Strapped my stock GT to a Dynojet
07-10-2011, 09:05 AM
#12
6th Gear Member
07-10-2011, 09:24 AM
#14
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,846
They could just rate it conservatively for the sake of doing so. Also, when the motors are completely stock (<500 miles), they tend to dyno lower than the OPs. In that case they usually fall pretty close to the 412hp mark.
07-10-2011, 09:27 AM
#15
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,846
07-10-2011, 09:33 AM
#16
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 348
07-10-2011, 12:43 PM
#19
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Anchorage, AK
Posts: 987
Ok here is my take on the whole numbers game.
First newer drivetrains do not have as much parasitic loss as they used to.
Second Dynojets tend to be more liberal with the numbers, than say Mustang dynos.
Third dynos are all calibrated different, there should be something like a division are weights and measures, to verify dyno calibrations nationwide.
Fourth they are really only good for comparing base numbers, with subsequent modded runs.
First newer drivetrains do not have as much parasitic loss as they used to.
Second Dynojets tend to be more liberal with the numbers, than say Mustang dynos.
Third dynos are all calibrated different, there should be something like a division are weights and measures, to verify dyno calibrations nationwide.
Fourth they are really only good for comparing base numbers, with subsequent modded runs.
Last edited by AK_Kayaker; 07-10-2011 at 11:02 PM.