UrS4

Kind of seems like the combination of an idiot, weather, and altitude puts too many variables on the table.

A dyno corrects for the weather and altitude, and idiots can't help but be idiots.

I guess with my 'incorrect' dyno numbers I should run a best of 13.35 at 102.25mphusing one of these Trap speed to whp calculators. But we know there are people on here with similar mods that run much better.

And you should be putting down over 476whp if your weight is accurate. But with some practice you should be able to raise your trap speed to 118.63mph which puts you at489whp, much better than the 468whp you calculated off your 538hp from your aeroforce gauge.

So which is it, which numbers do you want to believe, the dyno, the trap speed to whp, your aeroforce gauge?

Seems like you were disappointed with your dyno numbers so you are using a different modality to pump yourself back up.

mygt500

Just run what you brung and hope that you beat the guy next to you or the clock you go against as well...... JMO but who really cares how it is figured as long as you are happy and the car runs well! J

UrS4

All kidding and ribbing aside,

I agree, whp numbers are nice to know if for anything to verify that your setup is running well and producing the expected gains promised for dropping all that coin.

Truthfully, the only dyno that matters is the butt dyno as if you are happy, that is all that matters. As one gets better at the track, you butt dyno will pick it up and you will be happier still.

moosestang

I was making a point and I did, but you sadly missed it. You said trap speed was driver dependant, but my two examples show it's clearly not.

I never mentioned hp calculators, they aren't accurate, but you can't dispute trap speed. Dyno numbers can be wrong and as we've seen a million times with people claiming ridiculous numbers, they often are.

I surely don't think the aeroforce gauge is accurate, but it's atleast consistent like trap speed.

UrS4

I didn't miss your point but you admitted that trap speed is subject to many variables. It isn't accurate to assume that everyone going to the track will get their highest potential trap speed, but you think trap speed is driver independent, which means if you put your grandma in your car, she will trap 118mph, which she won't.

Your point also means that you will not improve your trap speed because if you do, then there is something else besides your whp that is getting through the traps at a faster rate. So you see, you have cornered yourself by saying your trap speed is driver independent.

Either way, I agree that your dyno results are flawed and there was a perfectly good reason for them being off.

Your doing a lot of double speak which just muddies your points. Its okay, your right, I'm sorry.

But seriously, if we were in driving distance from each other, I'd buy you a beer and we can BS about mustangs and maybe you could scare the sh*t out me with your whippled stang.

It's one of the sweetest rides on here, cheers [sm=icon_cheers.gif]

moosestang

She will if she keeps the gas to the floor in 4th gear, even if she short shifts. Did you even look at the two time slips I posted?

The only way I'll improve on my trap speed is better air, more power or less weight. Powershifting may improve it, i don't know, but a better launch probably won't. I've seen a few people trapping 111-112 and claiming 430-440rwhp, i think their dyno was flawed. Or maybe they are really fat, IDK.

UrS4

Man your jumpy. Yes I did look at your slips. No your grandma won't trap at 117.63mph even if she short shifts, unless you are saying you drive like a grandma. Sounds like you don't. Judging by your accusatory tone, I would guess you have been to the track many times, and that you are very good at banging gears and getting a decent launch. So, with your better than average 1/4 mile track abilities, your trap speed is much closer to your car's potential based on its whp numbers. So in this instance your trap speed is indicative of your whp numbers.

But let me ask you this, have you ever improved your trap speeds without increasing your hp? I'm sure you have or at least seen someone who has who was new to the track. But based on your previous statement of trap speed being driver independent, this shoud not occur because as your time slips say, no matter what your 60' time or ET your trap speed will always be the same.

Drivers aren't equal so their trap speeds won't be either. Put equal drivers in the car and then yes, the trap speed is more dependent on the car's hp.

MustangGT0405

Hey guys, not trying to get in the middle of this but I just wanted to clarify a point I made earlier in case it was missed.

The only real way to tell what a motor is putting out is to remove it from a car and run it on an engine dyno. That way it is in a 100% (or as close as humanly possible) test environment and you dont you "correction" factors.

Drum Dyno's are all going to be off from "reality" based on calibration, location, weather, and the mathematical correction that is being applied.

I wont say that ones trap speed cant change depending on conditions but I will say it is MORE accurate than a drum dyno. To be scientific take 10 runs at the track and average your MPH. Then take 10 dyno runs on different dyno's and average them. The Trap speed is a BETTER indicator of power.

If I was going to rate how to gauge engine power from more accurate to least I would put it;

1. Engine Dyno
2. Trap Speed (Average over multiple runs)
3. Drum Dyno
4. SOTP

Thanks,

MustangGT0405

Oh sorry and one more thing I just thought of is Altitude. If you dyno a car at 5,000 feet it will obviously put out worse numbers than at sea level, so at the Dyno you get a corrected # for sea level.

Also your trap speed will be lower at 5,000 ft than at sea level.

Theoretically the correction factor should make comparing cars from different location equal but we all know it doesnt. If you need proof look at the correction for a Turbo at altitude. They are "preferred" in the Math and so you will here about turbo guys at altitude making huge numbers at low psi. While I would contend you put that car at sea level and dyno it under identical conditions (except alt) and it would read lower.

I guess the whole point the whole thing is flawed no matter how you look at it. That is why I just like the SOTP method to gauge my fun metter, and comparing myself to the guy in the other lane.

As long as I am faster, I am happy.

moosestang

I was assuming everyone knows altitude will effect everything.


I've been to a track 3 times and I suck. My wife could trap 117 on the same day if i could get her to run it. Clearly Urs4 hasn't been to the track. I will admit that powershifting or shifting really, really slow may cause your trap to be higher or lower, but i'm just shifting quickly like my grandmother would if she were alive.