FINALLY...dyno comparisons pre- and post-mods
01-27-2006, 02:02 PM
#16
Drifting
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The discrepency between the Mustang chart of the "baseline" car and the Dynojet chart of the "baseline" car is quite consistent with my experience with load dynos (both Mustang and Dyno Dynamics) vs. Dynojet. The baseline Vivid car(with intake and exhaust mods) is showing approx. 9% less peak hp than the stock EVOMS car. This suggests to me that the Vivid car actually has more hp than stock because commonly there appears to be a 10-15 percent discrepency between the two types of dynos.
P.S.
>>>>As for the lower rear wheel horsepower, the deficit to horsepower at the crank could be due to anything including drivetrain,<<<<
Drivetrain losses are routinely overstated (Duh!). Think about where these power losses go..... they turn into heat. How many transmissions boil over at the track. How many CV boots melt. Not too many.
P.S.
>>>>As for the lower rear wheel horsepower, the deficit to horsepower at the crank could be due to anything including drivetrain,<<<<
Drivetrain losses are routinely overstated (Duh!). Think about where these power losses go..... they turn into heat. How many transmissions boil over at the track. How many CV boots melt. Not too many.
Last edited by Russ Murphy; 01-27-2006 at 02:22 PM.
01-27-2006, 02:11 PM
#17
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm... each grid in the plot is approx 25 HP, so the smoothing may render the gains statistically much less significant. I have also read that Mustang dynos tend to read lower, though.
01-27-2006, 07:34 PM
#20
Drifting
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Prince George's County, MD
Posts: 2,481
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
You guys don't have dyno days? Is dyno'ing taboo too?
Originally Posted by vividracing
OK here we go fellas. The two different graphs were done here in house at VividRacing. We have an AWD Mustang dyno. Now for those of you that know anything about dynos you will know that Mustangs read lower than a dynojet. Now for the gentlemen that posted the graph from EVOMS, notic what dyno that is on. Yes you are correct, a dynojet. Now our dyno reads low. All dynos are different, none read the same. It is impossible for every one to be the same. I am not going to get into the differences on the 2 dynos but the differences are big and that is why the numbers differ so much. Now on to the smoothing. The first test was ORIGINALLY done using different mustang software than what we are currently and i used a higher smoothing factor but since the original I have stopped using such a high smoothing factor so that i can see exactly how a motor is performing through out the entire power band. We figure that it is better to test real world products and show real world results. The chip made a big difference in the total drivablity of the car, I do recommend it. So if you have any more questions about the dyno numbers or smoothing please feel free to PM me and I can answer any more questions.
01-28-2006, 04:10 AM
#21
Burning Brakes
Originally Posted by vividracing
The chip made a big difference in the total drivablity of the car, I do recommend it.
But I can't say that more HP is a bad thing...
