Dyno Trifecta

[RobAGD]

Ok I am looking into doing a little test.

I want to take the same car or cars and test them on the following :

Dynoflow
Superflow
Mustang

I want to see what differnace we see from each dyno on the same day with a portable weather station taking the data. I am hoping the software will allow for entering correction to weather after the runs are recorded.

The next post will be what I use for collecting links and shop data.

-Robert

[RobAGD]

holding for shop data


Superflow

NOVA
Autothority - 703- 323 - 0919 - Web Site (http://www.autothority.com/contact/index.html)

Va Beach
Va Speed - (757) 468 - 5101 - Web Site (http://www.vaspeed.com/contact.htm) Lists chassis dyno but no pn#

MD
MD Performance - (301)258-8883 Web Site (http://www.marylandperformance.com/)


Mustang

NOVA
Curry's Auto Service, Inc. - (571) 522-1002 - Web Site (http://www.currysauto.com/)

DTM Motorsport - (703) 661-8885 Web Site (http://www.dtmmotorsport.com/)

Richmond
AED - (804) 271-9107 - Web SIte (http://www.aedperformance.com/)


Dynaflow

NOVA
Ultimate Performace - Web Site (http://www.ultimateva.com)

Springfield Motorsports - 703.339.3780 - Web Site (http://www.springfieldmotorsport.com/) 2WD sows as an Eddy Current optioned Dyno

[bipto]

You gonna be able to find all those dyno types in close proximity..?

Results will be interesting...

[RobAGD]

Working on it

I think this may explains some of teh differnace between teh westie numbers and what we seee out here. They are using a Syperlfow and we are typcally using Dynaflows and mustangs.


I think we have them within anhour of each other, its going to come down to options on the dynos.

-R

[FactoryD]

Go Rob!!!

[BrilliantBlackHemi]

Mustang:

In NoVa (these are AWD units)

Curry's Auto Service, Inc. (http://www.currysauto.com/) 1510 Moran Rd.
Sterling, VA 20166
(571) 522-1002
Email (dhowell@curryauto.com)

MD-AWD-IMP
http://www.mustangdyne.com/LocatorPages/lctr%20images/502dash.jpg

DTM Motorsport (http://www.dtmmotorsport.com/)

23571 Pebble Run Place
Suite 160
Dulles, VA 20166
(703) 661-8885
Email (nice22066@aol.com)
MD-AWD-1100

In Richmond: AED (http://www.aedperformance.com/) 2530 Willis Rd.
Richmond, VA 23237
(804) 271-9107
MD-1750-DE

[RobAGD]

Looks like Ill have to check a few of teh option but it looks good for a Sterling Sterling - Alexandria run forteh dynos.

-R

[Jweezy]

when are you going i would like to go with you...i havent been to a dyno of anykind...and i would like to put my car on a dyno

[RobAGD]

Its going to be a all day friday thing. I know you get off work fairly early and are in reston so the Sterling run should be doable for you... Provided you dont get waylaided by the girls again :)

-R

[RandomAccess]

Did somone say AWD?

[RobAGD]

all the Mustangs listed are AWD as is the Ultimate Dynaflow

Unsure about the Superflow but given what the guy tunes I would guess its a AWD unit.

-R

[Jweezy]

Rob i dont get off early on Fridays...I DONT EVEN WORK ON FRIDAYS...

I only work Mon-Thursday...every week...i Just went in friday, cuz i had some paper work to do before the week was up...

FRIDAYS>SATURDAYS>SUNDAYS...you will NOT catch me at work...

Jweezy

[RandomAccess]

Rob i dont get off early on Fridays...I DONT EVEN WORK ON FRIDAYS...

I only work Mon-Thursday...every week...i Just went in friday, cuz i had some paper work to do before the week was up...

FRIDAYS>SATURDAYS>SUNDAYS...you will NOT catch me at work...

Jweezy

YOU SUCK!


.
.
.
.
.
.

Okay... You don't suck... I'm just REALLY jealous!

[RobAGD]

lol, ok well then J you can make the full day of fun, expect your dyno to run about $100.

