Dyno results at wheels on mustang powerdyne - are numbers realistic?
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,122
From: Natick, MA
Rep Power: 163
Please make sure powerful high velocity fans are used to keep the car cool during the power pull, and allow proper cool down between runs. Make sure the air incoming to the engine is kept clean and free of exhaust fumes, and there is a fan on the engine to keep it cool, too.
These cars are very, very hard to dyno consistently and are very susceptible to heat. They will jump to a lower timing map with the slightest of coolant temp increase in order to preserve the engine. Very conservative factory routines.
These cars are very, very hard to dyno consistently and are very susceptible to heat. They will jump to a lower timing map with the slightest of coolant temp increase in order to preserve the engine. Very conservative factory routines.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,134
From: Chicagoland
Rep Power: 123
Ok Stacy, I got results.
First of all, for HP translation we can use posted here NSX reference
422 (real HP) = 364 (Mustang dyno HP). I saw other samples and they give pretty much same operation ratio of 1.1593 that I will use here.
Before any work done 3 measurements came as 268, 261, 258. Corrected by mustang factor, 268*1.1593 = 310 hp, somewhat probably realistic for stock C2.
Now after all that work being done - measurements were 289,283,283. Corrected it is 289*1.1593=335 hp.
Biggest difference seems to be in area of 5.5K-6K rpm - quite visible on a img016.pdf.
so about what you were asking - you can see timing issue is completely cured now - look how new curves look compared to old ones on img015.pdf. That drop of timing is gone. We also took MAF reading to ensure it was accurate plus other stuff - everything is fine now and runs as it should. Power curve also improved from what it was, as well as torque does not have such a big drop in 5.5K rpm spot - and I can feel it. It is definitely more linear now than it was and it is probably the best benefit from all those mods - car pulls in more uniformed fashion now than in stock mode.
As of work done - new spark plugs, cleaned MAF, IPD Plenum, B&K air filter, Fabspeed x-pipe, Fabspeed maxflo mufflers, Softronic ECU flash. For what it takes on my C2 - car gained something, if that is as much it was supposed to be - is an open question, but should give you all some idea of what to expect.
First of all, for HP translation we can use posted here NSX reference
422 (real HP) = 364 (Mustang dyno HP). I saw other samples and they give pretty much same operation ratio of 1.1593 that I will use here.
Before any work done 3 measurements came as 268, 261, 258. Corrected by mustang factor, 268*1.1593 = 310 hp, somewhat probably realistic for stock C2.
Now after all that work being done - measurements were 289,283,283. Corrected it is 289*1.1593=335 hp.
Biggest difference seems to be in area of 5.5K-6K rpm - quite visible on a img016.pdf.
so about what you were asking - you can see timing issue is completely cured now - look how new curves look compared to old ones on img015.pdf. That drop of timing is gone. We also took MAF reading to ensure it was accurate plus other stuff - everything is fine now and runs as it should. Power curve also improved from what it was, as well as torque does not have such a big drop in 5.5K rpm spot - and I can feel it. It is definitely more linear now than it was and it is probably the best benefit from all those mods - car pulls in more uniformed fashion now than in stock mode.
As of work done - new spark plugs, cleaned MAF, IPD Plenum, B&K air filter, Fabspeed x-pipe, Fabspeed maxflo mufflers, Softronic ECU flash. For what it takes on my C2 - car gained something, if that is as much it was supposed to be - is an open question, but should give you all some idea of what to expect.
Your drop around 5200 rpm is the resonance flap opening up.
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,122
From: Natick, MA
Rep Power: 163
Also contrary to popular believe - there were no registered drops of torque nor HP because of high flow cats in low range RPMs. You can see there is only a steady gain after 3600rpm.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,134
From: Chicagoland
Rep Power: 123
Yes, it is part of the design. It changes the size of the intake to allow for better high rpm breathing.
Last edited by 1999Porsche911; Sep 28, 2009 at 12:16 PM.
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,122
From: Natick, MA
Rep Power: 163
So, bottom line is - roughly somewhere at 5.7K rpm area car gained somewhat around 40 horses max. In other high RPM areas it is closer to 25-30 horses across most areas.
PS. He-he, found this old post:
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-cab-dyno.html
On stock `06 C2 'S' mustang dyno results were 281-277 horses. So, my bargain C2 is now faster that stock C2s. A quite little but still pretty nice detail.
PS. He-he, found this old post:
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-cab-dyno.html
On stock `06 C2 'S' mustang dyno results were 281-277 horses. So, my bargain C2 is now faster that stock C2s. A quite little but still pretty nice detail.
Last edited by utkinpol; Sep 28, 2009 at 02:15 PM.
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,122
From: Natick, MA
Rep Power: 163
Fabspeed dynojet sheet for C2S with performance package and ECU upgrade shows 326 hp, 280 torque.
I am at 335hp, 294.4 torque if I use 1.1593 multiplier. Is it fun or what?
