rjparth

I used to think the dyno was the holy grail of HP testing. The place where the rubber met the road, so to speak. Not so much anymore. Now I see it more like a tuning tool. The numbers are really only comparable to the numbers from another test on the same dyno under the same conditions. It seems like there is great deal of difference between the dyno graphs I've seen posted. Some guys are disappointed because their NA heads, cam, exhaust, free mods car barely squeaked into the 400's rwhp. I'm sitting back like WTF?

Anyway here's mine. 420 rwhp, 396 rwtq on a SuperFlow. Curious what thoughts anyone may have...

DynoDR

iTrader: (1)

That IS what a dyno is... A TUNING TOOL.

No other thoughts here.

RJB01camaross

They are tuning tools. I have never dynoed on a superflow only dynojets so I cant give you a fair comparison

Brice

Superflow are just REAL WORLD NUMBERS and great tools for tuning.
They can indicate the flywheels horsepower too.

I made 20-30 cars on the dyno. I've done my car in 2 differents days, different weather : same results.

Some numbers :
***01 Stock MN6 C5 ****
295.3 rwhp / 305 rwtq
346 fwhp, 365 ft/lb

****02 MN6 C5 Callaway Honker / catback ****
304.9 rwhp - 315 rwtq
362.3 fwhp - 375 fwtq

*** 99 MN6 C5 ARH 1-3/4-LS6 Intake-Callaway Honker, tuned ***
334.7 rwhp - 343 rwtq
393.2 fwhp - 408 rwtq

*** Same 99 MN6 With TFS 215 61cc/ VRX5 / Fast 92 ported ... ****
445 rwhp - 391 rwtq
524 fwhp- 466 fwtq

*** 2003 MN6 Corvette AFR 205 61cc Fast 92 Mamofied, Mamo Cam 224/228 ***
420 rwhp - 384 rwtq
498 fwhp -458 fwtq

*** Same 2003 MN6 Corvette with LS2 224/224, AFR Mamofied, fast mamofied, set up by Tony Mamo himself ***
436.5 - 401 rwtq
510 fwhp - 478 fwtq
This is hpw the 500 rwhp recipes are dynoed on a independant superflow ...


I see crazy numbers here in the forum with dynojet dynos !!!
Stock car with 320 rwhp, 500 rwhp small cam NA.
I think the superflow numbers are 8% less than the dynojet.

Here my differents experiences with differents setup on the same dyno.
Ask me if you want dyno sheets.
I think your car is a 500 rwhp car in some dynojet around the forum

Brice

wait a minute ... big cam and good heads do the job ?

I really like to read Tony's posts on the internet ... but when comes real world, specially on my car ... I listen to Ron@Vengeance.

Next month 402 Proline Engine with same VRX5/TFS 215 on the same dyno, to be continued ...

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

I will throw my nickels worth in on this topic....

My experience on the SuperFlow chassis dyno @ Westech's facility was that it was definitely "softer" than a handful of other style chassis dyno's I had ran my car on....not a bunch, but certainly 2-3% lighter.

My original 346 combo with the OEM short from my Vette and a set of stock 205 AFR's, a FAST I ported, LG headers, the 224/228 AFR cam and at the time a set of Crane roller rockers produced 552 HP on the Westech 902 engine dyno and it produced in the low 460's on their SuperFlow chassis dyno (SAE corrected) at the time. Now that same combo on a DynoJet (in fact numerous DJ's, and not the same models) and a Mustang dyno in TX, produced in the 475 - 480 range repeatedly. Come to think of it I spent a bunch of time on LAPD's dyno with my original 346 combo which was a four wheel dyno and I believe also a DynoJet (literally logged a couple of hundred runs on that dyno during the course of developing that original package....lots of 475+ runs when she was optimized).

Thinking back now, the softest number it ever rolled at the tire was in fact on the SuperFlow dyno at Westech, but I question whether every SuperFlow chassis dyno reads the same. I bet some aren't quite as conservative but Im purely speculating. I know Mustang dyno's can be all over the place....some read super stingy, others spit out numbers I question whether a DynoJet inertia style dyno would read. Thats why I try and bring all the complete engines I build to the same flywheel dyno....less variables and perfect data to truly compare what was accomplished with each build. An engine dyno IMO is far more repeatable and reliable than a chassis dyno because there are so many less variables to account for during the testing.

