Please help me with my Dyno Results....
Sep 11, 2004, 11:09 PM
#1
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please help me with my Dyno Results....
OK...I got dynoed on a Dynapak Dyno back in March with the mods I have listed below. Here is the chart...
Today, I was dynoed on a Mustang Dyno. I have the same mods as before. Now, I know that this dyno reads lower than a Dynapak/Dynojet...but...I was a little concerned with the results. Dynapak 303hp/324tq...Mustang 233hp/277tq
On the left side of the chart is my run. On the right side is my run overlayed with a baseline pull of a STOCK Evo RS on the same dyno on a different day. It looks like there is a difference of 90tq but only 20hp from the baseline of the STOCK Evo RS??
Also, comparing my Dynapak and Mustang charts, it looks like I am producing max HP at only 5600-5700RPMS. Isn't that real low???
Here is a video of the Motec Wideband they used on my pull... AIR/FUEL VIDEO
Any comments. concers or suggestions are GREATLY appreciated!!
Today, I was dynoed on a Mustang Dyno. I have the same mods as before. Now, I know that this dyno reads lower than a Dynapak/Dynojet...but...I was a little concerned with the results. Dynapak 303hp/324tq...Mustang 233hp/277tq
On the left side of the chart is my run. On the right side is my run overlayed with a baseline pull of a STOCK Evo RS on the same dyno on a different day. It looks like there is a difference of 90tq but only 20hp from the baseline of the STOCK Evo RS??
Also, comparing my Dynapak and Mustang charts, it looks like I am producing max HP at only 5600-5700RPMS. Isn't that real low???Here is a video of the Motec Wideband they used on my pull... AIR/FUEL VIDEO
Any comments. concers or suggestions are GREATLY appreciated!!
Last edited by GottaGoFaster; Sep 12, 2004 at 04:56 PM.
Sep 12, 2004, 11:28 AM
#2
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Enfield CT
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i believe that the top charts are hp at the crank..it says flywheel hp and flywheel torque right on the top so your numbers will be much higher..the bottom ones are at the wheels..and for your limited mods i would say that is about normal for hp and torque..that torque actually seems really good to the wheels..hp is about average since i believe evo's baseline at 220 hp at the wheels? anyone feel free to correct me but I believe this is the difference between the two charts
Sep 12, 2004, 11:30 AM
#3
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Enfield CT
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
actually i was just looking at your max hp and it was only 233..so that actually seems a little low to me for having a downpipe and all ur mods..the 277 or whatever for torque seems ok..but the hp seems a bit low..unless you really had a weak evo to begin with..but even then i would think you should be around 250 at least to the wheels..anyways again i'm sure someone can correct me if i'm wrong
Sep 12, 2004, 11:59 AM
#4
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Detroit
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't comment on the Dyno pack except it's numbers read way high.
However, I just looked at my baseline Mustang Dyno chart and your numbers are way off. My baseling was just aHKS intake, and I put 219.3 whp @ 6700 RPM, and 219.5 tq @3700 RPM.
I know your mods were different than mine, but peak power seems way to low for me. If you have a boost leak, (vacuem line or BOV) that might limit your power.
Comparing my curve to yours, mine looks like the stock RS, just higher.
However, I just looked at my baseline Mustang Dyno chart and your numbers are way off. My baseling was just aHKS intake, and I put 219.3 whp @ 6700 RPM, and 219.5 tq @3700 RPM.
I know your mods were different than mine, but peak power seems way to low for me. If you have a boost leak, (vacuem line or BOV) that might limit your power.
Comparing my curve to yours, mine looks like the stock RS, just higher.
Sep 12, 2004, 04:52 PM
#5
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GreedMOTO
I can't comment on the Dyno pack except it's numbers read way high.
However, I just looked at my baseline Mustang Dyno chart and your numbers are way off. My baseling was just aHKS intake, and I put 219.3 whp @ 6700 RPM, and 219.5 tq @3700 RPM.
I know your mods were different than mine, but peak power seems way to low for me. If you have a boost leak, (vacuem line or BOV) that might limit your power.
Comparing my curve to yours, mine looks like the stock RS, just higher.
However, I just looked at my baseline Mustang Dyno chart and your numbers are way off. My baseling was just aHKS intake, and I put 219.3 whp @ 6700 RPM, and 219.5 tq @3700 RPM.