I am guessing that I am looking at $100 per shop for dynos.

It will be intresting for BBH and I to dyno our ides together as we are almost a matched set for mods.

Super Chips
Cat Back MagnaFlows vs Zoomers
CAI Typhoon vs Voliant Ram Air
Gibson Shorties

So unless one of us picks up HF Cats before we get this done we shoudl be posting numbers very very close to each other.

J - Your have just a Cat back right ? It woudl be intresting to see what a stock car pulls on these dynos as well.....

RA - take a day and make some runs :)

-R

[northeastern08]

I wish I could do this...I need a lil Magnum fun

But Im waiting to dyno mine after I install my buncha goodies Ive been waiting on

Good luck on the journey guys!! :racing:

[BrilliantBlackHemi]

Any chance this could be done on a Saturday? Unlike Jweezy, I normally have to work. I could probably take a day off, but if it's a Saturday, that's always better. I could come up for a Chic-fil-et meet and stay overnight. :)

[RandomAccess]

Hmmm... google says 6 hours... couldn't be a day trip...

[RobAGD]

leave at 6am, get to Nova at 12 noon, we do the runs figure done by 6pm drive home you back by midnight and you wont turn into a pumpkin.


BBH - I dont think any of these shops are open for dyno runs on weekends unless your doing a dyno day and your looking at $1200 min per shop for that.... Kinda expensive for 3-4 cars :)

-R

[Jweezy]

Umm...i ordered the NEW AIRRAID CAI...it should be here by the 20th...and i am goin to try very hard to get a 170 degree stat...OH YEA>..i went to advanced auto parts, and AUTO ZONE...they said they dont have thermstats, and didnt offer to order them..i asked AUTO ZONE if they could order one...they said.."no"...so whats this all about?

i have BORLA, and AIR by dyno day...why a 100 dollars to dyno...not that, thats a problem, but well it is...cuz there is a dyno, i found out here on route 17 and they said 50 dollars for 3 pulls i believe...lol

[Jweezy]

YOU SUCK!


.
.
.
.
.
.

Okay... You don't suck... I'm just REALLY jealous!

Dont be...I leave my house mon-thurs. at 3am or 3:30am and work for 10 hours till 3:00pm..2 hours to get home sometimes...most of the time its 1 hour and half...you know this area...

[Hogward]

Umm...i ordered the NEW AIRRAID CAI...it should be here by the 20th...and i am goin to try very hard to get a 170 degree stat...OH YEA>..i went to advanced auto parts, and AUTO ZONE...they said they dont have thermstats, and didnt offer to order them..i asked AUTO ZONE if they could order one...they said.."no"...so whats this all about?

i have BORLA, and AIR by dyno day...why a 100 dollars to dyno...not that, thats a problem, but well it is...cuz there is a dyno, i found out here on route 17 and they said 50 dollars for 3 pulls i believe...lol
JWeezy,

Print out THIS PAGE (http://www.autozone.com/servlet/UiBroker?UseCase=C001&UserAction=performMoreDetail&Parameters=TRUE%7C%7ETHERMOSTAT%7C%7ENONE%7C%7EVAL UCRAFT+WHITE+BOX%7C%7ENONE%7C%7EFALSE%7C%7EFALSE%7 C%7E701273%7C%7E1579%7C%7E4127%7C%7ENONE%7C%7E%241 2.99%7C%7ECHRYSLER%7C%7E300C%7C%7E2006%7C%7ENONE%7 C%7E0.246%7C%7ENONE%7C%7EW) and take it to your AutoZone store, or alternatively you can create an account with AutoZone online, order it there and have it delivered to your door. Either way, you can see for sure that AutoZone can get it. You must have a LAZY A$$ (or stupid) parts person at that AutoZone!! Don't let them lie to you again.

Time for you to get that good 'stat.

Hog

[RobAGD]

J - Up here dyno runs run between 70-100 for 3 or 4 pulls with a/f. I woudl rather tell someone to bring extra and they not spend it, than not have enough and having to just watch.

