dkano

Yesterday Will and I went on a little road trip to Evolution Performance in PA for Dyno Day. Will was getting some parts installed on his car and I was just insterested in getting my car dynoed.
The trip there and back was a lot of fun just had to be careful with those troopers on I95!
We took a bunch of pictures, too many for me to post here, so you can see them by going to:
http://community.webshots.com/user/dkano

Here is a video of my car on the dyno:
http://media.putfile.com/Mustang-Dyno60

Here is Fred taking us for a little joy ride on his Mustang GT (Auto):
http://media.putfile.com/Joy-Rides

Here is a video of Will's Mustang with the Borla Catback system after putting resonators in:
http://media.putfile.com/Borla-Catback


Here is the dyno sheet of my car, it's completely stock, except for the C&L intake and I was running the 89 tune from Brenspeed. Now this was a Mustang Dyno, so I don't know what those numbers would be on a DynoJet. We'll be going back to Evolution Performance next month, getting Fred's 93 tune for my car and getting it on the dyno again.


[IMG]local://upfiles/25404/0724C7ACB7F44B7289FC8F430F182F88.gif[/IMG]

MusiccityGT

Like dkano, mine was done on a Mustang Dyno. Does anyone know what the typical variance is between the Mustang and a Dynojet? Was thinking of a pull on a Dynojet just for curiosity sake.

2006MustangGTNYC

Btw, Will would be me.... hehe.... I have a mess of pictures to upload and a few comments as well. Here is what I installed there:

1. resonators for my borlas (to stop drone noise)
2. intake and tune
3. front grills (top and bottom)

I just woke up so I will post later tonight.

Tik_Tok

Lol, I must've answered this 100 times on the site now, maybe I should put it in my signature?

J/K

Mustang Dyno's don't compensate for Physical Altitude and Pressure Altitude. For every 1000' above level a mustang dyno is, it'll show 3% lower HP than a dynojet, on a standard pressure day (29.92 inHG)

MusiccityGT

Lol... Thanks Tic_Toc! Now to find out the elevation. Web search time!

Tik_Tok

I have no idea how much the pressure will affect it though, even if you know the barometric pressure at the time of the run. There might be something on the web, I dunno.

MusiccityGT

From everthing I am seeing in comparison tests being run at the same date and altitude, there is between 12 and 15% variance with the dynojet reading higher. I found several postings and even some info on manufacturer websites that are in the same range. One in particular, same car 30 minutes apart at the same basic location showed an 18% variance. Interesting. At 15% variance that would put me around 350.75 whp and 382.95 wtq. Lol.... I think I will schedule a run on a Dynojet just for fun!
Everyone seems to agree that Mustang Dyno numbers are more real world figures.

[sm=bicker.gif]

dkano

Paul,
I might just stop by one of the shops around here and get mine dynoed on a dynojet, just to see if there is a big difference. I was searching this morning also, but there's no magic formula to convert the Mustang Dyno numbers to what you would get on a Dynojet. I know my numbers will be a bit higher next time we go see Fred at Evolution Performance though.

Evolution Performance

That is not true! The New 3.0 Mustang Dyno software shows with and without correction factor, when the graph is printed in the form that dkano is, the numbers are real time weather numbers, as is the Temp, Humidity, Barometric Pressure, etc!

Also, when we had are dyno calibrated from Mustang Dynamometer, I used a friend's 2002 Pontiac Firehawk which is bone stock and has been dynod at two other Dyno shops, which were Dynojet dynos, and it laid down the same numbers on are dyno!

So are actual dyno acts like a dyno jet, but when I'm tuning cars I usually load the Load setting, which will apply a load, so I can tune based on real world road conditions! Dynojet Dynos = The suck for tuning!

MusiccityGT

E-P, that is the same comment I heard from my tuner.

Mine was tuned under load on the Mustang dyno. I was very pleased with the results.