my new dyno #s hellz ya

[mattmoto441]

well went to the dyno lastnight and i laid down 620rwhp 610rwtq

will have sheet up later



the only part that makes me sad i cant go out and test the new power b/c its been raining all day yesterday and 2day


big thanks out to dyno Danwoot

[David]

****ing nice... 600hp daily friendly vert..

[Andy]

im so jealous...thats great to here. congratulations

[roo]

congrats.

[coop]

THE SHOP FTMFW

[C.J.]

you are a man among boys

[C.J.]

pervert

[C.J.]

lol

[David]

THE SHOP FTMFW

newest sponsor. :bolt:

[Alley]

THE SHOP FTMFW

No, he said Dyno Dan. Thats Dynosport, not The Shop.

[David]

Coop knows what he said.

[Alley]

Oh, I guess I'm confused on what the purpose of saying that is then. Is he saying Matt should of went to The Shop instead of Dynosport?

[Reaper]

Dynosport for the win. Dan's a good guy. Good numbers BTW!

[moparornocar]

Dynosport for the win. Dan's a good guy. Good numbers BTW!

never been to the shop, have nothing bad to say, But Matt has over 25 dyno pulls with Dan and he has been great to work with, And also takes good care of us.

[Alley]

The #'s would deffinatly not be as high at The Shop since they use a Mustang dyno.

[moparornocar]

The #'s would deffinatly not be as high at The Shop since they use a Mustang dyno.

This is true because they use two different methods to get the readings TQ numbers and curve will be different also. But the way I see it, IF Dan would have had a Mustang dyno, we would still go to him as I feel it is best to make your changes and testing at the same place to ge a better reading of improvements and failures. On a different note, We went out after wards with Dan to a place I believed is called Mistys, It was good food and had a great time, too bad the game was bad as there were some unhappy people there.

[roo]

562 mustang
565 dynojet

[C.J.]

how much does the cobra weigh?

[2gtalon]

dynosport ftmfw

[moparornocar]

562 mustang
565 dynojet

That seems pretty close.

[moparornocar]

how much does the cobra weigh?

With driver it is just under 4,000 lbs.

[Alley]

377 Dynojet
326 Mustang

[C.J.]

**** both places, we need AWD dyno

[schovil69]

Nice numbers.:)

[roo]

562 mustang
565 dynojet

That seems pretty close.

True story

[David]

not gonna lie i'm really surprise how close those numbers are.. roo would you care to elaborate as to why these numbers seem to not agree with mainstream knowledge of the difference between a dyno jet and mustang dyno?

[roo]

same tune, same boost, done about a month apart.

[David]

so your saying you have no explination for why they are so close then? BTW this is a serious question as my understanding there should have been a bigger difference.

[roo]

I have a theory. It involves octane booster

[roo]

The differences between the two runs were the fuels used. On the Mustang dyno I was using C16, on the Dynojet I was using 112. My theory is that C16 burns faster than 112. This would explain how I could safely run the same tune without detonation but make less power. Basically the 112 needs more advance since it is slower burning to optimize it for max power.

Just a theory

[David]

So the theory is that if you had C16 on the dynojet that your dynojet number would be higher?

[roo]

Actually I was more giving an example of why octane boosters can be dangerous

[LSWhat]

Good numbers man cant wait till next yr hopefully i will beable to get my numbers up there or higher with a 2.8L KB woot

[Cobra Commander]

well went to the dyno lastnight and i laid down 620rwhp 610rwtq

19 psi ftmfw!

[moparornocar]

well went to the dyno lastnight and i laid down 620rwhp 610rwtq

19 psi ftmfw!

19 accross the board.

[Cobra Commander]

Whipple blowers sure are impressive, thats for sure.

[¿umop apisdn]

Matt, did you get vid of the pull?

