sorry sir. was on coffee break. i had to catch up on my eating seeing as i didn't stop for lunch. ate doughnuts and drank milk from breakfast all day. man what a sugar rush.

 

Seems to be a good test with attention paid to maintaining constants (bottle pressure, etc) and keeping the nozzle as the only variable in the test.

Thanks for performing the test and sharing your results.

 

here's four graphs.
#1 all nine nozzles with .062/.033 baseline jetting HP Graph
#2 all nine nozzles with .062/.033 baseline jetting TQ Graph
#3 all nine nozzles with 12:1 A/F Ratio HP Graph
#4 all nine nozzles with 12:1 A/F Ratio TQ Graph

 

more graphs up. i'm a little disappointed in myself for not getting the a/f ratios closer.

 

Dont be....it took you long enough to do what you did. To get them all perfect would have added another day. You can see on some there is a direct correlation to AF and where they placed for power output. I like graph 3. Its a littl hard to follow the colors at times...lol.

 

funny thing...on graph #1...if you throw out the two substantially richer nozzles at your sample point....and look at the nozzles that are within 1 Af point of each other from 12.15 to 13.14 and use that group to compare "somewhat" close Af ratios the difference in HP at that point in that group of nozzles is down to 12.6 difference from the highest to lowest.

 

graph #1 and #2 we didn't care about matching a/f ratios. those compare nozzles with same jetting. #3 and #4 is where is was trying to match a/f ratios. when looking at it in the stretched version i'm putting up now, i can start to see how far off i was. on the small monitor with standard sizing, it looked closer. something i should have paid a little closer attention to. either way, it's still valid data to me.

 

all 78 dynosheets are up now. start comparing and talk amongst yourselves.

 

jeez....my head hurts!! Your tha man MRR23. Great job and thats alot of work!

 

Excellent work!

 

i did some ranking based only on peak numbers. here's what i came up with:

same jetting .062/.033 HP
1. Dynotune 423.21
2. TNT 422.52
3. NX SHO 420.06
4. NX Shark 419.37
5. NX Vortech 418.00
6. Ny-trex 415.83
7. CF Predator 412.42
8. NOS silver 403.87
9. NOS Black 389.31

same jetting .062/.033 TQ
1. TNT 438.60
2. Dynotune 438.15
3. NX SHO 436.20
4. NX Shark 433.96
5. NX Vortech 433.58
6. Ny-trex 433.20
7. CF Predator 429.49
8. NOS Silver 416.86
9. NOS Black 395.30

matching a/f ratio HP
1. NX SHO 424.82
2. TNT 421.74
3. NX Shark 420.56
4. Dynotune 414.20
5. NX Vortech 413.10
6. CF Predator 411.53
7. NOS Silver 409.60
8. Ny-trex 404.79
9. NOS Black 386.84

same a/f ratio TQ
1. NX SHO 442.21
2. TNT 441.79
3. Dynotune 436.16
4. NX Shark 434.23
5. CF Predator 431.08
6. NX Vortech 426.52
7. Ny-trex 422.68
8. NOS Silver 421.58
9. NOS Black 392.80

 

one thing i find interesting about this comparison is the dynotune and the NOS silver one. right on dynotune's site it says "Our nozzles have a chrome Finish and function exactly the same as the NOS fogger nozzles."

yet, they performed way differently. i have them in my hand right now. the dynotune has about a 30% larger (i'm guessing right now) orifice in the jet holder. my guess would be that if i was to swap the jet holder, the NOS Silver will perform about the same.

 

TOP: NOS Silver
MIDDLE: NX Vortech
BOTTOM: Dynotune



i need a better camera. you should be able to see how each one gets progressively bigger from top to bottom.

 

in talking with ken from ny-trex when he stopped by, he said when the orifice size more closely matches the jet size, you get better results. here's a list comparing what he said to the first ranking list i made:

same jetting .062/.033 HP
1. Dynotune 423.21
2. TNT 422.52 .093
3. NX SHO 420.06 .116
4. NX Shark 419.37 .093
5. NX Vortech 418.00 .063
6. Ny-trex 415.83 .110
7. CF Predator 412.42 .125
8. NOS silver 403.87
9. NOS Black 389.31

i will edit, as i get the info on the nozzles i do not have orifice sizes for.

 

Bottom line: Dyno testing is a time consuming process and I appreciate all the hard work. HOWEVER, there is a factor here that still does not add up.

Dyno Tune nozzle is manufactured by COLD FUSION NITROUS and is the EXACT same nozzle CFN puts in there basic kits!!! That being said We CFN Know that the Predator nozzle outperforms the smaller older brother you tested for dyno tune. So, My question is how is it that your results show the exact opposite? I can offer that all of our testing in compairing the 2 nozzles are HP ranges higher than those you tested. As the HP settings go up the Predator Flows more and can keep up with the larger jetting.

 

Please post up your results, the real results this time.
Ricky

 

there are three nozzles that are basically identical in the 1/8" sets.

Dynotune ( Cold Fusion makes it)
NOS silver
NX Vortech

each one 'looks' the same except in one area that i looked at. where you put the jets in at. all three have a different size orifice in them. again, here's a pic of all three together from a previuos post of mine 4 up from this one:

TOP: NOS Silver
MIDDLE: NX Vortech
BOTTOM: Dynotune


what i don't know is how large the hole is inside the nozzle itself. as far as the jet adapter goes, according to ricky, the NX Vortech is a .063" opening. if i remember correctly, the NOS Silver has a .045" opening. dynotune (CFN) i have no clue. but, by looking at the pic, it has a larger opening.

the larger orifice hole is supposed to flow more and make more power just didn't hold true in this case. the CFN Predator (.125) and Ny-trex (.093) made less overall power than the dynotune, TNT, and NX SHO.

now, the Ny-trex and NX Shark, both have a .093" opening. Yet, the NX shark outperformed it. why??? my guess is the nozzle design itself. the Ny-trex has both the n2o and fuel come out at the same point just inside the nozzle. the NX Shark has the n2o come out further away.

here's the graph comparing the two you have mentioned
Dynotune (CFN) vs CFN Predator same jetting


Dynotune (CFN) vs Predator matching 12:1 A/F Ratio

 

looking closer at the graphs, you would see the Predator was right there with the Dynotune (CFN) nozzle when i got them closer to 12:1 A/F Ratio.

when it was the same baseline jetting, the Predator took a slight dive at 4500 rpms and never came back. i doubt it was knock as it was richer than the Dynotune (CFN) the whole time.

if you would like you Dynotune nozzle back, so you can inspect it for any defects that might have altered the results, feel free to PM me about refunding my the money i spent on it. i had to buy two of the nozzles for this test. the Predator and the Dynotune (CFN). the rest were donated.

 

end result of this test, is the Predator did none of what you tests showed on those graphs that were put up. never made more power and never made it sooner.

 

True statement. Your test, on your day, under your conditions and your parameters. What the test really shows, as had been said numerous times, they are all really close and any test is subjective concerning the changing parameters through out the test. Lets do a back to back test of the best NX nozzle against the Predator, at a higher HP, say 200hp or above. Now, no one can say I am partial to either brand as we carry both, and both are fine products.

Oh yea the next test should be dry against wet. that should stir up some debate. hehehehehe
Robert