to wake up the 14.9!!

 

grey5.0beast

Cookies should never be DUNKED!!!

Aug 3, 2004

0

1

0

atl ga

Aug 25, 2004

#13

• Aug 25, 2004

• #13

nice numbers mine should be about the same hopefully .

 

st33da

New Member

Nov 18, 2003

3

0

2

Indianapolis

Aug 26, 2004

#14

• Aug 26, 2004

• #14

I have a Mustang Dyno at my school as well, and from what I have gathered over the year or so that I have been there is that it seems to produce low numbers. But on another note like Michael Yaunt said, it depends on alot of stuff.

 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master

Apr 10, 2002

9,039

6

79

Charlotte, NC

Aug 26, 2004

#15

• Aug 26, 2004

• #15

People often refer to Mustang Dyno numbers as being "low" -- but they're only low relative to DynoJet numbers. The fact is, it's near impossible to tell which of the two are in fact more accurate in terms of measuring a vehicle's actual HP. I've read several technical articles that indicate that the Mustang numbers may come closer to predicting actual HP/torque delivered to the wheels and that the DynoJet's all read "high". It's yet another example of why we shouldn't get too invested in the actual number produced. While entertaining, comparing them simply doesn't mean much.

 

tmoss

Gettin Wired

Founding Member

Jun 28, 2001

7,153

32

128

Saint Louis, MO

Aug 26, 2004

#16

• Aug 26, 2004

• #16

Any students been messing with the cal factors? Roughly corrected to dynojet numbers, you'd be making 246-258RWHP and 326-340RWTQ. Much too high for your mods.

 

Venom4.6

Founding Member

Jun 30, 2002

1,356

0

0

Saint Louis, MO

Aug 27, 2004

#17

• Aug 27, 2004

• #17

Michael Yount said:

Venom - I thought it was the other way around....

Click to expand...

Yeah, I had them mixed up. My bad.

 

86GT-Top

Founding Member

Aug 26, 2002

244

0

0

Bergen County, NJ

Aug 27, 2004

#18

• Aug 27, 2004

• #18

tmoss said:

Any students been messing with the cal factors? Roughly corrected to dynojet numbers, you'd be making 246-258RWHP and 326-340RWTQ. Much too high for your mods.

Click to expand...

It's locked up and there's no way for other students to get to it

 

N8Miller

I need NOS....make it 2 of the big ones

Founding Member

Jul 26, 2000

2,661

0

0

Kingston, PA, USA

Aug 27, 2004

#19

• Aug 27, 2004

• #19

86GT-Top said:

It's locked up and there's no way for other students to get to it

Click to expand...

your info says "minor bolt ons"----what are they? nice numbers....

 

Joe Jr.

Founding Member

Nov 16, 2001

207

5

19

Longmont area of Colorado

Aug 27, 2004

#20

• Aug 27, 2004

• #20

That's an interesting conversation, that has probably been discussed before, but i thought i read that the mustang dyno takes into account real world driving interference like wind resistance and weight of car? I could be making **** up, but thought that was a difference between the 2 dynos?

you've got to wonder if the BHP numbers that the factory uses is more accurate than the chassis dyno for base accuracy? I know i'll get flamed for that comment.

joe