[mattmoto441]

Matt, did you get vid of the pull?

no 4got camera at home:doubt:

[TurboB18C1DC2]

The differences between the two runs were the fuels used. On the Mustang dyno I was using C16, on the Dynojet I was using 112. My theory is that C16 burns faster than 112. This would explain how I could safely run the same tune without detonation but make less power. Basically the 112 needs more advance since it is slower burning to optimize it for max power.

Just a theory

generally speaking a way to look at burn speed is by looking at its potential engergy. this potential energy is quantified by its btu content. for gasoline its btu rating or content is measured per pound. so as a result this btu rating is kind of closely related to its specific gravity, so as i said in another thread when you change fuels dont be surprised that you will need to change your tune as well. as specific gravity gravity decreases your a/f ratio if fuel delivery and timing is not changed will get leaner. since you are generally speaking delivering less fuel since specific gravity is measured in gms/gallon. also if you look at the RVP which if i remember right stands for reid vapor pressure which i think is related to volatility. anyways more importantly if i remember right i think that rvp and heat of vaporization are either one in the same or rvp is like the unit of measurement for heat of vaporization or they are directly related to each other. anyways as the heat of vaporization increases so well its ability to absorb heat. this generally results in anal cream pie and girl to girl snowballing as well as a possible abraham lincoln

ok c16 specific gravity is .735gms/gallon and sunoco turbo 112 is .715. so we know that sunoco maybe should have less energy content. or at least that your car would have ran leaner on the 112 than the c16. if specific gravity is lower how should your timing curve change to achieve mbtt? looking at it one way or should i say a simple way, if specific gravity and btu content are directly related and changes go the same way then since there is less energy content wouldnt you need more timing to achieve mbtt on a lower specific gravity fuel. but in the same way you could say since the fuel has a lower energy content wouldnt you need less timing to achieve mbtt? i have seen people say it both ways.

what i feel is if turbo 112 has less energy content but sufficient knock resistance it should need more timing to achieve mbtt than c16. also if the energy content is less then should its burn rate be slower, since cylinder pressure and heat are directly related, and i just dont see cylinder pressure going down and therefore heat going down but burn rate increasing.

last time i talked to ross he told me if you squeeze enough nos you can actually blow up your intake manifold and have shrapnel hit dynodan in the balls. he also told me diamond plate does increase cylinder pressure and can cause detonation or maybe just pre-ignition i dont know, i give up

the shop inc FTMFW!!

[Cobra Commander]

last time i talked to ross he told me if you squeeze enough nos you can actually blow up your intake manifold and have shrapnel hit dynodan in the balls. he also told me diamond plate does increase cylinder pressure and can cause detonation or maybe just pre-ignition i dont know, i give up

the shop inc FTMFW!!

Hahahhahaha!

[¿umop apisdn]

rofl

[TurboB18C1DC2]

last time i talked to ross he told me if you squeeze enough nos you can actually blow up your intake manifold and have shrapnel hit dynodan in the balls. he also told me diamond plate does increase cylinder pressure and can cause detonation or maybe just pre-ignition i dont know, i give up

the shop inc FTMFW!!

Hahahhahaha!

seriously though i have heard a lot of tuners say that as specific gravity does down you need less timing to achieve mbtt, which is somewhat counter intuitive.

[roo]

The differences between the two runs were the fuels used. On the Mustang dyno I was using C16, on the Dynojet I was using 112. My theory is that C16 burns faster than 112. This would explain how I could safely run the same tune without detonation but make less power. Basically the 112 needs more advance since it is slower burning to optimize it for max power.

