Mustang Forums   Mustang Classifieds   Photo Gallery   Calendars   Search   Live Chat   Contact MF   Sponsors
  Mustang Recalls   Mustang TSB's   News   Timeslips   Timeline   Wallpaper   Member List   Register   Login

Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet

  Printable Version
Mustang Forum >> Ford Mustang Tech >> General Tech >> Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet Page: [1]

Mustang Forums Sponsor
 

General Tech Forum Sponsored by Edelbrock


Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 3:13:08 PM   
ThisBlood147


Posts: 3402
Joined: 1/19/2006
From: Louisiana
Status: offline
Ok, I had my first dyno done yesterday. I'll admit, I'm not very knowledgable about these dyno machines and such. So I have to ask, what is the difference between a Mustang dynamometer (which is what my car was done on) and a Dynojet? I know the mustang dyno's readout less than the dynojet, but what are each of these test machines measuring? And typically how much above a mustang dyno readout will a dynojet readout be?

And just to ask yet one more question....what do most of you guys quote for your hp ratings: mustang dyno numbers or dynojet?

_____________________________

98 Mustang V6: stock
93 Mustang vert: H/C/I 302 (SOLD)
05 GT: twin screw s/c + full suspension & tires

Post #: 1
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 6:30:42 PM   
live4motocross11


Posts: 959
Joined: 8/7/2005
Status: offline
there is an article in the new modified mustang magazine about this but i havent read that far into it yet, just read the first articles so far, c if u can find that mag

(in reply to ThisBlood147)
Post #: 2
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 8:09:23 PM   
MustangChris04


Posts: 2515
Joined: 5/8/2005
From: Ft. Lauderdale FL.
Status: offline
i think the mustang dyno reads around 10% less because it takes vehicle weight and some other factors into consideration.
I go by the dynoject numbers because around here that seems to be what everybody uses.

_____________________________


20LB Nitrous Bottle FOR SALE
CONTACT ME FOR MORE INFO

(in reply to live4motocross11)
Post #: 3
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 8:28:02 PM   
Sean97

 

Posts: 76
Joined: 3/5/2006
Status: offline
They take into account weight? I know that affects 1/4 mile time, but that has nothing to do with horsepower. That is stupid. Maybe I am wrong, I dunno.

_____________________________

97 GT auto

Sitting on my floor to be install
BBK Shorties
o/r x pipe
Flowmasters
S/C with all the fixens


Stationed in Camp Pendleton, CA for now, but always reppin' Tampa

(in reply to MustangChris04)
Post #: 4
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 8:32:54 PM   
MustangChris04


Posts: 2515
Joined: 5/8/2005
From: Ft. Lauderdale FL.
Status: offline
Lets say a honda with dynos 250 HP and weighs 2000 lbs.
now a mustang dynos and makes 300 on a regular dyno.
it would dyno on a mustang dyno at 270 because it takes into consideration the weight of the car so you can see what your cars compare as.

can anybody help, is this true?

_____________________________


20LB Nitrous Bottle FOR SALE
CONTACT ME FOR MORE INFO

(in reply to Sean97)
Post #: 5
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 8:53:20 PM   
Sean97

 

Posts: 76
Joined: 3/5/2006
Status: offline
Yeah, but that would only work if everyone used that kind of dyno. If I show a friend my dyno sheet and it says 300hp and I tell him I really have 400, but the dyno does some math and lowers your horsepower, they would all just laugh and tell me I was a liar.

_____________________________

97 GT auto

Sitting on my floor to be install
BBK Shorties
o/r x pipe
Flowmasters
S/C with all the fixens


Stationed in Camp Pendleton, CA for now, but always reppin' Tampa

(in reply to MustangChris04)
Post #: 6
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 8:57:54 PM   
JD1969




Team MF Member #069
Posts: 8570
Joined: 5/21/2004
Status: offline
JD1969's photo gallery

quote:

ORIGINAL: MustangChris04

Lets say a honda with dynos 250 HP and weighs 2000 lbs.
now a mustang dynos and makes 300 on a regular dyno.
it would dyno on a mustang dyno at 270 because it takes into consideration the weight of the car so you can see what your cars compare as.

can anybody help, is this true?

Weight really has no affect on how much HP a car puts down. The reason the two dynos will show different numbers is because of how they are loaded. Check out the web sites for a better explination, I am too lazy to type it all out, but basicly Mustang Dynos are better for tuning a car as they simulate the real world better, if all you care about is braging about numbers go to a Dynojet.
http://www.mustangdyne.com/chassisdynos.htm
http://www.dynojet.com/automotive_dyno/index.php

_____________________________

GET IN THE RING!