I know your mods were different than mine, but peak power seems way to low for me. If you have a boost leak, (vacuem line or BOV) that might limit your power.
Comparing my curve to yours, mine looks like the stock RS, just higher.
I called the shop back in March and according to the shop the Dynapak numbers on my chart are whp...for some reason they are printed on the fly wheel horsepower screen.
I find it odd that the Mustang Dyno says my HP is 233 and torque is 277...that ratio seems a bit off to me....especially when the stock RS is at 219hp/188tq.
My hallman boost controller holds 21psi and tapers to 19psi by redline, so I don;t think there is much of a boost leak.
Like I said before...the one thing that both the charts have in common is I reach my peak HP around 5600-5700rpms...which I think is way to low. Any reasons for that as well has any reasons why I would produce 233hp/277tq on the Mustang Dyno?
Also, anyone have a chance to look at the Air/Fuel video in the first post?
Sep 12, 2004, 07:19 PM
#6
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Salem, OR
Posts: 2,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mustang Dyno's are kind of funny. There is one that is local to me that reads very low and there is one farther away that reads 80hp higher. I threw down 285hp and I have 272's, 3" TB, cam gears, and Xede. Of course, this was about 6 months ago and they could be recalibrated today.
Another interesting story, is about a guy who came down for a dyno day at the low reading mustang dyno and realized his car was having problems when compared to the other cars that were present. He had no idea since the high reading mustang dyno was showing that he was throwing down 340hp. At this dyno day he was at 260hp which was 25hp lower then everyone else w/ similar mods.
You are definitely giving up some power in the high RPM w/ that rich A/F. That is probably why the HP line is so flat after 5000RPM. Just my 0.02
Another interesting story, is about a guy who came down for a dyno day at the low reading mustang dyno and realized his car was having problems when compared to the other cars that were present. He had no idea since the high reading mustang dyno was showing that he was throwing down 340hp. At this dyno day he was at 260hp which was 25hp lower then everyone else w/ similar mods.
You are definitely giving up some power in the high RPM w/ that rich A/F. That is probably why the HP line is so flat after 5000RPM. Just my 0.02
Sep 12, 2004, 07:35 PM
#7
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: StVa
Posts: 3,487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yo... I was at the Agile meet with you and basically put down the same #s. I ran a few months ago on a Mustang Dyno and my numbers were like 290WHP and I don't remember the torque, but it was something higher, and pretty similar to my Agile #s. The Mustang you were on is definitely a lot lower than the Dynapack we used in March, since I think Stock Evos there were putting down around 230-240 hp&tq.
Furthermore, that Mustang seems strange on the RS #s, because basically every Evo dyno I've seen has a TQ # that's higher than HP... Also, the Dynapack was definitely WHP.
Basically, as you know, I think you really can't compare #'s from 2 different dynos, especially when something seems so inconsistent with the York dyno. All brands, and even individual shops all seem to be vastly different. Running on the same dyno to chart progress, and then verifying it at the track seem to be what really tells the true story. It would be interesting to see what kind of numbers you put down if you went back down to Agile and replicated the conditions of the original runs... But probably not worth the time and money.
How's the car feel on the road?
Furthermore, that Mustang seems strange on the RS #s, because basically every Evo dyno I've seen has a TQ # that's higher than HP... Also, the Dynapack was definitely WHP.
Basically, as you know, I think you really can't compare #'s from 2 different dynos, especially when something seems so inconsistent with the York dyno. All brands, and even individual shops all seem to be vastly different. Running on the same dyno to chart progress, and then verifying it at the track seem to be what really tells the true story. It would be interesting to see what kind of numbers you put down if you went back down to Agile and replicated the conditions of the original runs... But probably not worth the time and money.
How's the car feel on the road?
Trending Topics
Sep 12, 2004, 07:47 PM
#8
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SterlingEvo
yo... I was at the Agile meet with you and basically put down the same #s. I ran a few months ago on a Mustang Dyno and my numbers were like 290WHP and I don't remember the torque, but it was something higher, and pretty similar to my Agile #s. The Mustang you were on is definitely a lot lower than the Dynapack we used in March, since I think Stock Evos there were putting down around 230-240 hp&tq.
Furthermore, that Mustang seems strange on the RS #s, because basically every Evo dyno I've seen has a TQ # that's higher than HP... Also, the Dynapack was definitely WHP.
