Now that is wisdom....... (low bow)

For almost all of the people on this board this is a very passionate hobby...... we like to compare results regardless of how flawed the "scientific method" is.

 

It can be both if you lay all the cards out. Yes, most of us know it is meant as a means of tuning...

But why not use the STANDARD SAE to compare! WE ARE GOING TO!


Yes we do!

 

SAE standardization? The output is only as good as the input and when your input is garage then so is your output. When you want to turn on your learning light bulb you will begin to understand. I joined this thread to try to bring reason/logic to the discussion. But this is another thread I'll abandon as I cannot fight the irrationality of people blinded by their passion.

 

at some point though, you have to acknowledge and accept that your measurement method, although possibly flawed, is the best we can do.

Thanks for crapping this thread all to hell though! We'll miss ya!

 

Cry us a river already. Everytime someone posts something you don't like you get huffy and puffy about it then use the "I am leaving with my nose in the air" line.

We acknowledge you as an asset to the community, but you have to realize that the greater majority of people here could care less about the scientific explanations. Believe it or not some just like to look at the graphs and say wow. Call it passion or whatever you want, but we don't need a freaking Mr. Wizard answer for everything.

Bottom line, people want to see that if I strap product x,y,z what is that going to do for me. While it helps one make a better decision to have more variability eliminated, you work with what you got. For most people, outside temp, model of dyno, fuel used, humidity are close enough. You start talking IAT's then you are working on a function of cooling your intake charge, pulley selection, or a host of other engine related variables.

Perhaps if you wanted to start a tech section aimed towards gearheads the admins could make it a sticky, the "Ask DMH" like the Ask Alta thread. Just a thought.

 

dmh go Hijack your own thread!

We were have fun comparing each others numbers. It's always a vendor that comes in and stirs things up WHY!

The Thread title is "Dyno Charts" not "dmh explain to us why we are wasting our money on Dyno Runs, you should come to me and get a custom tune"

 

Kickass thread save for some arrogance/ignorance.

I was at helix when they dyno'd a bone stock '05 MCS and got 150 hp at the wheels. Eric explained that if a dyno shop adds a correction factor, the base numbers may be much higher, but if the dynos are done right the difference after mods should be the same.

If I had a before dyno of my 17% et al, I would go get a after. I might just have to do it to see where I stand anyway...

 

It can also lower the number as well.

Take my last runs, uncorrected 222whp/186lbs/ft

Corrected: 215.6/179

 

Screw passion!!! ...there I go being sarcastic again....

 

Model:2002
Year:Mini Cooper S
Transmission: 6 speed manual
Gear Used:
Dyno: Mustang MD-250
Modifications:
Atmospheric conditions (aka Temperature, humidity, etc.): unknown.
SAE Correction or Actual WHP: Before 184.5 whp and 162.3 wheel torque.
After: 187.0 whp and 163.3 wheel torque.
Notes: This is a comparison between a car with a stock exhaust and the same car with a one ball exhaust

Because this dyno was alittle over 3 years ago, we unfortunately do not remember the atmospheric conditions or the specific mods this car had. Sorry. Must have been all those paint chips we ate as kids.

 

Edit on 01.16.2007!

Model:2003
Year:Mini Cooper S
Transmission: 6 speed manual
Gear Used: 3
Dyno: PowerDyn OBD
Modifications: Pulley, Exhaust, Head, Cam, ECU......
Atmospheric conditions (aka Temperature, humidity, etc.): 10°C, 70% hum. Q 1015 hpa
SAE Correction or Actual WHP: Actual DIN cranck HP
Notes: We did 7 runs in 30 min., this was run 3 which is average in HP and NM.
To convert NM to lbs/ft => 136 NM = 100 lbs/ft

 

madmick whats with the wavy torque curve? you might want to get that figured out! that looks like the imfamous 3000 flat spot I hear so much about but have never seen.

 

Should try doing the pulls in 4th...

 

We started the the dyno at 2500 rpm, take a look at 3000 rpm the torque is 240 NM / 176 lbs.
The torque at 3000 rpm is as high as a good running JCW at 4500 rpm.
But we have to check the bypas valve.
The car has a first generation supercharger with 14% pulley in adition to a 3% cranckpulley, at 3000 rpm I have 10 psi boost.
I have a new supercharger which will get a 15% pulley - hope that will bring some more boost at lower rpm.

 

All I have to say to the Dyno nay sayers....

The Poor Workman Blames his Tools

 

LOL.. SAE corrected numbers is the best way to "Almost" compare one to the other.. but the driver needs to know if it is corrected or NOT!! And actually if the driver is then adding mods to the car he will see the differance... if he is just getting the numbers and then tring to compare to numbers else where, YES there can be a differance, but the SAE corrected is susposed to make it as equal as possible!! If a guy says he turned 300 whp and has a dyno saying that.. then he did!! Unless you can dyno on the same machine.. then why not just say.... " cool, Good numbers!! ??" No matter what the gauge is to have fun and measure.. why try and destroy it??

My STOCK 06 in 98* Fl. temp made 145 WHP ( corrected )!! That SUX to me... but it is still a riot to drive... and when I get smoked by a 225 WHP MINI.. I can just smile !!

Just me......................................

Thumper

 

no dyno sheet

but how about a video of the dyno

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roSIU6UL_4U

and how that translates into performance at the track.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuuswp7D-RY

 

I think I blacked out when you launched

Bill

 

Sweet

 

Thumper:

"If a guy says he turned 300 whp and has a dyno saying that.. then he did!!"
Untrue. You might consider understanding how the dyno and/or operator work.

"Unless you can dyno on the same machine.. then why not just say.... " cool, Good numbers!! ??" No matter what the gauge is to have fun and measure.. why try and destroy it??"
Because truth matters.

"My STOCK 06 in 98* Fl. temp made 145 WHP ( corrected )!! That SUX to me... but it is still a riot to drive... and when I get smoked by a 225 WHP MINI.. I can just smile !!"
Are you saying reality is not fair?

 

There is a point where you have to "trust" some one!! and being that the playing fields ( dyno's ) is one of the ways to measure.. then cool!! If the operater is a flake... or the cal. isnt up to date.... that is part of it!! the computer makes it so every inch of the world can now post... and it HAS to be agreed that there IS dyno results that arent correct.... and the " USE My DYNO and we'll see what he gets !!" is just another way to discredit a run some one has... This isnt rocket science.. the SAE is susposed to make all runs equal with temp/humidity/alt.. blah..blah... does it?? dont know.. dont really care, unless it is a pride thing.. or a money thing.. ect!! I know on Flow benches the computer is set to consider all factors.. and the numbers you get in Fl. IS SUSPOSED to be the numbers you get in Ca. ( according to Super Flow ) does it?? dont know.. I am not taking a head and flow it on the left coast just to see!!

As far as "Fair" There isnt any such thing on this earth!! but then that is

Just me......................................

Thumper

 

If you want to see some worthless Dyno numbers that no one cares about, see at post #9

 

WAAAAAYYYYYY HARSH ...

 

2nd that. There's never a good reason to trash anyone.

 

Nice... Just got all my piping back with zero boost leaks... So off to the dyno in the rain... Don't think my map sensor will do 32 psi... Damn motec...