Just a theory

generally speaking a way to look at burn speed is by looking at its potential engergy. this potential energy is quantified by its btu content. for gasoline its btu rating or content is measured per pound. so as a result this btu rating is kind of closely related to its specific gravity, so as i said in another thread when you change fuels dont be surprised that you will need to change your tune as well. as specific gravity gravity decreases your a/f ratio if fuel delivery and timing is not changed will get leaner. since you are generally speaking delivering less fuel since specific gravity is measured in gms/gallon. also if you look at the RVP which if i remember right stands for reid vapor pressure which i think is related to volatility. anyways more importantly if i remember right i think that rvp and heat of vaporization are either one in the same or rvp is like the unit of measurement for heat of vaporization or they are directly related to each other. anyways as the heat of vaporization increases so well its ability to absorb heat. this generally results in anal cream pie and girl to girl snowballing as well as a possible abraham lincoln

ok c16 specific gravity is .735gms/gallon and sunoco turbo 112 is .715. so we know that sunoco maybe should have less energy content. or at least that your car would have ran leaner on the 112 than the c16. if specific gravity is lower how should your timing curve change to achieve mbtt? looking at it one way or should i say a simple way, if specific gravity and btu content are directly related and changes go the same way then since there is less energy content wouldnt you need more timing to achieve mbtt on a lower specific gravity fuel. but in the same way you could say since the fuel has a lower energy content wouldnt you need less timing to achieve mbtt? i have seen people say it both ways.

what i feel is if turbo 112 has less energy content but sufficient knock resistance it should need more timing to achieve mbtt than c16. also if the energy content is less then should its burn rate be slower, since cylinder pressure and heat are directly related, and i just dont see cylinder pressure going down and therefore heat going down but burn rate increasing.

last time i talked to ross he told me if you squeeze enough nos you can actually blow up your intake manifold and have shrapnel hit dynodan in the balls. he also told me diamond plate does increase cylinder pressure and can cause detonation or maybe just pre-ignition i dont know, i give up

the shop inc FTMFW!!

I was waiting for you to jump in on this lol

So you're saying that the btu content in C16 should be higher so even if timing was optimal with the 112 you would still make more power with the C16.

[TurboB18C1DC2]

The differences between the two runs were the fuels used. On the Mustang dyno I was using C16, on the Dynojet I was using 112. My theory is that C16 burns faster than 112. This would explain how I could safely run the same tune without detonation but make less power. Basically the 112 needs more advance since it is slower burning to optimize it for max power.

Just a theory

generally speaking a way to look at burn speed is by looking at its potential engergy. this potential energy is quantified by its btu content. for gasoline its btu rating or content is measured per pound. so as a result this btu rating is kind of closely related to its specific gravity, so as i said in another thread when you change fuels dont be surprised that you will need to change your tune as well. as specific gravity gravity decreases your a/f ratio if fuel delivery and timing is not changed will get leaner. since you are generally speaking delivering less fuel since specific gravity is measured in gms/gallon. also if you look at the RVP which if i remember right stands for reid vapor pressure which i think is related to volatility. anyways more importantly if i remember right i think that rvp and heat of vaporization are either one in the same or rvp is like the unit of measurement for heat of vaporization or they are directly related to each other. anyways as the heat of vaporization increases so well its ability to absorb heat. this generally results in anal cream pie and girl to girl snowballing as well as a possible abraham lincoln

ok c16 specific gravity is .735gms/gallon and sunoco turbo 112 is .715. so we know that sunoco maybe should have less energy content. or at least that your car would have ran leaner on the 112 than the c16. if specific gravity is lower how should your timing curve change to achieve mbtt? looking at it one way or should i say a simple way, if specific gravity and btu content are directly related and changes go the same way then since there is less energy content wouldnt you need more timing to achieve mbtt on a lower specific gravity fuel. but in the same way you could say since the fuel has a lower energy content wouldnt you need less timing to achieve mbtt? i have seen people say it both ways.

what i feel is if turbo 112 has less energy content but sufficient knock resistance it should need more timing to achieve mbtt than c16. also if the energy content is less then should its burn rate be slower, since cylinder pressure and heat are directly related, and i just dont see cylinder pressure going down and therefore heat going down but burn rate increasing.

last time i talked to ross he told me if you squeeze enough nos you can actually blow up your intake manifold and have shrapnel hit dynodan in the balls. he also told me diamond plate does increase cylinder pressure and can cause detonation or maybe just pre-ignition i dont know, i give up

the shop inc FTMFW!!

