View Single Post
Old May 7, 2008 | 05:30 PM
  #43 (permalink)  
Steve Hellums's Avatar
Steve Hellums
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 2
From: INDIANA
Default Re: WTF, No Way These DYNO #'s are right

Originally Posted by MMZ_TimeLord
So, based on the dyno sheet that looks like mine, with JUST a 20% loss from the drive line, you would have these numbers vs. my stock dyno sheet...

264.9 * 1.25 = 331.125 HP ------------vs. stock----------- 249 * 1.25 = 311.25 HP
294.7 * 1.25 = 368.375 torque --------vs. stock---------- 252 * 1.25 = 315 torque

And that's not even counting the low numbers for the Mustang dyno.

If you factor in the extra 12% for the Mustang dyno loss/low numbers you get

264.9 * 1.470588 = 389.5588 HP ------------vs. stock----------- 249 * 1.470588 = 366.1765 HP
294.7 * 1.470588 = 433.3824 torque --------vs. stock---------- 252 * 1.470588 = 370.5882 torque

So it looks like you aren't getting that bad of numbers after all.
I talked to RENNtech about the results and they said for that machine they were pretty good #'s (266rwhp). They said the stock C32 AMG on that dyno jet was 289rwhp.They also said on a dyno jet I would have probably been in the mid 300's.
[above edited, looked at notes and had posted wrong machine & #'s forC32 AMG- posted from home, notes at work]

Originally Posted by Bulldogger
Dyno's are really only a tuning tool. They should be used for modifying and correcting A/F ratios and tuning. You can check them for performance gains after mods are done but it should be done the same day or on a day with similar temps and humidity otherwise you won't really have correct numbers. Numbers are numbers track times are what really matters, because they tell you what you really have.
A/F ratio's were the main reason for doing the dyno + I did want to know what it was putting to the ground. I was just so shocked because the rwhp was 80 or so less than what I thought I'd see.
 

Last edited by Steve Hellums; May 8, 2008 at 02:23 AM.
Reply