Low dyno numbers
05-27-2016, 04:00 PM
#26
A stock e55 amg does not trap 120. And rarely traps 118. If it does, a lot of people are owed money for the misrepresentation of how much power a certain tune/mod adds.
The following users liked this post:
HeissRod (05-27-2016)
05-27-2016, 08:38 PM
#27
Senior Member
That's my mistake, I often think of my old car when thinking of trap speeds as I tracked it a lot more than the 55.
07-23-2016, 06:52 PM
#29
07-23-2016, 06:54 PM
#30
Member
If you dyno in third I would think those numbers are expected. Low four fourth. You would not have the same numbers for each gear in any event.
Look at the mph on the readout and compare it to your daily drive to determine the gear run.
If you have the raw data files I can always plot them for you.
Sean
Look at the mph on the readout and compare it to your daily drive to determine the gear run.
If you have the raw data files I can always plot them for you.
Sean
07-23-2016, 07:07 PM
#31
MBWorld Fanatic!
I am sure figured things out by now, but I dynode 365rwhp/430rwtq I believe back in the day. I did a comp test for piece of mind and modded it to hell. Car ran like a bat out of hell!
These cars should be pulled in 3rd gear btw.
These cars should be pulled in 3rd gear btw.
07-23-2016, 07:11 PM
#32
Member
I have a write up I did from another forum I can post if that would help. A bit much for one post though.
Sean
07-23-2016, 07:24 PM
#33
As soon as I get the car back after transmission work I will definetly do a compression test
07-23-2016, 07:27 PM
#34
It really depends on what type of dyno you run on regarding numbers. A load style dyno will show lower numbers than an inertia dyno. It is all in how they measure. If you stick to the same type of dyno then comparisons of power and changes can be accurately correlated.
I have a write up I did from another forum I can post if that would help. A bit much for one post though.
Sean
I have a write up I did from another forum I can post if that would help. A bit much for one post though.
Sean
07-23-2016, 07:32 PM
#35
Member
If that is third then compare your numbers with others who ran in third on an inertia dyno and you should be within 3 to 5% depending on the repeatability of the car.
You should stay with the same brand, Dynojet to Dynojet to remain accurate as each manufacturer uses different calculations. Also, pick a correction factor as well. Either SAE or STD. I always used SAE as I found it covered a broader range of conditions.
Good luck,
Sean
07-23-2016, 07:42 PM
#36
Member
On another note, why third? I have not looked at the trans ratio's yet, is it closest to 1 to 1?
Thanks,
Sean
07-23-2016, 07:43 PM
#37
You may be perfectly fine. Depends on what numbers you are comparing. You want to run the car in the trans ratio that is closest to 1 to 1 i.e. i rpm for 1 tire revolution. This has the least amount of parasitic loss.
If that is third then compare your numbers with others who ran in third on an inertia dyno and you should be within 3 to 5% depending on the repeatability of the car.
You should stay with the same brand, Dynojet to Dynojet to remain accurate as each manufacturer uses different calculations. Also, pick a correction factor as well. Either SAE or STD. I always used SAE as I found it covered a broader range of conditions.
Good luck,
Sean
If that is third then compare your numbers with others who ran in third on an inertia dyno and you should be within 3 to 5% depending on the repeatability of the car.
You should stay with the same brand, Dynojet to Dynojet to remain accurate as each manufacturer uses different calculations. Also, pick a correction factor as well. Either SAE or STD. I always used SAE as I found it covered a broader range of conditions.
Good luck,
Sean