Point is as most already realize, a dyno, any dyno, IS a tuning tool and the best way to use it is to always have a baseline from a previous state of tune (or a previous combination) and check the gains (or losses) from the new combination using as many of the same parameters as possible. In fact when I'm on the chassis dyno, with my electric water pump in the car I make sure I always start the run at the very same temperature. I have witnessed alot of chassis dyno testing and have noticed quite a number of folks don't pay attention to coolant temps which can and will effect the end results. Did the last change you made really help (or hurt) the combination, or did the fact the driveline and coolant temps were different play into the end results.....you get my point I'm sure.

Brice....good to hear you enjoy reading my posts

-Tony

Brice

Hi Tony ! good to hear you.

That a very interresting post, with my little provocation ;-), I was sure you were in.

An engine dyno sure it's the best ! But it's interresting too to have the RWHP graph, that's the real power which go on the road.
Here in europe people tottaly don't care about the rwhp. I am the only guy to ask it to the dyno operator in 5 years !
Your difference from the engine dyno and your superflow is 16% ! that's interressing it's the same number I get.
I would love to dyno my car on a dynojet to see the difference (but we don't have one in France). I've dyno it on another superflow : same number (2 hp difference).

The next time I go to the dyno I will ask about corrections ! they are definitivement not SAE (I think DIN because we're in europa).


We're agree : a dyno is a dyno, to compare dynosheet, we have to compare it on the same dyno.

Tony, I'm impressed with your 460 rwhp on stock AFR 205.
I'm 35 hp less with 25 hp gained on the tune !
Without tune the car was 394 rwhp

Brice

I've got strange facts with C6 Z06 !

All stock the corvettes (C5 LS1, C6 LS2 LS3) made approximatively the numbers announced by GM within 2hp.

I've dyno 8 C6 Z06. only one was 505 hp on the flywheel, 13% loss 440rwhp.
The 7 others was bout 480 fwhp !!! (420 rwhp).

Are the overrated ?

I've got the same results with a 2004 C5 Z06 with an intake (340 rwhp, 402 fwhp). But I can really compare because it was the only C5 Z06 I've dynoed. The owner was pretty disapointed, he was sure that the C5 Z06 was underrated reading the internet dynojet dynos.

The dyno is a AutoDyn 30 AWD version 2008.The dyno shop is a reputable french Bmw tuner. The shop dyno cars for french magazine.
I rent the dyno for my tunes.(I'm an amator tuner).

The dyno flywheel calculation is false for 4L60E automatic transmission. (it reads real rwhp but the calculation is higher than reality).

I am happy to discuss about superflow dyno ! All dyno I see on the forum are dynojet or mustang and my number are always 6-8% lower.

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

Hi Brice,

I didnt want to disappoint you.....LOL

Regarding my former package I will be the first to admit I spent alot of time optimizing it.....header swaps, moving the cam forward and backwards (the smaller cam likes less advance to make the bigger peak numbers which makes sense because with so little duration it liked the later intake closing point). Lots of time optimizing the tune and of course one of my ported FAST intakes (the first of many), an electric water pump, U/D pulley, and a lightweight clutch with a reasonably light rear tire and rim package (about 49 lbs) as well.

In short, I did what I could to extract the most from that combo and get all of it to the ground. It drove like stock, got killer fuel economy still, and made stroker-esque power....it was really a great combination but a little pricey to duplicate, although I have helped a few people copy it with success that were willing to invest the time and money.



Cheers,
Tony

PS....I hear Gilles engine I built is doing well.....PM me if you want to share a little. I never really heard where all the chips finally fell but knew it was making big power based on a quick update I got months back.

Mike@Diablosport

iTrader: (2)

Our Superflow Chassis dyno tends to read a bit lower than most local DJs for sure.

Brice

Gilles didn't send you the dyno ?
The engine is doing fine, Gilles told me last week there's some misfire someting, I have to check it to identify the problem.
Here is the dyno :
Lot of torque but I though it'd have better number than that.
The torque is in NM (flywheel torque, substract 16% for rwtq)

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

Sorry for the semi-hijack here folks but if my conversion is correct Gilles stock OEM 6.0 block with a set of "Mamofied" 205's / Mamo ported FAST and a small cam (228/228 on a 114) made 510 RWHP and 479 RWTQ (converted from Newton meters).

I don't know how you could be less than thrilled with those results unless you were batting for the other team!!

In my book thats about as good as it gets for a 6.0 combo that mild and the torque curve is killer which is exactly what Gilles was after (that's the reason I cammed it so conservatively).

-Tony

PS....Lets not jack this thread too much....in fact this was a nice build and I may start another thread discussing it and the results. Feel free to PM me. If I have the time to start another thread I will link you to it after I post Brice.