-R

[Jweezy]

J - Up here dyno runs run between 70-100 for 3 or 4 pulls with a/f. I woudl rather tell someone to bring extra and they not spend it, than not have enough and having to just watch.

-R

good thinking

[Jweezy]

JWeezy,

Print out THIS PAGE (http://www.autozone.com/servlet/UiBroker?UseCase=C001&UserAction=performMoreDetail&Parameters=TRUE%7C%7ETHERMOSTAT%7C%7ENONE%7C%7EVAL UCRAFT+WHITE+BOX%7C%7ENONE%7C%7EFALSE%7C%7EFALSE%7 C%7E701273%7C%7E1579%7C%7E4127%7C%7ENONE%7C%7E%241 2.99%7C%7ECHRYSLER%7C%7E300C%7C%7E2006%7C%7ENONE%7 C%7E0.246%7C%7ENONE%7C%7EW) and take it to your AutoZone store, or alternatively you can create an account with AutoZone online, order it there and have it delivered to your door. Either way, you can see for sure that AutoZone can get it. You must have a LAZY A$$ (or stupid) parts person at that AutoZone!! Don't let them lie to you again.

Time for you to get that good 'stat.

Hog
Thanks Hogward...YOUR THE MAN

[Jweezy]

Except on thing, what is white box tstat?

I didnt see where it says 170 degree or anything

[Hogward]

Except on thing, what is white box tstat?

I didnt see where it says 170 degree or anything

White Box T'stat is just how AutoZone has it identified. I have one in my car and can testify that it is the 383-170 (part number 4127) that is discussed in the 300C forum thread on Alternate Thermostats.

Read this thread on our forums: Video on Thermostat Changeout (http://www.lxforums.com/board/showthread.php?t=32989) and pay attention in post #1 where it has a link to the thread on the 300C forums. Lots of reading there, but you will find all you ever wanted to know about thermostats.

Just trying to help you...

Hog

[Jweezy]

Thanks alot hog, i am going to autozone today. to get that baby, when do you think it should be available for me to get, when it is ordered?

[BrilliantBlackHemi]

So when do we want to do the Trifecta! Soon or wait until it's C O L D (brrr).

[Immo]

DTM is having an open house July 29 and 30th... $50 for 3 pulls. Plus free food...

[RobAGD]

Too bad, BBH and I will be on our way to Ga for the SE Shindig.

Paul go get a few pulls, and we will throw BBH's on the dyno soon to get some stock numbers from his 8 as well..

-R

[Immo]

Paul go get a few pulls, and we will throw BBH's on the dyno soon to get some stock numbers from his 8 as well..

-R

I have family in town this weekend, but will try to get over there if there isn't a huge wait....

[CoolVanilla]

This will be very interesting! However, Rob, I'm afraid its not going to be completely telling unless you can ensure each dyno tested was calibrated just before your pulls (as ours has been each time) AND you can dictate what mode the dyno is in for the power pulls. Even within "The Big 3" there are so many variances... you've really got to make sure your operator knows his dyno inside and out.

For example, our Superflow can run in either inertia or load bearing modes; and within those modes we can choose various sub modes; simple intertia, controlled acceleration, steady state control and road load (we've got two 400hp eddy current absorbers that enable this mode variability; many dyno shops do not have this kind of option as their dyno is not as complete.)

Each method has its purpose;

simple inertia uses the mass of the roller to simulate load and is good for acceleration testing (non adjustable load)
steady state requires a variable load and is primarily used for tuning purposes
controlled acceleration requires a variable load and is primarily used for is for max power numbers
road load is good for simulation and diagnostic purposesFor the tests we've run, we've been in inertia mode and have used either simple or controlled acceleration; the max numbers came out "close enough" to forgo the controlled acceleration tests and go with simple inertia (much less stress on the vehicle, and is more informative for seeing "up the curve" improvements).

To make a long story endless, one of the dyno's you list uses a whole lot more math in deriving its hp/trq numbers, as opposed to our actual measured numbers(via the eddy current sensors we're measuring both force and accereration, the other most likely just measures accel and uses the manually input weight of the vehicle to calc force, and therefore hp/trq). So weather & weight spec'd is going to be big time important to note at that location.

