Old Dyno Graph vs New Dyno Graph
10-22-2011, 08:23 PM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
Looking GREAT!! Best I have put down is 530hp.. Still trying to sort out tune with the LT's. Do you have an AFR chart? Im still running into low 10's (as in 10.0) up top. I will get that fixed soon (I hope)..
10-22-2011, 08:23 PM
#28
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Temps today were alot higher than yesterday. Yesterday was around 48/49 and today was 68. I did change my intercooler out and I saw nice temp drops. It showed a consistent 10 above ambient. My toon in the summer was pig rich and have adjusted it for the winter weather and for the upcoming track day.
I also weighed my 18x9.5 rims with 285/30/18 combo which came in at 57.5lbs. The new drag setup came in at 42.5lbs.
I also weighed my 18x9.5 rims with 285/30/18 combo which came in at 57.5lbs. The new drag setup came in at 42.5lbs.
10-22-2011, 11:45 PM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
Nice numbers bro.can you ask the shop to get you the uncorrected numbers and using 5 on the smoothing.
Not anything wrong with your numbers I'm just trying to get is as close as possible with my dynojet pulls.
What pulley are you up to now?
Not anything wrong with your numbers I'm just trying to get is as close as possible with my dynojet pulls.
What pulley are you up to now?
10-23-2011, 12:04 AM
#31
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
The problem with uncorrected numbers is that discrepancies due to air temp, humidity and pressure will only be larger...that's the whole point of corrected numbers. In any case, you should try and get your dyno files corrected to see how yours compare to his, not the other way around.
10-23-2011, 12:18 AM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
Uncorrected is 100% what the car put down on that day and my dynos have everything up front with temp and baro and for the runs.
Gtr I can inflate my numbers to 570whp using std correction and running the car in 3rd gear and 80d temps.
Uncorrected is the raw power it put down.just like when soneone runs a person best at the track we don't say well lets correct that run for 75d sae da.
You ran what you ran.my car will make the same power at 60d vs 85d but if I use std correction like you did I would inflate my numbers.
Iv seen dynos on this forum with 1.09 cf added.that is insane
Gtr I can inflate my numbers to 570whp using std correction and running the car in 3rd gear and 80d temps.
Uncorrected is the raw power it put down.just like when soneone runs a person best at the track we don't say well lets correct that run for 75d sae da.
You ran what you ran.my car will make the same power at 60d vs 85d but if I use std correction like you did I would inflate my numbers.
Iv seen dynos on this forum with 1.09 cf added.that is insane
10-23-2011, 12:50 AM
#33
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
Uncorrected is 100% what the car put down on that day and my dynos have everything up front with temp and baro and for the runs.
Gtr I can inflate my numbers to 570whp using std correction and running the car in 3rd gear and 80d temps.
Uncorrected is the raw power it put down.just like when soneone runs a person best at the track we don't say well lets correct that run for 75d sae da.
You ran what you ran.my car will make the same power at 60d vs 85d but if I use std correction like you did I would inflate my numbers.
Iv seen dynos on this forum with 1.09 cf added.that is insane
Gtr I can inflate my numbers to 570whp using std correction and running the car in 3rd gear and 80d temps.
Uncorrected is the raw power it put down.just like when soneone runs a person best at the track we don't say well lets correct that run for 75d sae da.
You ran what you ran.my car will make the same power at 60d vs 85d but if I use std correction like you did I would inflate my numbers.
Iv seen dynos on this forum with 1.09 cf added.that is insane
It would be ridiculous to compare a 490whp uncorrected dyno run performed in 110* weather with 95% humidity to a 500whp uncorrected dyno in 20* weather and 5% humidity. The 490whp car would rape the 500whp car when raced together. This is why CF's are used. The would correct the 490whp car to maybe 520whp and the 500whp car to maybe 480whp because it's more realistic, and fair, in a comparison.
Now...uncorrected dyno's do have a purpose... and it's to see how YOUR car does in the ambiance YOU normally race in. But to compare two different sets of dyno's from two completely different regions without CF's is just ridiculous.
Here, read this.
http://wahiduddin.net/calc/cf.htm
Here is an excerpt for quick reading:
One common use of the dyno correction factor is to standardize the horsepower and torque readings, so that the effects of the ambient temperature and pressure are removed from the readings. By using the dyno correction factor, power and torque readings can be directly compared to the readings taken on some other day, or even taken at some other altitude.
That is, the corrected readings are the same as the result that you would get by taking the car (or engine) to a certain temperature controlled, humidity controlled, pressure controlled dyno shop where they measure "standard" power, based on the carefully controlled temperature, humidity and pressure.
If you take your car to the dyno on a cold day at low altitude, it will make a lot of power. And if you take exactly the same car back to the same dyno on a hot day, it will make less power. But if you take the exact same car to the "standard" dyno (where the temperature, humidity and pressure are all carefully controlled) on those different days, it will always make exactly the same power.
Sometimes you may want to know how much power you are really making on that specific day due to the temperature, humidity and pressure on that day; in that case, you should look at the uncorrected power readings.