(in reply to MustangChris04)
Post #: 7
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 10:08:14 PM   
ThisBlood147


Posts: 3402
Joined: 1/19/2006
From: Louisiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JD1969

I am too lazy to type it all out, but basicly Mustang Dynos are better for tuning a car as they simulate the real world better, if all you care about is braging about numbers go to a Dynojet.


Thanks JD.........so I'm to assume that many of the ppl on this forum quote dynojet numbers for their power output estimates?

_____________________________

98 Mustang V6: stock
93 Mustang vert: H/C/I 302 (SOLD)
05 GT: twin screw s/c + full suspension & tires


(in reply to JD1969)
Post #: 8
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 10:29:40 PM   
JD1969




Team MF Member #069
Posts: 8570
Joined: 5/21/2004
Status: offline
JD1969's photo gallery
LOL I am not sure about that one Actually I think that the Mustang dyno is becoming more and more wide spread.

_____________________________

GET IN THE RING!

(in reply to ThisBlood147)
Post #: 9
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/2/2006 10:34:17 PM   
grabbem88


Posts: 8434
Joined: 12/31/2003
From: perryville,mo
Status: offline
it needs to be...i dodn't drive on rollers....i drive on pavement.

_____________________________

THOSE WHO BEG IN SILENCE....STARVE IN SILENCE
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/8EE10B2F-EDEA-4379-91A7-A89E4E27D4A9.htm

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/c535db52-4398-43c2-b538-9849013aa5e5.htm

(in reply to JD1969)
Post #: 10
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/3/2006 12:51:51 AM   
Sean97

 

Posts: 76
Joined: 3/5/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JD1969
Weight really has no affect on how much HP a car puts down. The reason the two dynos will show different numbers is because of how they are loaded. Check out the web sites for a better explination, I am too lazy to type it all out, but basicly Mustang Dynos are better for tuning a car as they simulate the real world better, if all you care about is braging about numbers go to a Dynojet.


Ok, well that is a much more reasonable answer. Now I get it!

_____________________________

97 GT auto

Sitting on my floor to be install
BBK Shorties
o/r x pipe
Flowmasters
S/C with all the fixens


Stationed in Camp Pendleton, CA for now, but always reppin' Tampa

(in reply to JD1969)
Post #: 11
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/7/2006 3:00:21 PM   
1996snake

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline
I recently had my 96 cobra dyno'd on a Mustang Dyno and was wondering if you know what is means by "with WCF" on the dyno sheet?

I have a Maximum HP and Torque and for each of these there is also a line underneath that says "with WCF" and the numbers are lower.

Exaple:
Maximum Torque 289
with WCF 280

I figure WCF is factoring of something, but what? Is the upper number with no factoring or do both numbers have factoring and WCF has additional factoring?

Thanks

(in reply to Sean97)
Post #: 12
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/7/2006 5:28:55 PM   
JD1969




Team MF Member #069
Posts: 8570
Joined: 5/21/2004
Status: offline
JD1969's photo gallery
WCF= weather correction factor. It's the number that we go off when tuning a car, but a lot of people will use the uncorrected number for bragging rights.

_____________________________

GET IN THE RING!

(in reply to 1996snake)
Post #: 13
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/8/2006 9:26:08 AM   
1996snake

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline
OK, cool.

With the weight and other factors that the Mustang Dyno also accounts for, are these accounted for in the non-WCF value?

And when compared to DynoJet numbers, even the non-WCF numbers are typically less than DynoJet numbers?

Thanks again for the help.

(in reply to JD1969)
Post #: 14
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/26/2006 11:00:32 PM   
ThisBlood147


Posts: 3402
Joined: 1/19/2006
From: Louisiana
Status: offline
Does anyone have a general idea of about what % less the Mustang dyno numbers usually run from bhp numbers?

_____________________________

98 Mustang V6: stock
93 Mustang vert: H/C/I 302 (SOLD)
05 GT: twin screw s/c + full suspension & tires


(in reply to 1996snake)
Post #: 15
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/27/2006 9:30:34 PM   
JD1969




Team MF Member #069
Posts: 8570
Joined: 5/21/2004
Status: offline
JD1969's photo gallery
About 8-10%. I also just want to say that dynos are nothing more than a tool to be used for tuning purposes, the numbers can be manipulated and weather is a big factor. Dyno two stock cars, one in Maine and then one in Florida at the same time of year and the results will be different. One thing to consider on a Mustang Dyno is that the uncorrected numbers are what the car would make in "perfect weather", corrected is what the car actually made.

_____________________________

GET IN THE RING!