I was waiting for you to jump in on this lol

So you're saying that the btu content in C16 should be higher so even if timing was optimal with the 112 you would still make more power with the C16.


its hard to say, it all depends on the relationship of specific gravity and btu content. c16s specific gravity is higher than sunoco turbo 112 and from what i have read and my experience there is at least some occasions when specific gravity goes up that btu does. but i cannot definitively say this is the case all the time. even if the specific gravity numerically increasing results in btu increasing that doesnt mean that both fuels will need to the same timing curve or spark advance to achieve mbtt. although generally speaking as btu goes up so should cylinder pressure and heat so you would think burn rate would. i dont know i give up

[roo]

Damn it!! You're supposed to have the answer lol

I haven't found any good articles yet explaining fuel specific gravities and what it all boils down to so you're a step ahead of me.

[TurboB18C1DC2]

Damn it!! You're supposed to have the answer lol

I haven't found any good articles yet explaining fuel specific gravities and what it all boils down to so you're a step ahead of me.

if i was you id just ask ross. even the articles i have found half believe one way half believe the other. i just find it easier to go to vivid.com and rub one out. to be honest with you, you have to be special to blow up an intake manifold. the throttle body was laying on the ground, thats mother ****ing tunning.

[Johnny]

that is the first time I have ever seen Ben post somthing that contributed in a positive way














and didnt end in poop ****

[TurboB18C1DC2]

that is the first time I have ever seen Ben post somthing that contributed in a positive way











and didnt end in poop ****

there were a handful on scr. there are only a few on here. only mad max and roo have replied so there could be a convo. i miss ross's old tech write ups. the quantitative and qualitative analysis of "intake manifold danger" by ross was phenomenal.

[roo]

lol

[TurboB18C1DC2]

yeah i dont know icefire. i have seen arguements for both sides of what we have been discussing. my personal opinion generally agrees with yours andrew but to to be honest i just cant say for sure. i have seen alot of debates go both ways and i can see the validity to both sides. like i said we need ross to end this debate. the point is at least you have first hand experience, which a lot of people that argue this topic out on the internet do not, but it would have been great if it would have happened on the same dyno. jerk.

[TurboB18C1DC2]

youd actually be somewhat surprised how many times will and i have debated and argued about this topic. all it resulted in was personal attacks and cutting. but im emo so i go across the street.

[clint]

I have always been under the impression that the heavier the fuel the leaner the engine will run if nothing is changed. ie flow/pressure through a given space between different specific gravitys = unequal flow.

[clint]

I actually had a guy working for me with a 90 Mustang gt. He put race fuel in it and it ran slower and overheated. Put 93 back in problem went away.

[TurboB18C1DC2]

Damn it!! You're supposed to have the answer lol

I haven't found any good articles yet explaining fuel specific gravities and what it all boils down to so you're a step ahead of me.

just an fyi i found an article by ross that definitively answers this debate. heres the link

myspace.com/kimber/vr4girl/stalker/intakemanifolddanger.html

[roo]

The answer to life

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/383/pagecannotfy8.png

[TurboB18C1DC2]

The answer to life

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/383/pagecannotfy8.png

i seriously rofl'd that was awesome.

[C.J.]

this topic sucks, way to many big technical words

poop ****!

[TurboB18C1DC2]

this topic sucks, way to many big technical words

poop ****!

poooooooooopppp diiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicccckkkkkkkk!!

[Cobra Commander]

just an fyi i found an article by ross that definitively answers this debate. heres the link

myspace.com/kimber/vr4girl/stalker/intakemanifolddanger.html

Hahahahahahahaa!

