Ladogaboy

iTrader: (1)

I also posted this over on ClubRalliart, but I thought I'd share here too. First, I'd like to thank Mike for giving me a run on his Dynopack. He even let me get my hands a little dirty.

Stock, I ran 223 hp and 250 tq. Mike mentioned that my car is running a little lean for stock, and he noticed a bit of knock. I'm hoping it's not too big of a deal, but I might want to reflash sooner rather than later.

mattgood2

really? u put down 250 ft/lbs @ the wheels stock? impressive...

Ladogaboy

iTrader: (1)

Well, we did turn the air conditioner off.

secondchace

its not impressive, its inflated.

as has been discussed how many thousand times, a baseline dyno only shows you a starting point, it will be good to post gains later on, but is no where close to acutal wheel power numbers.

if these were real that would mean the ralliart only loses 14 hp or 5.5 % on an awd drivetrain? Please.

The real number like those on here who chose to believe reality, are in the 190-200 whp range, and 220-230 torque range on a STOCK ralliart.

And no, dynopack isnt the most accurate, nor is the one. My dynopack numbers stock were very different, its a car by car and dyno by dyno subject, making these numbers irrelevent unless they are used to show gains in the future.

I'm trying to be less agressive on these points, but people really need to start seeing whats true, and whats not on these boards, before the community gets really big, to the point where all out wars start between noobs who know nothing, and those trying to educate them outside of what a dyno might say.

For reference, with a small tweak, his dyno could say 500 whp and 1500 ft lbs at the wheels.. its simply not mathamatically possible.

But good stuff none the less

mattgood2

hence the 'really?'...i was kinda being sarcastic.

secondchace

haha its all good, i figured you werent believing it as most wont.

I wrote most of it for the OP and mike @ rre because they both need to hear it.

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

Wow that's a ridiculously nice dyno if you're only 14 HP down from the crank rating (and what, 3 ft-lbs of torque down?).

secondchace

haha, my point exactly!

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

I'm been preaching exactly what you're saying for years now, some people simply will not understand or do not want to understand the point of a dyno. You can dyno the same car on the same dyno and see numbers varying by as much as 50%.

Ladogaboy

iTrader: (1)

So basically, you were thread crapping again. I didn't post this in order to start a fight, or to brag, or to do anything other than give another stock pull from the dyno. A few other guys have their stock dyno pulls on the RRE dyno floating around, and my pulls are pretty similar to theirs.

Hopefully, people who actually know what they are talking about and doing (in particular, tuners) will be able to compare the various stock runs on that dyno, so that we can better map out the factory tuning. While you are still caught up in being upset because your car isn't putting up similar numbers (regardless of the cause for that), other, better, people are able to focus on AFR, timing, knock, power curve, etc.

This isn't a pissing contest: My car could have put down a theoretical 190 whp and 205 lb/ft of torque (which apparently fits right into your view of how the universe should be), and I wouldn't care. But the fact is, it didn't. RRE's dyno just doesn't read that way. Sorry. The readings were adjusted for SAE by the computer, but that's it. For Mike to do anything other than he did would make him guilty of exactly what you're currently accusing him of.

Piper747

iTrader: (2)

GST Motorsports

iTrader: (8)

***THIS IS NOT A STAB ON THIS DYNO OR AN ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT RRE IN ANY WAY***

We've had a couple cars dyno on this dyno after our dyno and see about a 9-10% difference. A 100% bone stock ralliart baselines 190-200 on our Mustang dyno so that would put this RA right in that range on our Mustang.


- Bryan

Mike W

iTrader: (1)

We use the SAE correction that Dynapack recomends. It puts our Dynapack on par with local Dynojets.

Secondchance got a dyno run on a Dynapack also. The Dynapack he ran on uses the lower SAE J1349 (2004) correction which probably put the number more in line with the 2WD Mustang dyno that the same shop has.

I have seen a ~15 whp difference from RalliArt to RalliArt, seems mostly to be caused by differences in mileage (break in) and boost levels. AFRs are very different from car to car too.

There are lots of reasons for manufacturers to underrate a car's HP. Insurance for the customer can be cheaper, make the supposed big brother (more profitable) cars look like a better deal...


Look at the differences on one car, all stock but from run to run:



Just depends on how much knock, how well the fans are placed, all kinds of variables.

Here is the lowest stock RalliArt vs the highest stock RalliArt I have run on the dyno:



It sucks but there are Monday and Friday cars out there. Here are the same two cars with the stingier SAE (2004) correction:



Here are the same two car's AFRs:




My understanding is that the SAE J1349 (2004) is more based on an engine dyno (not chassis dyno) and is most accurate in a narrow range of conditions like what you would see in a test lab. Locally the SAE Adapted correction works best for us since there are several Dynapacks and AWD Dynojets that put down similar numbers.

It would be so cool if all the cars were exactly the same. They are not.


Mike W

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

I really don't buy the underrated argument, that same line has been used for many cars and it doesn't make sense, at least not now.

secondchace

Im not crapping on your thread at all, infact, i was very constructive. However, if you were reading what me and amby wrote, and not skimming it, im sure you would see we are using logic and fact to simply make it known your baseline numbers are not the real baseline, that instead, the dyno is very friendly, and that you should use them for the future and for nothing more.

You can try to discredit me all you want in an attempt to prove these numbers are correct, but try your best with amby please, because its simply not possible.


Lastly, comparing your numbers Mike W to those of an awd dynojet just provides even more proof of how friendly the dyno you have is. Dynojets are a civic owners dream as we all know. Their numbers are the most inflated in the industry, and by a wide margin.

In 2006 my saturn ion red line stage 5 fully bolted on meth dynoed 267 whp 269 ft torque on a mustang ddyno it was tuned on, yet in the SAME DAY not 2 hours later, dyno'd 291 whp and 314 ft torque on a dyno jet.

It just doesnt add up