HOSS

iTrader: (12)

In response to a post I made in another thread. WeathermanShawn gave me a great idea on polling LS1Techers to see which correction factor they would like to maybe see standardized around here. I think most people around here would like to see the SAE correction factor made the norm, but we'll see. This gives everyone a good basis on their research when looking for things that make power, and can be sure that the corrections are on somewhat of a standardized level.

badpewter-z

iTrader: (4)

SAE as its going to be the closest for comparrisions which is what this section is about for the most part anyway

Sigforty

SAE is the only one I go by.

30th t/a

iTrader: (51)

why do we go by corrected dyno numbers but uncorrected track numbers? you got one guy at acto running 11.0s and another guy with the exact setup running 12's in Nevada. I say if were going with corrected dyno numbers then the track numbers should be corrected also. that way were comparing apples to apples.

speed_demon24

iTrader: (6)

Because corrected track #'s arent as accurate as corrected dyno #'s. It's kind of stupid to run a 12.5 but say you have a 12.0 car because it was 85 degrees out. And to the pole, all american cars are rated in SAE from the factory, so I would say SAE.

pdd

iTrader: (3)

SAE

WeathermanShawn

iTrader: (1)

Thanks for the shout-out Hoss.

Voted SAE.

I agree that STD and SAE correction factors are usually within 1/2-3% of each other. However if you really start looking at the STD & SAE formulas, it appears the more you deviate from a "normal" air pressure and standard temperature/humidity, the more that STD/SAE differ. SAE appears to level the field.

No offense intended to the previous post & dyno policy Hoss was referring to.

In fact I was backing up their reading. Just observing that if you post a dyno STD, no matter how accurate..it is questioned. Everyone seems to accept SAE, so it would be an easy and reasonable remedy.

..WeathermanShawn..

98SS2836

iTrader: (6)

I voted SAE thats what the basis is for tuning ect.. It just easier. AS stated above with regards to track times ect. I try to go up to the dyno before going to the track to get my uncorrected numbers and see what the air is going to be like. The other day at the track the DA was through the roof It's usually real low like 200-300. In this case it was 3200 hot humid muggy just shitty for racing my car was trapping 4mph lower than normal It was probably only putting 420-430 rwhp SAE is 455rwhp Sometimes when I go up, that day it puts 470-480 uncorrected. So You can post any dyno sheet, number. The only thing that matters is if you satisfied and you get to the line first.

WS6FirebirdTA00

iTrader: (33)

SAE, STD is for pussies

everyone needs to post something common. Too many people being shady about CFs around here.

Slowhawk

iTrader: (12)

SAE is a standard? STD and uncorrected vary alot by weather around here.

HOSS

iTrader: (12)

They vary some here too. Last time I hit the dyno, it was close to a 10 hp difference. STD being greater of the 2.

WeathermanShawn

iTrader: (1)

Hey Hoss:

While not an overwhelming number of LS1tech members voted, of those who did, 93% for SAE is a convincing customer preference poll result.

Hopefully the results are considered. Thats a convincing percentage. Seems like an easy and reasonable policy.

Any suggestions as to making SAE dyno readings the accepted standard?

You really need the cooperation of everyone posting to make it work.

HOSS

iTrader: (12)

haha. 218 views and 31 votes. We have some lazy members here. I would love to get some moderators views on this topic, and a few more sponsors. I just think that it would really be beneficial in the research aspect of trying to put together a good combination that works, and makes great power, instead of people coming up short of their expectations, and being dissapointed. Thoughts?

RedHardSupra

iTrader: (1)

why don't you list the 'standard' conditions for each type of correction so enlighten the masses? is humidity and altitude get taken into the normalizing process as well?

WeathermanShawn

iTrader: (1)

I'll take a shot. One caveat. I can do math, but any engineers or dyno experts available are more than willing to clarify or correct.

SAE corrects to an atmospheric pressure of 29.234" inches of mecury and 77deg F.

STD corrects to 29.92" of mecury and 60f. Since STD corrects to a higher atmospheric pressure and cooler temperature, it will always be higher than SAE.

Yes, both use the same parameters in the formula, but using a different reference point.

Perhaps the greater point is using the same standardized reading when you measure such any value of importance. I.E. A quarter-mile should always measure 1320'.

RedHardSupra

iTrader: (1)

Shawn, does altitude gets taken into account explicitly, or does it just show up as pressure change? what about humidity? i know it's a small change, but if we're normalizing dyno scores here, might as well go the extra mile.

WeathermanShawn

iTrader: (1)

The altitude is taken into account under both SAE and STD readings. It is implicitly accounted for by using the actual environmental station pressure.

For instance, the atmospheric pressure today in Denver is 24.11" of mecury. As long as the Dynojet weather station is calibrated to read actual pressure, the elevation and its effect on pressure is taken into account.

Both use humidity and temperature, but using 60f and the higher pressure of 29.92 for conversion can make a STD reading 1/2-4% higher. Water vapor (humidity) plays a much smaller role.

Thats my understanding from using the formulas.

BriancWS6

iTrader: (18)

I voted for SAE, and, I like the idea of making it the standard. It seems when someone posts up some good results, if it doesnt say "SAE corrected" at the top or somewhere, everyone asks about it. I know I do.

SSNISTR

iTrader: (10)

Word to that!

00T\A

SAE