[C.J.]

just an fyi i found an article by ross that definitively answers this debate. heres the link

myspace.com/kimber/vr4girl/stalker/intakemanifolddanger.html

Hahahahahahahaa!

hahahahaha how did i miss this?

lol lol lol lol

[David]

wow.

[¿umop apisdn]

What did you do to get the 620?

[Cobra Commander]

How does the car feel on nitrous...... lol

[moparornocar]

What did you do to get the 620?

swapped the pulley, added 100 octane gas, installed the different tune (actually Dan modified that tune was 611.4RWHP base line)Ran the car and up popped 619.9RWHP so I guess it is not really 620?

[moparornocar]

How does the car feel on nitrous...... lol

Now that would be a gas!!! Or something?

[RabidB4C]

take the time to tune on a Dynojet....then drive the vehicle on the street that you just did with the Dynojet....you'll be restrapping & trying this process over & over until the figures are somewhat correct.



Mustang Dyno was designed for the tuning tech. when they get done tuning you car it
should run the same on the street as when they tuned it on the chassis dynometer.
for a fact the Mustang reads slightly different than the Dynojet....DJ is a little higher.
But in my mind for tuning a vehicle @ The Shop Inc. on there Mustang Dyno is the way
to insure your cars engine is running correctly. After the tuning is done take it to Dynosport for some Horsepower & Torque #'s.... if you need another sheet. Hands down the Mustand Dyno is a better quality piece of equipment.
Dynojets are for inflated horsepower & torque #'s.

everybody know EJ's of Omaha? his Dyno was the first Mustang 1750 ever built. when I went up and talked with him about
purchasing the Mustang dyno.....he said buy it & don't look back unless your just going to HP & TQ #'s all day.
I'm not tellin anyone where they should do business. I'm just letting you know what each of these pieces of equipment
can do for you nextime your thinking about taking your vehicle to get tuning work done.

have a wonderful day,
Scott

[shevelle6t9]

last time i talked to ross he told me if you squeeze enough nos you can actually blow up your intake manifold and have shrapnel hit dynodan in the balls. he also told me diamond plate does increase cylinder pressure and can cause detonation or maybe just pre-ignition i dont know, i give up

the shop inc FTMFW!!

Hahahhahaha!




hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahaha


That made it worth reading all of that


hahahahahahahhazhahahahahahhahaha its funny cause its tru

[TurboB18C1DC2]

take the time to tune on a Dynojet....then drive the vehicle on the street that you just did with the Dynojet....you'll be restrapping & trying this process over & over until the figures are somewhat correct.



Mustang Dyno was designed for the tuning tech. when they get done tuning you car it
should run the same on the street as when they tuned it on the chassis dynometer.
for a fact the Mustang reads slightly different than the Dynojet....DJ is a little higher.
But in my mind for tuning a vehicle @ The Shop Inc. on there Mustang Dyno is the way
to insure your cars engine is running correctly. After the tuning is done take it to Dynosport for some Horsepower & Torque #'s.... if you need another sheet. Hands down the Mustand Dyno is a better quality piece of equipment.
Dynojets are for inflated horsepower & torque #'s.

everybody know EJ's of Omaha? his Dyno was the first Mustang 1750 ever built. when I went up and talked with him about
purchasing the Mustang dyno.....he said buy it & don't look back unless your just going to HP & TQ #'s all day.
I'm not tellin anyone where they should do business. I'm just letting you know what each of these pieces of equipment
can do for you nextime your thinking about taking your vehicle to get tuning work done.

have a wonderful day,
Scott


what are the two different ways the mustang dyno and dynojet measure hp and tq? and tell me about the mustang dynos ability to load hold a car on the dyno for tuning.