But when you want to see how much more power you have solely due to the new headers, or the new cam, then you will find that the corrected power is more useful, since it removes the effects of the temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure and just shows you how much more (or less) power you have than in your previous tests.
That is, the corrected readings are the same as the result that you would get by taking the car (or engine) to a certain temperature controlled, humidity controlled, pressure controlled dyno shop where they measure "standard" power, based on the carefully controlled temperature, humidity and pressure.
If you take your car to the dyno on a cold day at low altitude, it will make a lot of power. And if you take exactly the same car back to the same dyno on a hot day, it will make less power. But if you take the exact same car to the "standard" dyno (where the temperature, humidity and pressure are all carefully controlled) on those different days, it will always make exactly the same power.
Sometimes you may want to know how much power you are really making on that specific day due to the temperature, humidity and pressure on that day; in that case, you should look at the uncorrected power readings.
But when you want to see how much more power you have solely due to the new headers, or the new cam, then you will find that the corrected power is more useful, since it removes the effects of the temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure and just shows you how much more (or less) power you have than in your previous tests.
Last edited by GT-ER; 10-23-2011 at 12:54 AM.
10-23-2011, 01:00 AM
#34
MBWorld Fanatic!
Next time I dyno my car it will be in 85d weather with a cold engine and iced blower and post up my 560whp sae corrected number.I will also use 3rd gear since it won't heat soak the blower also.
Do you see how easy it is to inflate nunbers using sae?
Why do you use std correction in your dynos instead of sae? Its because you wanted to break the 500whp mark since sae would of given you lower results.
Look at my dyno video and sheet,it was done in 4th gear and all the info is there for people to compare.it was 70d out not 20 where the temp would make a big difference and humidity does nothing for our cars to kill power.I ran an 11.46 in 65 d weather with over 60% humidity.
Do you see how easy it is to inflate nunbers using sae?
Why do you use std correction in your dynos instead of sae? Its because you wanted to break the 500whp mark since sae would of given you lower results.
Look at my dyno video and sheet,it was done in 4th gear and all the info is there for people to compare.it was 70d out not 20 where the temp would make a big difference and humidity does nothing for our cars to kill power.I ran an 11.46 in 65 d weather with over 60% humidity.
10-23-2011, 01:06 AM
#35
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
Next time I dyno my car it will be in 85d weather with a cold engine and iced blower and post up my 560whp sae corrected number.I will also use 3rd gear since it won't heat soak the blower also.
Do you see how easy it is to inflate nunbers using sae?
Why do you use std correction in your dynos instead of sae? Its because you wanted to break the 500whp mark since sae would of given you lower results.
Look at my dyno video and sheet,it was done in 4th gear and all the info is there for people to compare.it was 70d out not 20 where the temp would make a big difference and humidity does nothing for our cars to kill power.I ran an 11.46 in 65 d weather with over 60% humidity.
Do you see how easy it is to inflate nunbers using sae?
Why do you use std correction in your dynos instead of sae? Its because you wanted to break the 500whp mark since sae would of given you lower results.
Look at my dyno video and sheet,it was done in 4th gear and all the info is there for people to compare.it was 70d out not 20 where the temp would make a big difference and humidity does nothing for our cars to kill power.I ran an 11.46 in 65 d weather with over 60% humidity.
It's not about the peak numbers as it is about putting everyone in the same playing field. Just read the article. What you wish to do is utterly useless.
Again, comparing uncorrected numbers
10-23-2011, 01:07 AM
#36
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
Next time I dyno my car it will be in 85d weather with a cold engine and iced blower and post up my 560whp sae corrected number.I will also use 3rd gear since it won't heat soak the blower also.
Do you see how easy it is to inflate nunbers using sae?
Why do you use std correction in your dynos instead of sae? Its because you wanted to break the 500whp mark since sae would of given you lower results.
Look at my dyno video and sheet,it was done in 4th gear and all the info is there for people to compare.it was 70d out not 20 where the temp would make a big difference and humidity does nothing for our cars to kill power.I ran an 11.46 in 65 d weather with over 60% humidity.
Do you see how easy it is to inflate nunbers using sae?
Why do you use std correction in your dynos instead of sae? Its because you wanted to break the 500whp mark since sae would of given you lower results.
Look at my dyno video and sheet,it was done in 4th gear and all the info is there for people to compare.it was 70d out not 20 where the temp would make a big difference and humidity does nothing for our cars to kill power.I ran an 11.46 in 65 d weather with over 60% humidity.
It's about putting everyone in the same playing field. Just read the article. What you wish to do is utterly useless.
Again, comparing uncorrected numbers is simply absurd.
10-23-2011, 08:20 AM
#37
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
I am on a 180 Angelo. Funny thing is, this dyno was at a dyno day for a monster mustang shop here in Atlanta. The owner said that you can really see how these cars suffer from major heat soak as it started pulling timing up top. I don't want tovrun Meth so the only other alternative is a smaller pulley. He did say these cars would love a tiny shot of nitrous just for cooling. I hit 182mph in the open header run.