(in reply to ThisBlood147)
Post #: 16
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/27/2006 11:23:04 PM   
ThisBlood147


Posts: 3402
Joined: 1/19/2006
From: Louisiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JD1969

About 8-10%. I also just want to say that dynos are nothing more than a tool to be used for tuning purposes, the numbers can be manipulated and weather is a big factor. Dyno two stock cars, one in Maine and then one in Florida at the same time of year and the results will be different. One thing to consider on a Mustang Dyno is that the uncorrected numbers are what the car would make in "perfect weather", corrected is what the car actually made.

8-10% less????? I thought dynojet numbers were typically around 10% less than crank numbers.......and Mustang dyno numbers were even less than dynojet. I'm just trying to calculate an accurate bhp number for my car now to get an idea of my improvement since going FI. I was stubborn and didn't do a stock dynorun before the install. Of course, that may not have been that helpful either....but again, I'm just lookin to get a ballpark figure.

BTW, I didn't do a dynopull for tuning.......just to check A/F and get an idea of how much hp I was putting out after the s/c install. Dunno if that makes me some sort of "dyno-queen" for wanting some numbers to put with my overall performance....but I wanted to know.

< Message edited by ThisBlood147 -- 5/27/2006 11:26:45 PM >


_____________________________

98 Mustang V6: stock
93 Mustang vert: H/C/I 302 (SOLD)
05 GT: twin screw s/c + full suspension & tires


(in reply to JD1969)
Post #: 17
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/27/2006 11:33:48 PM   
JD1969




Team MF Member #069
Posts: 8570
Joined: 5/21/2004
Status: offline
JD1969's photo gallery
I never said you are a dyno queen man. The Mustang Dyno will show about 8-10% less hp than a Dynojet. Also keep in mind that a lower (ie 4.10) gear will also cause the dyno to show a lower hp number.

_____________________________

GET IN THE RING!

(in reply to ThisBlood147)
Post #: 18
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 5/28/2006 12:16:16 AM   
ThisBlood147


Posts: 3402
Joined: 1/19/2006
From: Louisiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JD1969

I never said you are a dyno queen man. The Mustang Dyno will show about 8-10% less hp than a Dynojet. Also keep in mind that a lower (ie 4.10) gear will also cause the dyno to show a lower hp number.

Alright, that's about what I figured. I think you didn't realize my previous question was asking for % difference between mustang dyno numbers and bhp (crank numbers). I still have my stock 3.55's in, so my readout shouldn't be off compared to other stock geared S197's. And the dyno queen comment wasn't a response to you JD......just heading off certain "other members" around here who have a fit whenever someone wants to know about dyno numbers. Let's just say I saw it happen to some poor other fella, and I was puttin up my defense early

_____________________________

98 Mustang V6: stock
93 Mustang vert: H/C/I 302 (SOLD)
05 GT: twin screw s/c + full suspension & tires


(in reply to JD1969)
Post #: 19
RE: Mustang dyno vs. Dynojet - 6/1/2006 2:36:01 PM   
TommyV8

 

Posts: 4026
Joined: 7/26/2004
From: St. Louis, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JD1969
One thing to consider on a Mustang Dyno is that the uncorrected numbers are what the car would make in "perfect weather", corrected is what the car actually made.

Is that kinda the opposite of a corrected ET? The uncorrected time is what the car actually ran and the corrected is what it theoretically would've run in ideal weather, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: JD1969
Also keep in mind that a lower (ie 4.10) gear will also cause the dyno to show a lower hp number.

Does that mean that my 2.73 gear ratio will make me look like a stud on the dyno?

_____________________________

2002 Camaro Z28
Automatic, stock converter, 2.73 gears
Airbox lid, longtube headers, catless Y-pipe, cutout, Nitto drag radials
12.72 @ 108.62 1.93 60 ft


(in reply to JD1969)
Post #: 20
Login OR Register now to post a reply to this forum topic.
Page:   [1]

 

 
Mustang Forum >> Ford Mustang Tech >> General Tech
Jump to:
Forum Rules & FAQ
Today's Posts
Most Active Topics
RSS Feeds
Make A Donation

Mustangs:
Classic Mustang
Mustang II
Fox Body Mustang
sn95 Mustang
New Edge Mustang
s197 Mustang
Mustang Clubs
2007 GT500 Mustang
2009 Mustang
Ford Mustang Prices


Featured Sponsors
Advertising Info

Top 10 Posters
pro50sc17932
nanaki14694
88bluegt14536
dan04cobra14535
addermk214016
ride of the 13720
hotrods_n_bo13332
2000gt4.612516
mustangman0211995
1slo8511780

New Vendors
Extreme Dimension
BMR Fabrication
Year One
Auto Badges
Trickflow
Speedware Motorsports
LTM Global
Late Model Restoration
Southern Mustang Parts
BrandMotion

MustangForums.com is not affiliated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.