Low Hp on dyno?
02-20-2006, 01:43 PM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low Hp on dyno? With all my mods in my sig, I was expecting at least 350hp at the wheels. I got it on a dyno today and only got the best of 10 pulls was 282hp and 244tq. Whats up with this? It cant be right because this car pulls HARD all the way to 150mph. I can smoke a stock 2000 Corvette. So I have to be getting more power than that. Do these numbers seem right, or is something up? Anybody else have the same issue? 
Also, it hasnt really been tuned yet, so I understand doing that could possibly free up 20hp. The fuel ratio can use some work, but even at that I still thing the results are too low.
Also, it hasnt really been tuned yet, so I understand doing that could possibly free up 20hp. The fuel ratio can use some work, but even at that I still thing the results are too low.
02-20-2006, 01:48 PM
#2
Your 90mm TB, intake and 3500 stall are killing the dyno numbers. If you're on a stock 346 ci motor then the first 2 items are a waste of $ IMO.
Dynojet or Mustang Dyno ? Also, without a tune all those mods will act like garbage.
Dynojet or Mustang Dyno ? Also, without a tune all those mods will act like garbage.
02-20-2006, 02:20 PM
#3
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mustang Dyno, I know they dyno low, but is it that much lower?
I agree somewhat about the intake, but a supercharger is going to be installed this summer, so ill need it by then anyways
But after the install I did feel a noticable increase in power, so to me it was worth it, but its not being used to its full potential.
I agree somewhat about the intake, but a supercharger is going to be installed this summer, so ill need it by then anyways
But after the install I did feel a noticable increase in power, so to me it was worth it, but its not being used to its full potential. Last edited by Thrasher245; 02-20-2006 at 08:52 PM.
02-20-2006, 06:28 PM
#4
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by NOSjohn
If you're on a stock 346 ci motor then the first 2 items are a waste of $ IMO.
Dynojet or Mustang Dyno ? Also, without a tune all those mods will act like garbage.
Dynojet or Mustang Dyno ? Also, without a tune all those mods will act like garbage.
He has a cam and people gain power over the ls6 intake with STOCK internals. So please do your homework before telling this guy he wasted his money. There's plenty of cam only guys running the 90/90 setup and they've gained incredible power through out the curve.
02-20-2006, 06:36 PM
#5
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Thrasher245
Mustang Dyno, I know they dyno low, but is it that much lower?
I agree with you about the intake, but a supercharger is going to be installed this summer, so ill need it by then anyways
I agree with you about the intake, but a supercharger is going to be installed this summer, so ill need it by then anyways
2. your stall wasn't locked
3. you have gears
4. mustang dynos are loaded dynos, there for they shower numbers
5. autos arent dyno queens
Last edited by lilbuddy1587; 02-20-2006 at 06:41 PM.
Trending Topics
02-20-2006, 10:08 PM
#8
Originally Posted by lilbuddy1587
He has a cam and people gain power over the ls6 intake with STOCK internals. So please do your homework before telling this guy he wasted his money. There's plenty of cam only guys running the 90/90 setup and they've gained incredible power through out the curve.
OOOH, so sorry I touched your sore spot. I did mention that it was MY opinion that it was a waste of money. Oooooh, most people with CAMS gain INCREDIBLE power? How much is this INCREDIBLE power ? 10 rwhp ? 20 rwhp ? No thanks, I can find 20rwhp in my car without spending $1,000 plus dollars on a 90/90 setup.
So, before you talk smack, do your homework, learn to tune and learn what IS necessary and what is NOT necessary on a car to allow it to make power.
02-20-2006, 10:56 PM
#9
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by NOSjohn
So, before you talk smack, do your homework, learn to tune and learn what IS necessary and what is NOT necessary on a car to allow it to make power.
Anyways,
You do mean CAM correct ? You talk about peak numbers only, while I'm talking about gains through out the curve. No one said I was talking smack either, so obviously I hit a SORE spot for you didn't I ? I never said the 90/90 was a necessity but it DOESN'T hurt either. So now that your chance to one up yourself been shot down, take a step back and re-read what I said. I never attacked you.
Last edited by lilbuddy1587; 02-20-2006 at 11:02 PM.
02-21-2006, 02:14 AM
#10
Hahaa...ya, the Predator. Well, considering I work directly with Diablosport to tune people's Corvettes using this fairly popular item, it was given to me for free. So, you really got me on that one!
No, I mean CAMS. Several people owning several cars would make it plural. 1 car = 1 cam, several cars = several cams. See?
So, if it's NOT a necessity, why are you telling ME to do my homework? You're defending the idea that it's a INCREDIBLE gain ...for the money...it isn't.
No, you didn't attack me and I didn't feel that you did. So, I see we agree that it's not a necessity now. BTW, just for conversations sake, I've probably been tuning cars longer than you've been out of diapers.
EDIT: Good convo., thanks for making it interesting. Original poster - sorry for the misdirection in your thread.
No, I mean CAMS. Several people owning several cars would make it plural. 1 car = 1 cam, several cars = several cams. See?
So, if it's NOT a necessity, why are you telling ME to do my homework? You're defending the idea that it's a INCREDIBLE gain ...for the money...it isn't.
No, you didn't attack me and I didn't feel that you did. So, I see we agree that it's not a necessity now. BTW, just for conversations sake, I've probably been tuning cars longer than you've been out of diapers.
EDIT: Good convo., thanks for making it interesting. Original poster - sorry for the misdirection in your thread.
02-21-2006, 07:14 PM
#15
On The Tree
Originally Posted by lilbuddy1587
4. mustang dynos are loaded dynos, there for they shower numbers
02-26-2006, 10:53 PM
#16
Originally Posted by waSStock
whether a dynamometer can apply resistance or not has absolutely nothing to do with measured horsepower. Dyno Jet's calculations are a guess...a high guess. The majority of the guys on the internet base their numbers and info on Dyno Jets "padded numbers". The funny part is that if you don't believe me, read the latest Hot Rod Magazine...Mark Dobeck (the founder of Dyno Jet) finally admitted that he fudged the calculations to make his customers happy.
Fudged or not, they are a constant, so they can still be used to judge gains, tune cars, and make comparisons between setups.
02-26-2006, 11:44 PM
#17
One thing most people don't realize is that the original setup on a dyno can impact the horsepower readings it gives. I had no idea how easy it is to fudge hp numbers high or low until I set up my next door neighbors md250. The load cell calibrations for the power absorbing unit have to be correct in order to get a correct reading. Also, we dynoed an n/a car loaded and unloaded to see if it gave different readings. The results were almost identical. The results on a turbo car were drastically different, however. I have not tried either of these cars on a dynojet to see if it would give different readings than the mustang. I guess my point is that you shouldn't freak out about low dyno numbers if the car runs good.