10-23-2011, 08:25 AM
#38
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
If you run a 40-50 shot and have it setup correctly, I don't see why the motor would not love it. Maybe come in around 2800-6000rpms and obviously tune for it. I mean the terminators love it, and they are running big shots with no problems what so ever. They just know how to set the systems up.
10-23-2011, 08:41 AM
#40
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Granite State
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
8 Posts
.
-G
10-23-2011, 09:08 AM
#41
MBWorld Fanatic!
I am on a 180 Angelo. Funny thing is, this dyno was at a dyno day for a monster mustang shop here in Atlanta. The owner said that you can really see how these cars suffer from major heat soak as it started pulling timing up top. I don't want tovrun Meth so the only other alternative is a smaller pulley. He did say these cars would love a tiny shot of nitrous just for cooling. I hit 182mph in the open header run.
Also, water injection may be another alternative to cooling the charge. I have used water / meth injection on other cars with great success, but Meth can be very corrosive and I would not use it again. Were you pulling timing because of AIT or detonation ?
Finally, if you are pulling timing because of AIT, you likely are beyond the efficiency range of the SC and really only pushing hot air. Adding a better cooler may help, but the real solution would be to keep the SC in its efficient range.
10-23-2011, 09:59 AM
#42
MBWorld Fanatic!
for next year I will spray water into the inlet instead of meth to see if that lowers the blowers temps at all.
Not to much but just enough to cool it down without really messing the a/f up.It pulled timing becasue you used 4th gear and put massive load on the car with no airflow.
Im lowering my boost also and searching for an oem 172 and im willing to bet ill make real close to the same power up top end as my 178 does.
Not to much but just enough to cool it down without really messing the a/f up.It pulled timing becasue you used 4th gear and put massive load on the car with no airflow.
Im lowering my boost also and searching for an oem 172 and im willing to bet ill make real close to the same power up top end as my 178 does.
10-23-2011, 01:15 PM
#44
MBWorld Fanatic!
It looks like you could hold peak HP to redline if you went just a tad leaner up top. I don't know what the "better be careful" threshold is, but I see SC Mustangs running 11.8 to 12.5 and some even going to 12.8 at RL. My best dyno graph peaked at 11.5 right at redline. My Max HP was at 5600 and stayed flat to RL. I don't want to blow my motor trying to find out, but 10.7 seems like there is more safe power to be had. Im sitting at 10.0 right now - It needs fixxed 
(Long Tubes is the reason for the new tune)
Here was the previous tune on shorties that was dead on. I dont have the AFR graph from this pull, but on the dyno jet it looked identical, peaking at 530.3 (SAE Corr) The AFR sheet associting the Dyno jet pull showed afr at 11.5 (exactly ) at 6100
Peak HP on both graphs (DD / DJ) showed flat from 5800 to 6400.. Made a big difference on the top end.
Do you have the timing chart? I dont seem to have problems with pulling timing, or high IAT's... Guess Im just lucky
(Long Tubes is the reason for the new tune)Here was the previous tune on shorties that was dead on. I dont have the AFR graph from this pull, but on the dyno jet it looked identical, peaking at 530.3 (SAE Corr) The AFR sheet associting the Dyno jet pull showed afr at 11.5 (exactly ) at 6100
Peak HP on both graphs (DD / DJ) showed flat from 5800 to 6400.. Made a big difference on the top end.
Do you have the timing chart? I dont seem to have problems with pulling timing, or high IAT's... Guess Im just lucky
Last edited by Bramage; 10-23-2011 at 01:29 PM.
10-23-2011, 03:20 PM
#46
MBWorld Fanatic!
On pump gas, with a forced induction setup, 11.5 is generally considered the optimal AFR. You may gain a few hp going from 10.7 to 11.5, but I would not go to 12.5 unless you were running race fuel.
It looks like you could hold peak HP to redline if you went just a tad leaner up top. I don't know what the "better be careful" threshold is, but I see SC Mustangs running 11.8 to 12.5 and some even going to 12.8 at RL. My best dyno graph peaked at 11.5 right at redline. My Max HP was at 5600 and stayed flat to RL. I don't want to blow my motor trying to find out, but 10.7 seems like there is more safe power to be had. Im sitting at 10.0 right now - It needs fixxed (Long Tubes is the reason for the new tune)
(Long Tubes is the reason for the new tune)
10-23-2011, 04:59 PM
#47
MBWorld Fanatic!
I think 10.7 to 11.5 would make a big difference in holding the power, and from 10.0 to 11.5 should increase output. I hate how rich** I am, however I just realixed something:
My maps are running wonderful fuel progression, just 1.5% too rich. My LTFT is pulling 3%
I have a 190mm ready to go. I think this tune might actually be prety close to what I want once I add the boost back in. I will try that next week. If it works, I won't need a tune after all...
My maps are running wonderful fuel progression, just 1.5% too rich. My LTFT is pulling 3%
I have a 190mm ready to go. I think this tune might actually be prety close to what I want once I add the boost back in. I will try that next week. If it works, I won't need a tune after all...
10-24-2011, 02:15 PM
#48
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Nice Dane, a 190mm and also add a 3K stall so it will kick like a mule. Gawd, that would be an insane sled with those two mods. Oh, do you have a LSD yet?