[Johnny]

tell me how mooshoe pork is so good

[TurboB18C1DC2]

tell me how mooshoe pork is so good

its the special sauce.

i would just like an explanation of the differences not just a statement. we've dynoed cars before on ej's back in 01 and sublimes and dynosports. i have no hate for mustang dynos, i just a hate the shop inc. jk. i just hate the owners of the shop inc. jk. on a serious note i have never talked to them, but i do hate them. jk

[moparornocar]

take the time to tune on a Dynojet....then drive the vehicle on the street that you just did with the Dynojet....you'll be restrapping & trying this process over & over until the figures are somewhat correct.



Mustang Dyno was designed for the tuning tech. when they get done tuning you car it
should run the same on the street as when they tuned it on the chassis dynometer.
for a fact the Mustang reads slightly different than the Dynojet....DJ is a little higher.
But in my mind for tuning a vehicle @ The Shop Inc. on there Mustang Dyno is the way
to insure your cars engine is running correctly. After the tuning is done take it to Dynosport for some Horsepower & Torque #'s.... if you need another sheet. Hands down the Mustand Dyno is a better quality piece of equipment.
Dynojets are for inflated horsepower & torque #'s.

everybody know EJ's of Omaha? his Dyno was the first Mustang 1750 ever built. when I went up and talked with him about
purchasing the Mustang dyno.....he said buy it & don't look back unless your just going to HP & TQ #'s all day.
I'm not tellin anyone where they should do business. I'm just letting you know what each of these pieces of equipment
can do for you nextime your thinking about taking your vehicle to get tuning work done.

have a wonderful day,
Scott

Each time we have Dyno tuned with Dan , We always datalog on the car on a a drive around the area to double check And have never had to restrap it on? We also continually datalog it out here before Matt races someone locally.

[clint]

take the time to tune on a Dynojet....then drive the vehicle on the street that you just did with the Dynojet....you'll be restrapping & trying this process over & over until the figures are somewhat correct.



Mustang Dyno was designed for the tuning tech. when they get done tuning you car it
should run the same on the street as when they tuned it on the chassis dynometer.
for a fact the Mustang reads slightly different than the Dynojet....DJ is a little higher.
But in my mind for tuning a vehicle @ The Shop Inc. on there Mustang Dyno is the way
to insure your cars engine is running correctly. After the tuning is done take it to Dynosport for some Horsepower & Torque #'s.... if you need another sheet. Hands down the Mustand Dyno is a better quality piece of equipment.
Dynojets are for inflated horsepower & torque #'s.

everybody know EJ's of Omaha? his Dyno was the first Mustang 1750 ever built. when I went up and talked with him about
purchasing the Mustang dyno.....he said buy it & don't look back unless your just going to HP & TQ #'s all day.
I'm not tellin anyone where they should do business. I'm just letting you know what each of these pieces of equipment
can do for you nextime your thinking about taking your vehicle to get tuning work done.

have a wonderful day,
Scott


what are the two different ways the mustang dyno and dynojet measure hp and tq? and tell me about the mustang dynos ability to load hold a car on the dyno for tuning.

Eddy current vs. inertia. First being Mustang and second DJ.

[TurboB18C1DC2]

take the time to tune on a Dynojet....then drive the vehicle on the street that you just did with the Dynojet....you'll be restrapping & trying this process over & over until the figures are somewhat correct.



Mustang Dyno was designed for the tuning tech. when they get done tuning you car it
should run the same on the street as when they tuned it on the chassis dynometer.
for a fact the Mustang reads slightly different than the Dynojet....DJ is a little higher.
But in my mind for tuning a vehicle @ The Shop Inc. on there Mustang Dyno is the way
to insure your cars engine is running correctly. After the tuning is done take it to Dynosport for some Horsepower & Torque #'s.... if you need another sheet. Hands down the Mustand Dyno is a better quality piece of equipment.
Dynojets are for inflated horsepower & torque #'s.

everybody know EJ's of Omaha? his Dyno was the first Mustang 1750 ever built. when I went up and talked with him about
purchasing the Mustang dyno.....he said buy it & don't look back unless your just going to HP & TQ #'s all day.
I'm not tellin anyone where they should do business. I'm just letting you know what each of these pieces of equipment
can do for you nextime your thinking about taking your vehicle to get tuning work done.

have a wonderful day,
Scott


what are the two different ways the mustang dyno and dynojet measure hp and tq? and tell me about the mustang dynos ability to load hold a car on the dyno for tuning.

