bassn_07

I'll make this short and sweet. I have new numbers on a Mustang Dyno - 440 rwhp and 470 rwtq!!!! You got to love dyno numbers .

My lowest numbers to date.

MB_Forever

here we go again......

bassn_07

Mo, I’m not trying to start trouble I promise. I was somewhat surprised with my numbers and its obviously not adding up with my track numbers. I just find it amazing how dyno machines vary sooo much from machine to machine. This is not directed towards any of my other threads but just some info I thought I would share.

Thericker

Just proves my points Dyno's are full of sheet, just good for tuning/before/after-mods, or a good laugh...You need to go to high reading DynoJet now!

Alan, this was obviously off the bottle correct? LOL!!! j/k bud!

cahiil55k

At least now you can claim that your 440hp E almost broke into 10's.

bassn_07

Haha...yeah, I now have a new record! A highly modded E55 with the lowest dyno numbers...hehe.

BenzoBoi

jangy

Got any other data? What was the A/F, etc? Timing?

How would this be explained? I thought there would be no need for a re-tune? also, please make sure your car is safe to drive before any more dyno runs or WOT runs. You putting down 440hp is scary, especially with a tune. Good thing MBs love to dump fuel....

MB_Forever

Mustang dynos vary in numbers tremendously... even greater than any other dyno machine I've ever experienced. For example, a performance shop local to me recently purchased a top-of-the-line Mustang dyno (fully optioned) that was supposed to be "one of the best". Well.... when I dynoed my car there, the car kept putting down 500+ to the wheels. Of course I know there is no chance this could ever be true given the car is 100% stock. That said, I don't believe Alan's differences in dyno numbers are all due to a different dyno machine. It probably contributed a bit, but I actually think a re-tune would be necessary since most of the data that the ECU was receiving during the tune was inaccurate. I'm guessing the ECU tried to constantly adjust timing and A/F ratios based on the inaccurate feedback. This could have also constrained Jeramy's tuning adjustments even at WOT.

jangy

That is kind of what I was trying to say before and everyone (that knows) was saying that WOT conditions wouldn't matter.

Dynos are like anything in life. With more accuracy will come a need for tighter precision, so getting 2 days to compare will always be dependent on how the setup goes. I agree that the numbers are a bit too far off to be "real". Alan's car should be one of the strongest, if not fastest, E55s on here. Those numbers are closer to baseline or maybe stage 1.

aleksandar1099

Wow Alan, those are some crazy numbers!!

MB_Forever

LOL...... I knew it I knew you messed with my car that day I actually posted my results earlier in the year, but I was very upset that I wasted 3 to 4 hours without any meaningful numbers. Now they're trying to invite me back, but I'm not sure about them anymore Here is a link to the thread:

https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/...tang-dyno.html

Maybe that dyno explains what happened here :

https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/...rap-speed.html

bassn_07

Alright guys I set the bar pretty high this time and all you 500 rwhp cars better be running 10's...haha. I just raced MikesAMG and my car is still running very healthy.

We did 3 runs wtih the 1st 2 within 5 minutes of each other and the 3rd 10 minutes later. My hp varied 6 rwhp and my torque number got slightly stronger on the 2nd and 3rd. One thing I did confirm is that I'm running rich and my timing was conservative. My car felt very smooth and they seemed to be good pulls. Because this was his first time doing a MB I was in the passenger seat letting him know how I wanted the pulls ran. He did exactly as I instructed and IMO a great job.

My only purpose for this pull was to confirm that my AFR's were rich. They were slightly rich at idle but not too bad. My whole curve was definitely richer than I like, with redline at 10.8. This makes me believe I have much more power to gain under the curve for both HP and torque.

Alan

juicee63

Looks like yer back in the 12's , congrats

Max Hughes

If want truly accurate dyno numbers go weigh your car, then go to a Mustang dyno and have them edit the weight of the car in the computer. After all is said and done do a pull in 4th gear.

prodigymb

bassn_07

Nah, I don't believe in accurate dyno numbers. I have the track numbers to back up my cars power. My only suggestion is to use the dyno as a tool and not for bragging rights.

bassn_07

Thanks Josh!!!

ricky bobbie

running rich adds tq but takes hp . 10.8 is losing alot of power in ur car . u need it around 12.4 to be perfect . good luck and break a 10 damn it

URnext

Great job Alan........... Solid #'s!

TTMotorsports

Maybe you didn't have the Flintstone mode enabled. I don't know any dyno's that can measure that mode!

Take it to the track and see what she runs Alan. Those are the only numbers that count!

bassn_07

Like always Bruce, track numbers will follow.

Just for reference though, I did still pull steady on my friends 11.5 @ 123.7 car up to 130. Anytime I do a street run in Mexico I always have traction issues up to 60.... The power still there with a lot more to be gained. Once I get my logging system installed I'll have much more accurate numbers to play with.

blackbenzz

Meh, just dyno numbers, we already know your car runs strong! At least your car isn't running 9.1:1 afrs but it still made 450whp on a dynojet with no cool down and 3 consecutive pulls

bassn_07

Thanks Ahmad, but it still hurts to see those kind of numbers regardless....

Damn....9.1:1 is crazy! At least you'll finally have that beast running strong and healthy again .

V12Godspeed

Alan,

You have a healthy beast man...nothing else needs to be spoken. Track times speaks for itself, after all, she is no Dyno queen.