finally got dynoed

tmoss · Feb 6, 2006

Nice!, you carried your peak torque higher than my stock SD cam and made more HP, but we both got that 330 torque.

Who says stock iron can't make power??????????

final5-0 · Feb 6, 2006

94gtslow said:
here is the sheet

says its too big.

What do I do?

I'd use an editor and shrink it down to about 25% of its original size.

anyway

Are we making any headway to be able to SEE THE PULL

Grady

tmoss · Feb 6, 2006

Scans are often done in bitmap form (bmp) and if you convert it to a jpeg or even gif format the size of the file will be much smaller.

legalize420 · Feb 7, 2006

bump. can we get this thing posted

final5-0 · Feb 7, 2006

The guy is from Killeen!

Chris can give him a helping hand

Chris, how bout helping out a fellow Stanger

Grady

95Vert · Feb 7, 2006

Hey 94gtslow, we have almost the idetical combo and you're pulling 50+hp/tq more than me. This damn tranny is killing me.

94gtslow · Feb 9, 2006

Sorry been busy at work, Got it scanned at a friends house, so here it is.

94gtslow · Feb 9, 2006

T T T

legalize420 · Feb 9, 2006

what would be a good shift point based on that graph? it looks like max power is at about 5200-5300. is that what you go by?

wytstang · Feb 9, 2006

Tq comes on pretty darn fast at 4's you're already hitting peak tq.

what would be a good shift point based on that graph? it looks like max power is at about 5200-5300. is that what you go by?

Not what everybody else go by but I go by tq. I would shift at 5,500 cause the tq is just falling there after. That's just me though. .02

tmoss · Feb 9, 2006

What size MAF/TB, rocker ratio and exhaust system are you running?

94gtslow · Feb 9, 2006

ford 65 mm throttle body, pro M 75mm MAF, ccm p-headers,bbk h-pipe,and flows. The rockers are the stock stamped ones.

final5-0 · Feb 10, 2006

The curves look pretty good.

This is a bit different than what is usually seen.

I see the word Dynojet at the top of the page.
Does this mean the dyno was a Dynojet?

I see SAE used in the top right hand corner with the word smoothing.
SAE is also used in the foot notes.

I wonder if these values are uncorrected or SAE values?

Grady

tmoss · Feb 10, 2006

They are SAE corrected Grady - the correction value of 1.13 is in the info at the bottom of the graph.

final5-0 · Feb 10, 2006

tmoss said:
They are SAE corrected Grady - the correction value of 1.13 is in the info at the bottom of the graph.

Hey Tom

A little knowledge from you if you please.

When looking over the charts I wondered about the SAE value of 1.13

I know it is used to alter the actual results to try and keep things equal or make it appear that the pull was done under optimum conditions.

This value is > 1.00
Would that mean his actual results were multiplied by this value and be greater than those results?

If the value were < 1.00 you'd have the opposite?

Grady

tmoss · Feb 10, 2006

The SAE corrects for conditions............

"Most of the standards that are presently used are defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). When something is corrected to those standards it is often said that this run was “SAE Corrected.” Now, one of the problems with this is that SAE has a few different standards which are frequently used in the industry. So, if I say that this is SAE corrected how do you know which one? One of the main differences between the various specs is what they consider to be a “normal environment.” After all, that is all that these formulae do. They correct the numbers coming out of the dyno for the environment. There are many factors that go into these calculations. Among them are temperature, humidity, pressure, and altitude. The J607 specification uses a temperature of 60 F as “normal” compared to J1349 (or J1985) which used 77 F. SAE J816B uses 85 Degrees, 29.00 Barometer. This means that if you use these factors with the same set of data you will get higher results for HP/TRQ with the J607. That means you cannot compare corrected data from the different correction factors".

final5-0 · Feb 10, 2006

tmoss said:
The SAE corrects for conditions............

"Most of the standards that are presently used are defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). When something is corrected to those standards it is often said that this run was “SAE Corrected.” Now, one of the problems with this is that SAE has a few different standards which are frequently used in the industry. So, if I say that this is SAE corrected how do you know which one? One of the main differences between the various specs is what they consider to be a “normal environment.” After all, that is all that these formulae do. They correct the numbers coming out of the dyno for the environment. There are many factors that go into these calculations. Among them are temperature, humidity, pressure, and altitude. The J607 specification uses a temperature of 60 F as “normal” compared to J1349 (or J1985) which used 77 F. SAE J816B uses 85 Degrees, 29.00 Barometer. This means that if you use these factors with the same set of data you will get higher results for HP/TRQ with the J607. That means you cannot compare corrected data from the different correction factors".

Thanks for the great info Tom.

I now remember a large thread a long time ago about this very thing.

That is most likely why I was thinking there was some kind of gotcha about this topic.

I do try and make sure the dyno being used is a Dynojet and the values are SAE when comparing combos.

however

I can see now see how a Speed Shop Guy with a Dyno could pick between the various SAE formulas to give the highest values displayed of the pull.

Grady

final5-0 · Feb 10, 2006

Hey 94gtslow

I had the time to look more closely at your pull today.

I gotta tell ya, 300 lbs or better from 3200 to 5100 ain't bad.
I like how things look here.

Did your dyno guy provide for you numerical values that went along with your chart results?

The reason I ask is because

The display tick marks are split at values of 20
Taking a look at your hp side of the chart ........
You plainly see the peak rwhp listed at 294

but yet

It looks like about 299

I usually can get real close (within 1 or 2) with a chart that is as clean and straight as the one you provided for us

but

this method of display is somehow different and I can't even get close with the hp values.

The Torque side of the chart seems to be about like I would expect based upon the listed torque value of 330.

I'm at a loss of why the HP displays the way it does

Anyway, I was looking forward to putting your pull next to several others
but
my normal method of guess ta mating is not as accurate as usual

Again, the curves look like it would be a lot of fun to drive around on the street.

Grady

finally got dynoed

tmoss

Gettin Wired

final5-0

Mustang Master

tmoss

Gettin Wired

legalize420

Active Member

final5-0

Mustang Master

95Vert

New Member

94gtslow

Attachments

94gtslow

legalize420

Active Member

wytstang

Mustang Master

tmoss

Gettin Wired

94gtslow

final5-0

Mustang Master

tmoss

Gettin Wired

final5-0

Mustang Master

tmoss

Gettin Wired

final5-0

Mustang Master

final5-0

Mustang Master

Similar threads

finally got dynoed

Gettin Wired

Mustang Master

Gettin Wired

Active Member

Mustang Master

New Member

Attachments

Active Member

Mustang Master

Gettin Wired

Mustang Master

Gettin Wired

Mustang Master

Gettin Wired

Mustang Master

Mustang Master

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency