Scout2232

I was curious why the Mustang dyno's read lower than dynojets. Also is there a general % difference between the 2? What do you guys think?

drhoward

I thought it was 15% lower than other dyno's for some reason...I could be wrong though

LTnone

Mustang dynos take load into consideration, which is nice. Dynojet numbers are good for bragging... but the real bragging comes from the track

ruger311

i like the dynojet numbers they sure make you look good, but like LT says bragging comes from the track or street

Scout2232

Yea I was just curious how my numbers would have compared tothe numbers that you just recently got. That's whatgot me thinking about it.

dman302

5-10 percent is more realistic...any dyno any day there will be variation due to several contributing factors.

LTnone

Something like that sounds about right. People have 15% in their heads for some reason, but that would put me at roughly 263rwhp and my rear end tells me that that is definitely not the case.

r.barn

hp is a ratio between rpm and torque.
there are a couple formulas that vary that ratio. ( ie why 5.0's "lost" hp in '93 but really didnt )

I think the mustang dyno use a little more conservative ratio

Mustang dyno also do "load" the roller with resistance giving
a more acurate reading of the engine be loaded up

vs a dynojet just has a known mass roller that it spins.

Mustang dyno is supposed to be more of "real" number