General Tech Ask model specific questions in the appropriate category below. All other general questions within.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: DashLynx

Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-03-2006, 02:51 AM
  #11  
Sean97
1st Gear Member
 
Sean97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location:
Posts: 76
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet


ORIGINAL: JD1969
Weight really has no affect on how much HP a car puts down. The reason the two dynos will show different numbers is because of how they are loaded. Check out the web sites for a better explination, I am too lazy to type it all out, but basicly Mustang Dynos are better for tuning a car as they simulate the real world better, if all you care about is braging about numbers go to a Dynojet.
Ok, well that is a much more reasonable answer. Now I get it!
Sean97 is offline  
Old 05-07-2006, 05:00 PM
  #12  
1996snake
 
1996snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

I recently had my 96 cobra dyno'd on a Mustang Dyno and was wondering if you know what is means by "with WCF" on the dyno sheet?

I have a Maximum HP and Torque and for each of these there is also a line underneath that says "with WCF" and the numbers are lower.

Exaple:
Maximum Torque 289
with WCF 280

I figure WCF is factoring of something, but what? Is the upper number with no factoring or do both numbers have factoring and WCF has additional factoring?

Thanks
1996snake is offline  
Old 05-07-2006, 07:28 PM
  #13  
JD1969
Pro. B.S. caller outer
 
JD1969's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: IL
Posts: 9,644
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

WCF= weather correction factor. It's the number that we go off when tuning a car, but a lot of people will use the uncorrected number for bragging rights.
JD1969 is offline  
Old 05-08-2006, 11:26 AM
  #14  
1996snake
 
1996snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

OK, cool.

With the weight and other factors that the Mustang Dyno also accounts for, are these accounted for in the non-WCF value?

And when compared to DynoJet numbers, even the non-WCF numbers are typically less than DynoJet numbers?

Thanks again for the help.
1996snake is offline  
Old 05-27-2006, 01:00 AM
  #15  
ThisBlood147
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
ThisBlood147's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 4,197
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

Does anyone have a general idea of about what % less the Mustang dyno numbers usually run from bhp numbers?
ThisBlood147 is offline  
Old 05-27-2006, 11:30 PM
  #16  
JD1969
Pro. B.S. caller outer
 
JD1969's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: IL
Posts: 9,644
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

About 8-10%. I also just want to say that dynos are nothing more than a tool to be used for tuning purposes, the numbers can be manipulated and weather is a big factor. Dyno two stock cars, one in Maine and then one in Florida at the same time of year and the results will be different. One thing to consider on a Mustang Dyno is that the uncorrected numbers are what the car would make in "perfect weather", corrected is what the car actually made.
JD1969 is offline  
Old 05-28-2006, 01:23 AM
  #17  
ThisBlood147
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
ThisBlood147's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 4,197
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

ORIGINAL: JD1969

About 8-10%. I also just want to say that dynos are nothing more than a tool to be used for tuning purposes, the numbers can be manipulated and weather is a big factor. Dyno two stock cars, one in Maine and then one in Florida at the same time of year and the results will be different. One thing to consider on a Mustang Dyno is that the uncorrected numbers are what the car would make in "perfect weather", corrected is what the car actually made.
8-10% less????? I thought dynojet numbers were typically around 10% less than crank numbers.......and Mustang dyno numbers were even less than dynojet. I'm just trying to calculate an accurate bhp number for my car now to get an idea of my improvement since going FI. I was stubborn and didn't do a stock dynorun before the install. Of course, that may not have been that helpful either....but again, I'm just lookin to get a ballpark figure.

BTW, I didn't do a dynopull for tuning.......just to check A/F and get an idea of how much hp I was putting out after the s/c install. Dunno if that makes me some sort of "dyno-queen" for wanting some numbers to put with my overall performance....but I wanted to know.
ThisBlood147 is offline  
Old 05-28-2006, 01:33 AM
  #18  
JD1969
Pro. B.S. caller outer
 
JD1969's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: IL
Posts: 9,644
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

I never said you are a dyno queen man. The Mustang Dyno will show about 8-10% less hp than a Dynojet. Also keep in mind that a lower (ie 4.10) gear will also cause the dyno to show a lower hp number.
JD1969 is offline  
Old 05-28-2006, 02:16 AM
  #19  
ThisBlood147
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
ThisBlood147's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 4,197
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet


ORIGINAL: JD1969

I never said you are a dyno queen man. The Mustang Dyno will show about 8-10% less hp than a Dynojet. Also keep in mind that a lower (ie 4.10) gear will also cause the dyno to show a lower hp number.
Alright, that's about what I figured. I think you didn't realize my previous question was asking for % difference between mustang dyno numbers and bhp (crank numbers). I still have my stock 3.55's in, so my readout shouldn't be off compared to other stock geared S197's. And the dyno queen comment wasn't a response to you JD......just heading off certain "other members" around here who have a fit whenever someone wants to know about dyno numbers. Let's just say I saw it happen to some poor other fella, and I was puttin up my defense early[8D]
ThisBlood147 is offline  
Old 06-01-2006, 04:36 PM
  #20  
TommyV8
5th Gear Member
 
TommyV8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 4,438
Default RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

ORIGINAL: JD1969
One thing to consider on a Mustang Dyno is that the uncorrected numbers are what the car would make in "perfect weather", corrected is what the car actually made.
Is that kinda the opposite of a corrected ET? The uncorrected time is what the car actually ran and the corrected is what it theoretically would've run in ideal weather, right?

ORIGINAL: JD1969
Also keep in mind that a lower (ie 4.10) gear will also cause the dyno to show a lower hp number.
Does that mean that my 2.73 gear ratio will make me look like a stud on the dyno?
TommyV8 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Diode Dynamics
Vendor For Sale / Group Buy Classifieds
28
05-26-2022 12:02 PM
mstahoo
SVT Forums
10
08-19-2021 09:15 PM
yurizx6r
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
49
09-07-2015 06:40 PM
Jacob4589
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
6
08-17-2015 09:34 PM
daytooday
Motor Swap Section
2
08-11-2015 09:22 AM



Quick Reply: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:39 AM.