Basically, as you know, I think you really can't compare #'s from 2 different dynos, especially when something seems so inconsistent with the York dyno. All brands, and even individual shops all seem to be vastly different. Running on the same dyno to chart progress, and then verifying it at the track seem to be what really tells the true story. It would be interesting to see what kind of numbers you put down if you went back down to Agile and replicated the conditions of the original runs... But probably not worth the time and money.
How's the car feel on the road?
Furthermore, that Mustang seems strange on the RS #s, because basically every Evo dyno I've seen has a TQ # that's higher than HP... Also, the Dynapack was definitely WHP.
Basically, as you know, I think you really can't compare #'s from 2 different dynos, especially when something seems so inconsistent with the York dyno. All brands, and even individual shops all seem to be vastly different. Running on the same dyno to chart progress, and then verifying it at the track seem to be what really tells the true story. It would be interesting to see what kind of numbers you put down if you went back down to Agile and replicated the conditions of the original runs... But probably not worth the time and money.
How's the car feel on the road?
I know what you mean about comparing dynos. It just struck me as odd that I could be producing 277tq and only 233hp. The car feels great on the road...but my clutch is definitely on the way out!!
I should go back to Agile to see what numbers I put on the Dynapak 6 months later. It kinda sucks though cuz the dyno at Agile is 45 minutes further and more expensive than the Mustang Dyno around here
My peak HP coming at 5600-5700rpms...is that a result of the Dynoflash or my mods? If you watch the Air/Fuel vid in my first post, it does look like I run really rich towards the later half of the pull
Sep 12, 2004, 08:13 PM
#9
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: StVa
Posts: 3,487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, plus that Dynapak's a pain, having to take off the wheels and all. By the way, Mach V's having another Dyno Day down here in NoVa on Saturday, and I may stop by but I'm probably not going to run. I think it's relatively cheap per pull, like $70. They (Ultimate Performance, with whom Dan shares a shop) have a new Dynojet... Check dcevoclub.com for details.
Sep 13, 2004, 05:34 PM
#11
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread must have cooties 
Can anyone comment on my air/fuel during the 3rd grea dyno pull... Too rich in the later half of the pull?? AIR/FUEL VIDEO
Can anyone comment on my air/fuel during the 3rd grea dyno pull... Too rich in the later half of the pull?? AIR/FUEL VIDEO
Sep 13, 2004, 06:24 PM
#13
Evolving Member
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Sterling, VA
Posts: 374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First off, I think it's nearly hopeless to try to compare charts from two different kinds of dynos. They're both resistance dynos, but they use different methods, and one is a wheels-off dyno, while one is a wheels-on type.
I don't know if I can comment on your numbers vs. other Evos with the same mods, on the same kind of dyno...too many variables that I don't know about, and I'm not familiar enough with how the Evos read on those other dynos.
Keep in mind, though, that torque and hp are directly related to RPM. That is, hp = torque * RPM / 5252. So when you say "HP is low but torque is high," you really want to say, "My torque peak is at a really low RPM." In fact on the Agile graph you have torque declining continuously from the beginning of the graph, so we don't even know where the peak was.
The other graphs just look a little weird to me. They're really jagged -- seems like I've noticed that before with Mustang plots. And, a stock Evo RS with a torque peak that doesn't happen until 4500 rpm? Huh? What, did they not step on the gas until 3000 RPM? How exactly does that happen?
But as to the big difference in torque with not so much difference in top-end horsepower, that's not uncommon. The deal is, we can pump up the boost and make a bunch more power at the low end, but with stock fuel injectors you run up against maximum duty cycle at fairly moderate boost levels, so it becomes hard to tune at high rpms. (Conventional wisdom says that after 80% duty cycle, the injector is pretty much wide open, so you can't fine tune after that.)
Your air/fuel ratio was richer than 11.0:1 at the top end, and you could run it a bit leaner than that, assuming there's still some room to dial the fuel back.
If you're local, come on by the dyno day on Saturday and we can talk more about it.
--Dan
Mach V
MachEVO.com
I don't know if I can comment on your numbers vs. other Evos with the same mods, on the same kind of dyno...too many variables that I don't know about, and I'm not familiar enough with how the Evos read on those other dynos.