Eddy current vs. inertia. First being Mustang and second DJ.

i think most people know that. what i am trying to say is does anyone know why mustang decided to use a different roller system and what are the two different ways that hp and tq is measured. i heard that it was due to bukkake volume limitations that mustang decided to go with their design which involved two girls to be recipients and therefore increased the amount of snowballing. also the way they measure hp and tq is different. dynojets use anal creampie and mustang dynoes use vaginal creampie. they are similar but different. i think one back calculates facials into titty ****ing and the other measures titty ****ing and calculates facials.

let me tell you for real my opinion

with a dynojet the car spins the rollers or drums that is a known fixed weight= usally 2500 or 3000 lbs. the computer thats hooked up measures the amount of time the engine takes to spin the drums or rollers. so knowing the weight and acceleration as long as weight and time interval stays constant you can calculate hp from knowing simple calculations like w=fd and f=ma and p=w/t. since this is the way that a dynojet calculates or measures a cars force it reads hp and then back calculates tq. think of a dynojet as not reading tq but instead the acceleration of the rollers aka the rotational energy exerted by the car. a dynojet does not base its numbers off the hp=tq x rpm/5252 equation. it uses the 1 hp = 33,000 lbft/minute or 1 hp = 550 lbft/sec since these are a measure of rotational energy. this makes sense since we are looking for p and we know w, which is f x d and t is in sec or min, in the case of the dynojet in sec. it does use tq = hp x 5252 / RPM like i said earlier to back cal tq.

a mustang dyno or absorption dyno applies resistance to the rollers in the case of the mustang dyno an eddy current brake to develop the resistance or load, instead of using the actual weight or mass of the roller as the resistance like in a dynojet. this method measures force as torque which is the opposite of the dynojet.

put very simply i kind of feel that with the dynojet you are measuing the ability of the car to accelerate the rollers mass or weight. where as since with mustang dyno is adjustable in its absorption or resistance you could look at it as it is actually testing the your vehicles ability to accelerate a weight that is equal to the weight of your car plus even aerodynamic load as well. plus there is the whole arguement with mustang dynos that your numbers are more "real" since you are directly measuring tq like a "strain" or "force" gauge instead of calculating it like a dynojet would. plus like i already said a absorption type dyno can add aero load. generally speaking from my experience if the car that is being dynoed is equal to or similar to the weight of the dynojets rollers the power readings between mustang and dynojet are simmilar. as the weight goes over 3000 and aero loads get higher due to poor aerodynamics the numbers will grow apart.

in tems of tunning being able to load hold aka hold the engine at a certain engine speed and load aka rpm and vac/boost its something that the mustang dyno cant say is the only one with this ability. dynojets can do the same thing now.

lastly in regards to repeatability. dynojets in my opinion will always have better repeatability results going from one dynojet to another. i feel with the mustang dyno's ability to be corrected by the owner and im not speaking of weather or atmospheric conditions its repeatability from one mustang dyno to another will always be in question.

ross

[blk97z28]

DYNOSPORT!!!!:) Dyno Dan is GREAT to work with!:)

[LastPewterZ]

^^ Edit your sig, those aren't Z28 wheels on your car. AKA Ten Spoke SS wheels or more simply put Chrome Ten Spokes

[blk97z28]

Better

[Cobra Commander]

lol @ Tanner.

[turbodaytona87]

What does a dyno run cost these days?

[mattmoto441]

What does a dyno run cost these days?



money:bolt:



What did you do to get the 620?



more boostwoot