MustangDyno vs. DynoJet

[MartyMoose]

My 'base' pull was on a DynoJet back in 2002, which resulted the following #'s with the following mods:

205HP

3.73's
K&N filter

My next pull was on a MustangDyno back in 2003, which resulted the following #'s with the following mods:

183HP @ 4250RPM
234Ft/Lbs @ 3750RPM

3.73's
Mac CAI & K&N
Steeda UDP's
MagnaFlow X w/ cats and cat-back
FordChip performance chip from fordchip.com

Yesterday the car went back on the MustangDyno, which resulted the following #'s with the following mods:

(Pre- 'fine-tuning' with the Predator)
207.5HP @ 5000RPM
224.9 Ft/Lbs @ 4750 RPM

(Post- 'fine-tuning' with the Predator)
208.6HP @ 5000RPM
237.6 Ft/Lbs @ 4250RPM

3.73's
TransGo shift kit
FIPK II
AccuFab 75mm TB
C&L Plenum
Steeda UDP's
MagnaFlow X w/ cats and cat-back
(Before/After with Predator using 92 Octane pump gas)

When tuning A/F with the Predator he pulled timing out of the bottom and added a little to the top. The A/F ratio is the 'stock' Predator settings. The A/F graph is pretty linear at about 13.0:1. He couldn't do much more with the timing because the car just didn't respond very well to it (lost HP and a puff or two of smoke out of the exhaust).

How does the DynoJet correlate to the MustangDyno regarding HP#'s (I thought I read in these forums that the DynoJet is about +15% compared to the MustangDyno. i.e, higher HP#'s).

Do these #'s look like they're where they should be with these mods (Post- 'fine-tuning).

Your thoughts/opinions appreciated.

 

[helty]

Mustang Dyno's generally give lower readings than DynoJet's.

what year is your car? i'm guessing pre 99. if so those #'s look acccurate to me.

 

[MartyMoose]

The car is a 2001 AODE.

 

[helty]

wow, that seems kinda low for a PI GT, even for an Auto. maybe im wrong then. wait till someone with a bit more dyno experience come along, im sure they'll correct me.

 

[ponysarepretty]

generally autos pull 215-225 on dynojets stock

 

[MartyMoose]

Then, it sounds like is was a 'slow' car, right off the lot.

I own 2 mid-2001 GT AODE's, and I often complain (to myself) that both of these cars 'feel' slow; thus, my reason for the mods.

Did the mid-2001's have any HP/Tq issues, or was I just lucky enough to get two 'slower' cars?

 

[ponysarepretty]

Not that I am aware of.

 

[Hornetsnest]

generally autos pull 215-225 on dynojets stock

I wouldn't give them that much credit...I've seen them usually more like 205-215rwhp bone stock...18-20% drivetrain loss averages them around 208-213...Have you ever seen a STOCK 99-04 GT AT put down 225 to the wheels???

 

[jstreet0204]

Don't get too wrapped up in the numbers. They don't seem too far off, just try to keep using the same dyno to guage your progress. Trying to compare numbers from different dynos in different conditions doesn't really tell you much.

 

[dollarbill]

They do seem a little low, but how does it feel? Will it roast the tires if you nail it from a dead stop? Do you have any track times? When in doubt, throw more money at it.

 

[MartyMoose]

Yeah, I hear ya dollarbill.

Actually, the car feels pretty good in the lower RPM. Seems like torque comes on early (max is at 4250RPM), but falls flat on it's a$s at 4500RPM.

Yeah, I wish I had did the initial 'base' pull on the MustangDyno.

But to be honest, I think I'm just coming to realize that the car just needs a little boost

 

[trinity_gt]

Don't get too wrapped up in the numbers. They don't seem too far off, just try to keep using the same dyno to guage your progress. Trying to compare numbers from different dynos in different conditions doesn't really tell you much.

I agree. The delta from mod to mod, on the same dyno, are worth more than the absolutes. To my thinking the MD shouldn't really be used to guage absolute, at-the-wheels power. It's a tuning tool, able to put the engine under a calibrated, consistent load for fixing A/F ratios and timing.

If you want actual at the wheels HP numbers, use a Dynojet. Or go to the track...

 

[MatthewP]

My MD-600 reads 13-14% lower than Dynojet 248's in the same area. Your numbers don't seem too far out to me. My 2002 GT made 209/242 stock on the MD-600, but that was with about 30000 miles and after I took it apart it was clear that the pistons were pretty carboned up. If it was clean, it would have had a little less compression and probably a little less power. This car is a standard transmission car though.

-Matthew