Brice

It's a nice build and pretty combo, exactly the Gilles was asking for ! . I was expected more the 6.0L engine (LS2 vs LS1), that why the next build is on a 402ci, the owner like bad *** cars, I will post the results.

Here is the previous engine (LS1) + 224/228, AFR 205 61cc, Fast 90 mamofied, ARH 1-3/4, 25% pulley, ... ... on the same SUPERFLOW dyno. I will tuned a ported LS6 + mild cam + fast next week, I sure the combo will be under 400 rwhp on this dyno.

the graph is a before/after the tune.


Personnaly I don't think the swap to LS2 is worth it, LS1 + your massaged head do the job !
Gilles is happy, his car dyno higher than a stock C6 Z06 in the whole rpm !

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

The reality is he needed a shortblock so why not get one that's a little larger for the same price. Lets face it, stepping into a 6.0 litre is not going to rotate the world.....we are only discussing an increase in displacement of 18 CID (only a 5% increase). Your not going to see huge gains anywhere for that type of displacement bump but it does fatten the torque curve and provide more low RPM part throttle response. Given the choice, as long as the price increase was reasonable (and in Gilles case was the same), I would take the 6.0 liter over a 346 every day of the week.....you simply have a little more to work with.

Another six degrees of cam timing would have fattened the power curve substantially but not hurt peak torque output.....only shifted it to the right side of the dyno sheet, but Gilles really liked the 224/228 with his stock 346 and was looking for a similar daily driver friendly combo from the 6.0 that acted the same....which is exactly what I provided for him.

Honestly, for an extremely mild combo that still gets very good fuel economy and especially considering it is more of a daily driver, this package provides very few compromises IMO and as you said makes more than a 427 from GM with some very exotic parts and an additional 63 cubic inches.

-Tony

Brice

yep you're right. For information, this is the first and only H/C LS2 in France (and LS2 in a C5!), so we didn't know what to expect ... I've bet in the 540 fwhp range before the dyno.

So let's back to the post ... I've got a lot of dyno sheets on Superflow dyno !

Here is a stock C5 Z06 2004

Brice

rjparth, do you have another car's dyno number from your dyno ?

Brice

Here is a 99 MN6 Corvette, ARH 1-3/4 Callaway Honker.
The dyno sheet is before/after LS6 Intake

Brice

Here is a MN6 2K Camaro Z28 ARH 1/3-4, VRX5/TFS 215, FAST 92, 3.73 gears)
(The 25% Pulley was installed on the dyno, 3-5 hp more are expected)

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

Yep....That makes perfect sense

Your stock C5 Z06 put down 342 RWHP and 388 RWTQ (converted to ft.lbs).

A typical C5 Z06 lays down 350-355 on a DynoJet (lots of data to back that up) so the 2-3% less I witnessed on Westech's SuperFlow chassis dyno (compared to all the other chassis dyno data I had collected) also coincides with your SuperFlow data perfectly.

That means Gilles 6.0 liter engine would have laid down approximately 520 on a DynoJet if you factor in the extra 2-3% (BIG number for a mild mannered build).

BTW, that means that engine is making ALOT more than 540 at the flywheel....the 552 HP 346 I built made 462 RWHP (on a SuperFlow chassis dyno). That puts Gilles engine right around 600 HP at the flywheel.

Like I said initially....to be any less than thrilled with this power output considering the nature of the build would be silly.

I think it's great that 12,000 miles away your SuperFlow Dyno reads just about the same as the dyno @ Westech's facility and now we have a better cross section of data that points to the fact the SuperFlow chassis dyno is about 2-3% "stingier" than a DynoJet.

Good stuff....

-Tony

PS....The puts the OP's dyno numbers closer to 430-435 RWHP on a DynoJet or similar reading chassis dyno. I would also strongly recommend the OP get the vehicle on a scale with him in it and head to the local track to see what it traps in the quarter. You can even roll in on street tires....the ET doesn't matter....we just need to get a better idea of what its capable of trapping which we can then calculate the power needed to push that much weight to get there. My guess is it will correlate with chassis dyno numbers but some drivelines have more loss than others so it might trap higher than one might expect given the numbers it rolled on the chassis dyno although this is much more common with auto trans cars that always look weaker on the rollers.

miami993c297

iTrader: (6)

Was that last version of Gilles car dynoed with the heavy repro C6 Z06 19", the ones build in Chino with all the screws on the circumference...do you have the weight of those rims ???

If I remind correctly it is Michelin PS2 mounted there in January, 305/30-19 were 28 lbs...already heavier than the previous 275/40-18...

The wheel weight makes an impressive difference on the final RWHP result...

Christian