secondchace

totally agreed, especially in a s.e.m.a. era where manufacturers are more accurate on the amount of power a car makes stock.


the argument that its underrated still doesn't make up for the 10$% or so MORE loss that isnt shown on this dyno. That would in theory put this car at 260 crank stock which is completely ridiculous

Mike W

iTrader: (1)

Here is a 265 crank hp 09 WRX dyno chart laid up agains a lowly RalliArt on our Dynapack:







Am I missing something or does this kill your arguement a little?


Dynojet numbers are unfortunately the gold standard for internet dyno numbers. Any other dyno numbers have to be qualified constantly in e-***** contests. Just for fun here is the 1200hp AMS drag EVO making 1200 hp on our dyno but with no wheelspin, they were out west for MOD 09 and ran the car for a demo for everyone:




Mike W

secondchace

There is really no conclusive anything there. there car dynod similar without wheelhop, imagine what it would produce on theres without the spinning...

Also, the general concencous on nasioc is that the car u just showed dynoing 247whp is a true and realiable 220 whp stock... again your 10-12 higher then the known real number.

Mike W

iTrader: (1)

Yep... the AMS car would have dynoed higher on a Dynojet with out the wheelspin. Makes my Dynapack read lower than your dreaded Dynojet.

The 247 number is a spike in _torque_ on both the WRX and RalliArt.

My numbers have the WRX at 230 whp on a 265 crank rated car. Isnt that a legal spread? What is up with two different crank rated cars making the same WHP?

There are a lot of other Dynojet numbers on this message board that need pooping on based on your evidence. Why concentrate on just your RalliArt brothers?

Mike W

secondchace

i was discrediting the dynojet... because the numbers on them are silly... i hope you got that..

and i drive a ralliart, thus my inclusion here.

Ladogaboy

iTrader: (1)

Who said that? You are the only one who is talking about correct or incorrect and thinking in absolutes. I am simply saying: The numbers are what they are.

Mike gave you a reason why other dyno numbers might not match the same. He has more experience as a tuner than you, and he has done more for the Mitsu/DSM community than you have ever done.

What is your purpose in trying to discredit the dyno readings? Are you hoping to "save" unsuspecting Mitsu owners from buying a reflash off of RRE? Last I checked, they aren't the ones trying to sell those maps. They'll custom tune a car, sure... but they aren't out hocking wares.

I don't know what they put in the water up North, but I've had about enough of it. I'm guessing these boards are about to get a lot quiter and friendlier for me. Bye.

Mike W

iTrader: (1)

Dynojet numbers may be silly but they are here to stay, no?

So what is up with the 09 RalliArt being rated at 235 and the 09 WRX being rated at 265.. but they can put down essentially the same numbers? That one really has me cornfused :-/ Which manufacturer is lying? And why?

Mike W

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

Were the two cars dynoed back to back? Were they strapped down exactly the same? Were they driven the same? There are many variables that can give rise to dyno numbers. I highly doubt Mitsubishi would lie about the Ralliart's HP in a segment where they are hardly the king of the hill. If their only legitimate competition was themselves (in the form of the Evo), sure, I could see why they'd want to dumb down the numbers to avoid stepping on their own toes but they compete against the WRX, the Cobalt SS, the MS3, etc. Intentionally diminishing the performance numbers of the car makes no sense when you're facing competition, it's like purposely answering incorrectly on a test.

Mike W

iTrader: (1)

That is the cool thing about a Dynapack. There is no strapping down differences. No tighter/looser putting more or less load between the tires and rollers. There are no tire pressure differences. The wheels come off and there are hub adapters that bolt on and it is all direct drive. All that stuff can make big differences on other dynos.

As far as temperatures and atmospheric conditions, the dyno has a weather station built into it and that is what the SAE corrections are supposed to iron out.

As far as methodology, we dyno operators tend to be professionals and do our best to make the runs the same way and and to be sure the car is warmed up consistently.

So yes, all that is pretty darn close.

Mike W

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

Here's the problem though, using those correction factors adds another potential source of error. Which factors do you use? What are these factors? What are the assumptions used by these factors? The important message is that dynos are nothing more than tools, they carry no absolute value in and of themselves.

Mike W

iTrader: (1)

Correction factors are adressed in post #13 above. Some bunch of dorks named Society of Automotive Engineers make it up :-) Who knows if it is anygood or consistent for sure.

Mike W

toredefine

iTrader: (6)

I think I'm falling in love with Mike.

secondchace

lol read the thread.

brads09lancerGT

iTrader: (7)

OP Thanks for posting the dyno. Don't let Amby or Amby Jr get to you.


I could see that. I went to a legal race night at an old 1/4 mile track(wasn't street racing mods) and went up against my buddy in his 09 WRX Sedan(both of us were stock). We did 2 races against each other and they were so close we couldn't tell who won. He kept saying "I thought my car had 30 more hp then yours"

secondchace

its because he has a manual, if he knew how to drive, he would have mashed you.

l2read