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,370
From: Vancouver
Rep Power: 329
My issue is when we are trying to compare dynos....it is not a comparison because of all the variables with dynos and their operators......so this makes it tough!
Now this may seem stupid BUT:
Do we all have access to a flat road?...YES
Do we all of access to a truck weighing scale..Probably..just drive a highway somewhere?...YES
Do each of us have an extra $200 kickin' around........YES,of course,we drive a big $$$$$$ car?!
So everyone go out and buy a Gtech and run your car in third gear from 3000rpm to redline and lets have some direct comparisons!
This will work IF everyone does this on a flat road( which we all have access too somewhere) AND has the integrity to put forth a honest run for everyone to base off of.
Problem with some shops is they need to show BIG numbers to warrant a money making shop!
Small numbers,even IF realistic,will hurt business and you won't go back...... that is WHY I suggest the Gtech....!
I would think that all the Gtech's are made the same,so the only variable is US......which....is why you/me/us need to punch in things honestly.
Even provide weather conditions before your data is posted!
Just would be NICE to have a common platform and the only way for us to compare over the internet is a portable device....good idea or bad?
You know what I am going to start a new thread for this!
Stacy
Now this may seem stupid BUT:
Do we all have access to a flat road?...YES
Do we all of access to a truck weighing scale..Probably..just drive a highway somewhere?...YES
Do each of us have an extra $200 kickin' around........YES,of course,we drive a big $$$$$$ car?!
So everyone go out and buy a Gtech and run your car in third gear from 3000rpm to redline and lets have some direct comparisons!
This will work IF everyone does this on a flat road( which we all have access too somewhere) AND has the integrity to put forth a honest run for everyone to base off of.
Problem with some shops is they need to show BIG numbers to warrant a money making shop!
Small numbers,even IF realistic,will hurt business and you won't go back...... that is WHY I suggest the Gtech....!
I would think that all the Gtech's are made the same,so the only variable is US......which....is why you/me/us need to punch in things honestly.
Even provide weather conditions before your data is posted!
Just would be NICE to have a common platform and the only way for us to compare over the internet is a portable device....good idea or bad?
You know what I am going to start a new thread for this!
Stacy
Registered User
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,481
From: Blaine, Wa (not in Irvine anymore)
Rep Power: 194
One caution Stacy, I expect there are a lot of roads that look flat, but may in fact have a slight incline. So measurements could vary depending on whether you're going slightly uphill or slightly downhill, vs true level. Perhaps use an average of a run in each direction? Similarly minor headwind or tailwind could have big impact. Pavement surface and tire pressures could impact drag. Bottom line, it is hard to get consistent measuring conditions between different drivers and cars in different locations and differing road conditions.
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,122
From: Natick, MA
Rep Power: 163
Well, what matters for me is to have this stupid timing issue fixed. All the rest is a plus and to use same dyno shop for all measurements makes sense for me. It is obvious that no 2 dyno stands would probably show same numbers on same car, so, we just have to take it for granted, apparently. One way or another I am satisfied with my mods now, even if those numbers are baloney, heck with it, it was worth it.
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,122
From: Natick, MA
Rep Power: 163
One caution Stacy, I expect there are a lot of roads that look flat, but may in fact have a slight incline. So measurements could vary depending on whether you're going slightly uphill or slightly downhill, vs true level. Perhaps use an average of a run in each direction? Similarly minor headwind or tailwind could have big impact. Pavement surface and tire pressures could impact drag. Bottom line, it is hard to get consistent measuring conditions between different drivers and cars in different locations and differing road conditions.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,370
From: Vancouver
Rep Power: 329
One caution Stacy, I expect there are a lot of roads that look flat, but may in fact have a slight incline. So measurements could vary depending on whether you're going slightly uphill or slightly downhill, vs true level. Perhaps use an average of a run in each direction? Similarly minor headwind or tailwind could have big impact. Pavement surface and tire pressures could impact drag. Bottom line, it is hard to get consistent measuring conditions between different drivers and cars in different locations and differing road conditions.
I think this would be alot more comparable than TWO seperate dynos in different parts of the country/world.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,134
From: Chicagoland
Rep Power: 123
I agree about the incline...but the Gtech,once you are positioned on your road,you zero it out on your windshield so as long as the incline is consistent....you should get a good reading.Weather conditions....well....just pick a calm day I guess!
I think this would be alot more comparable than TWO seperate dynos in different parts of the country/world.
I think this would be alot more comparable than TWO seperate dynos in different parts of the country/world.
I live in the Chicago area and we have no inclines. You can see Omaha on a clear day.
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,122
From: Natick, MA
Rep Power: 163
it is on today`s chart and was on first 08/03 chart as well.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
BlackMarketRacing
996 Turbo / GT2
16
Dec 3, 2015 10:46 AM
vividracing
Mercedes / AMG
1
Sep 1, 2015 03:16 PM
