Dyno Numbers Are In : A Lesson In Power Under The Curve
10-24-2006, 12:30 AM
#46
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by KPG
Dock, I think that is a DynoJet.... do you have a Mustang graph so we can compare apples to apples? Kevin
10-24-2006, 05:33 AM
#47
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by KPG
Dock, I think that is a DynoJet.... do you have a Mustang graph so we can compare apples to apples? Kevin
If you want to tune and compare to Porsche apples you are going to need one of these:
Next best thing is the AX22 and your two shift 60-130 time puts you right on the money at 540hp and 750NM - very impressive for the spend and mods
10-24-2006, 09:02 AM
#49
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TB993tt
If you want to tune and compare to Porsche apples you are going to need one of these:
Next best thing is the AX22 and your two shift 60-130 time puts you right on the money at 540hp and 750NM - very impressive for the spend and mods
Next best thing is the AX22 and your two shift 60-130 time puts you right on the money at 540hp and 750NM - very impressive for the spend and mods
As for the AX22 being the next best thing...I dont agree, there are other units cheaper with double the satellite update rate per sec. Kevin
10-24-2006, 09:03 AM
#50
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by KPG
Dock, I found one for you. Hard to see but clearly states 457HP and 437TQ. compared to 510HP and 565TQ.... not as close as you would have us believe. Kevin
The EVO dyno you posted is too small for me to clearly pull numbers at rpm markers, but if you did assess the torque value every 500 rpm starting with 2500 (through 6500) and took the average, you'd get a quick idea of power under the curve. This can also show where each car makes it's power relative to each other...lower or higher in the rpm range.
I used EVO's stage 4 as a comparison to your UMW stage X only because it appears to be the closest EVO package in terms of overall performance, and it allows us the chance to evaluate the programs from a macro point of view...about the best you can do since (IMO) comparisons of this type are hard to keep in an apples to apples context. The three dynos presented here (1 UMW and 2 EVO) hardly establishes anything except a macro view.
What I get out of the EVO versus UMW comparison is that UMW makes it's power earlier in the rpm range, and EVO makes it's power later in the rpm range. I think this difference can be attributed mainly to the different turbos each company uses. Assuming one car makes more low end power, and the other makes more high end power, someone can decide based on their driving style/requirements which is the best fit for them.
Last edited by Dock; 10-24-2006 at 09:36 AM.
10-24-2006, 09:21 AM
#51
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My buddy george just completed his stage III/IV. (He had everything but the headers) and he dyno'd 495hp on a 4 wheel mustang dyno. So I would assume add a few ponies with the headers on. Just to clarify his setup is Stage IV EVO progamming on kkk24's with the V-Flow intake, and a fabspeed medium exhaust.
Considering my IA/EVO stage II dyno'd 445hp on a Mustang 4 wheel dyno, another 50-60hp for the stage IV sounds about right to me.
Considering my IA/EVO stage II dyno'd 445hp on a Mustang 4 wheel dyno, another 50-60hp for the stage IV sounds about right to me.
10-24-2006, 09:37 AM
#52
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dock
I don't remember talking about peak power numbers in my post comparing EVO's stage 4 versus your UMW program.
The EVO dyno you posted is too small for me to clearly pull numbers at rpm markers, but if you did assess the torque value every 500 rpm starting with 2500 (through 6500) and took the average, you'd get a quick idea of power under the curve. This can also show where each car makes it's power relative to each other...lower or higher in the rpm range.
I used EVO's stage 4 as a comparison to your UMW stage X only because it appears to be the closest EVO package in terms of overall performance, and it allows us the chance to evaluate the programs from a macro point of view...about the best you can do since (IMO) comparisons of this type are hard to keep in an apples to apples context. The three dynos presented here (1 UMW and 2 EVO) hardly establishes anything except a macro view.
What I get out of the EVO versus UMW comparison is that UMW makes it's power earlier in the rpm range, and EVO makes it's power later in the rpm range. I think this difference can be attributed mainly to the different turbos each company uses. Assuming one car makes more low end power, and the other makes more high end power, someone can decide based on their driving style/requirements which is the best fit for them.
The EVO dyno you posted is too small for me to clearly pull numbers at rpm markers, but if you did assess the torque value every 500 rpm starting with 2500 (through 6500) and took the average, you'd get a quick idea of power under the curve. This can also show where each car makes it's power relative to each other...lower or higher in the rpm range.
I used EVO's stage 4 as a comparison to your UMW stage X only because it appears to be the closest EVO package in terms of overall performance, and it allows us the chance to evaluate the programs from a macro point of view...about the best you can do since (IMO) comparisons of this type are hard to keep in an apples to apples context. The three dynos presented here (1 UMW and 2 EVO) hardly establishes anything except a macro view.