Keep in mind, though, that torque and hp are directly related to RPM. That is, hp = torque * RPM / 5252. So when you say "HP is low but torque is high," you really want to say, "My torque peak is at a really low RPM." In fact on the Agile graph you have torque declining continuously from the beginning of the graph, so we don't even know where the peak was.
The other graphs just look a little weird to me. They're really jagged -- seems like I've noticed that before with Mustang plots. And, a stock Evo RS with a torque peak that doesn't happen until 4500 rpm? Huh? What, did they not step on the gas until 3000 RPM? How exactly does that happen?
But as to the big difference in torque with not so much difference in top-end horsepower, that's not uncommon. The deal is, we can pump up the boost and make a bunch more power at the low end, but with stock fuel injectors you run up against maximum duty cycle at fairly moderate boost levels, so it becomes hard to tune at high rpms. (Conventional wisdom says that after 80% duty cycle, the injector is pretty much wide open, so you can't fine tune after that.)
Your air/fuel ratio was richer than 11.0:1 at the top end, and you could run it a bit leaner than that, assuming there's still some room to dial the fuel back.
If you're local, come on by the dyno day on Saturday and we can talk more about it.
--Dan
Mach V
MachEVO.com
Sep 13, 2004, 07:11 PM
#14
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mach V Dan
First off, I think it's nearly hopeless to try to compare charts from two different kinds of dynos. They're both resistance dynos, but they use different methods, and one is a wheels-off dyno, while one is a wheels-on type.
I don't know if I can comment on your numbers vs. other Evos with the same mods, on the same kind of dyno...too many variables that I don't know about, and I'm not familiar enough with how the Evos read on those other dynos.
Keep in mind, though, that torque and hp are directly related to RPM. That is, hp = torque * RPM / 5252. So when you say "HP is low but torque is high," you really want to say, "My torque peak is at a really low RPM." In fact on the Agile graph you have torque declining continuously from the beginning of the graph, so we don't even know where the peak was.
The other graphs just look a little weird to me. They're really jagged -- seems like I've noticed that before with Mustang plots. And, a stock Evo RS with a torque peak that doesn't happen until 4500 rpm? Huh? What, did they not step on the gas until 3000 RPM? How exactly does that happen?
But as to the big difference in torque with not so much difference in top-end horsepower, that's not uncommon. The deal is, we can pump up the boost and make a bunch more power at the low end, but with stock fuel injectors you run up against maximum duty cycle at fairly moderate boost levels, so it becomes hard to tune at high rpms. (Conventional wisdom says that after 80% duty cycle, the injector is pretty much wide open, so you can't fine tune after that.)
Your air/fuel ratio was richer than 11.0:1 at the top end, and you could run it a bit leaner than that, assuming there's still some room to dial the fuel back.
If you're local, come on by the dyno day on Saturday and we can talk more about it.
--Dan
Mach V
MachEVO.com
I don't know if I can comment on your numbers vs. other Evos with the same mods, on the same kind of dyno...too many variables that I don't know about, and I'm not familiar enough with how the Evos read on those other dynos.
Keep in mind, though, that torque and hp are directly related to RPM. That is, hp = torque * RPM / 5252. So when you say "HP is low but torque is high," you really want to say, "My torque peak is at a really low RPM." In fact on the Agile graph you have torque declining continuously from the beginning of the graph, so we don't even know where the peak was.
The other graphs just look a little weird to me. They're really jagged -- seems like I've noticed that before with Mustang plots. And, a stock Evo RS with a torque peak that doesn't happen until 4500 rpm? Huh? What, did they not step on the gas until 3000 RPM? How exactly does that happen?
But as to the big difference in torque with not so much difference in top-end horsepower, that's not uncommon. The deal is, we can pump up the boost and make a bunch more power at the low end, but with stock fuel injectors you run up against maximum duty cycle at fairly moderate boost levels, so it becomes hard to tune at high rpms. (Conventional wisdom says that after 80% duty cycle, the injector is pretty much wide open, so you can't fine tune after that.)
Your air/fuel ratio was richer than 11.0:1 at the top end, and you could run it a bit leaner than that, assuming there's still some room to dial the fuel back.
If you're local, come on by the dyno day on Saturday and we can talk more about it.
--Dan
Mach V
MachEVO.com
Cool...thanks for all the info!!