What I get out of the EVO versus UMW comparison is that UMW makes it's power earlier in the rpm range, and EVO makes it's power later in the rpm range. I think this difference can be attributed mainly to the different turbos each company uses. Assuming one car makes more low end power, and the other makes more high end power, someone can decide based on their driving style/requirements which is the best fit for them.
10-24-2006, 09:40 AM
#53
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dock looks like about 450 FTlbs at 5500, I know it is quite small and a guess, but still no higher TQ on the back end with comparable dynos.
Maxwell, can you track down your friends dyno sheet and run log? Thanks. Kevin
Maxwell, can you track down your friends dyno sheet and run log? Thanks. Kevin
10-24-2006, 10:04 AM
#54
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by KPG
Toby, thanks but no thanks.... I dont need a Ferrari engine, I am quite happy with flat-6 Porsche.
this is how real Porsche torque is quantified, a little more to it than the 10sec roller run - Porsche apples 
Originally Posted by KPG
As for the AX22 being the next best thing...I dont agree, there are other units cheaper with double the satellite update rate per sec. Kevin
10-24-2006, 10:09 AM
#55
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by KPG
Apples to apples Dock... Mustang to Mustang..
10-24-2006, 12:18 PM
#56
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TB993tt
It is the mode of measurement I am highlighting this is how real Porsche torque is quantified, a little more to it than the 10sec roller run - Porsche apples
this is how real Porsche torque is quantified, a little more to it than the 10sec roller run - Porsche apples Cheers, Kevin
10-27-2006, 01:06 AM
#57
Advanced
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kevin,
Thank you for all of your hard work, taking the time to post your 1/4 mile times, and sharing your dyno numbers.
I found Kevin in a round about way through a 911 publication on the PP100 programmer.
Although I was only going to program my car because I could not be convinced by other Stage 1+ kits with their peaky and late torque/hp curves , I have purchased an identical Stage 2 set-up as yours from Ultimate Motorwerks.
This decision is based on 1) your feedback, 2) Kevin's unbelievable experience in building turbos, 3) the ease and unobtrusive nature of going through the obd 2 port for programming, 4) unbelievably early and flat torque/hp curve (I've grown up on V8's so this is imperative to me), and 5) Kevin's patience and unbelievable customer service.
I too will share my experiences with the forum, which I know are going to be outstanding.
Thank you again for all of your great insight and sharing your outstanding experiences,
Jon
Thank you for all of your hard work, taking the time to post your 1/4 mile times, and sharing your dyno numbers.
I found Kevin in a round about way through a 911 publication on the PP100 programmer.
Although I was only going to program my car because I could not be convinced by other Stage 1+ kits with their peaky and late torque/hp curves , I have purchased an identical Stage 2 set-up as yours from Ultimate Motorwerks.
This decision is based on 1) your feedback, 2) Kevin's unbelievable experience in building turbos, 3) the ease and unobtrusive nature of going through the obd 2 port for programming, 4) unbelievably early and flat torque/hp curve (I've grown up on V8's so this is imperative to me), and 5) Kevin's patience and unbelievable customer service.
I too will share my experiences with the forum, which I know are going to be outstanding.
Thank you again for all of your great insight and sharing your outstanding experiences,
Jon
10-27-2006, 01:11 AM
#58
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jon Elliott
Kevin,
Thank you for all of your hard work, taking the time to post your 1/4 mile times, and sharing your dyno numbers.
I found Kevin in a round about way through a 911 publication on the PP100 programmer.
Although I was only going to program my car because I could not be convinced by the peaky and late torque/hp curves, I have purchased an identical Stage 2 set-up from Ultimate Motorwerks.
This decision is based on 1) your feedback, 2) Kevin's unbelievable experience in building turbos, 3) the ease and unobtrusive nature of going through the obd 2 port for programming, 4) unbelievably early and flat torque/hp curve (I've grown up on V8's so this is imperative to me), and 5) Kevin's patience and unbelievable customer service.
I too will share my experiences with the forum, which I know are going to outstanding.
Thank you again for all of your great insight and sharing your outstanding experiences,
Jon
Thank you for all of your hard work, taking the time to post your 1/4 mile times, and sharing your dyno numbers.
I found Kevin in a round about way through a 911 publication on the PP100 programmer.
Although I was only going to program my car because I could not be convinced by the peaky and late torque/hp curves, I have purchased an identical Stage 2 set-up from Ultimate Motorwerks.
This decision is based on 1) your feedback, 2) Kevin's unbelievable experience in building turbos, 3) the ease and unobtrusive nature of going through the obd 2 port for programming, 4) unbelievably early and flat torque/hp curve (I've grown up on V8's so this is imperative to me), and 5) Kevin's patience and unbelievable customer service.
I too will share my experiences with the forum, which I know are going to outstanding.
Thank you again for all of your great insight and sharing your outstanding experiences,
Jon