And lastly, we've used STP corrected values the entire time; whatever numbers you derive should also be listed in STP if we can hope to draw any useful comparisons.

After thinking about this for a while, I don't think its a bad idea, but I'm really concerned at the amount of variability possible even between your tests, much less when compared to ours. I just don't think we'll be able to compare the 4 dyno's with any accuracy... I'd hate to see ya spend all this time and money and come away with little more than an interesting day...

What am I not considering?

[RobAGD]

CV thanks for chiming in, my main reason for doing this is to see how differnt dyno report the same car/s.

Part of my home work will be talking to the dyno manufactures and picking thier brains on what and how these beast work.

Part of what I want to do is see how differnt dyno modes/options effect the readings as well. Like if one of the Dynojets has an EDDY current motor, if we ran that vs and standard DJ what would we see as a differnce ?

This is going to be something thats I am going to have a lot of work into, and I hope to pull it off before fall, but you never know how things work out :) I mean heck my other test car just got traded in on a 300SRT8 so my cars 300c twin for mods is now gone.

Thanks for all the good info, who knows maybe we will find a sutable shop for an East Cost GIFO's with all my hunting and brain picking. The problem out here is a lack of Superflow Dynos.

Thanks again, and as always if you have an idea or thought please feel free to chime in.

-R

This will be very interesting! However, Rob, I'm afraid its not going to be completely telling unless you can ensure each dyno tested was calibrated just before your pulls (as ours has been each time) AND you can dictate what mode the dyno is in for the power pulls. Even within "The Big 3" there are so many variances... you've really got to make sure your operator knows his dyno inside and out.

For example, our Superflow can run in either inertia or load bearing modes; and within those modes we can choose various sub modes; simple intertia, controlled acceleration, steady state control and road load (we've got two 400hp eddy current absorbers that enable this mode variability; many dyno shops do not have this kind of option as their dyno is not as complete.)

Each method has its purpose;

simple inertia uses the mass of the roller to simulate load and is good for acceleration testing (non adjustable load)
steady state requires a variable load and is primarily used for tuning purposes
controlled acceleration requires a variable load and is primarily used for is for max power numbers
road load is good for simulation and diagnostic purposesFor the tests we've run, we've been in inertia mode and have used either simple or controlled acceleration; the max numbers came out "close enough" to forgo the controlled acceleration tests and go with simple inertia (much less stress on the vehicle, and is more informative for seeing "up the curve" improvements).

To make a long story endless, one of the dyno's you list uses a whole lot more math in deriving its hp/trq numbers, as opposed to our actual measured numbers(via the eddy current sensors we're measuring both force and accereration, the other most likely just measures accel and uses the manually input weight of the vehicle to calc force, and therefore hp/trq). So weather & weight spec'd is going to be big time important to note at that location.

And lastly, we've used STP corrected values the entire time; whatever numbers you derive should also be listed in STP if we can hope to draw any useful comparisons.

After thinking about this for a while, I don't think its a bad idea, but I'm really concerned at the amount of variability possible even between your tests, much less when compared to ours. I just don't think we'll be able to compare the 4 dyno's with any accuracy... I'd hate to see ya spend all this time and money and come away with little more than an interesting day...

What am I not considering?

[CoolVanilla]

Good deal Rob! Glad to see you'll be planning this out.

If you want to talk or care to talk with Bob @ SVS even, let me know. I'm happy to help in any way I can.

[MattRobertson]

sorry for the rambling. I'm trying to think of everything all at once.

What am I not considering?History. At the end of the day you've only got one day. I remember at the end of GIFO1 we had all kinds of people saying this or that about test methods, which were wide open for comment weeks in advance. So at the second and third events we made sure we had tests for those concerns; even had a control vehicle (gotls1's LS-1) come in and ran it and lo and behold got the numbers that we should have.

And here comes the ugly one: There will be no control. As in no baseline for comparison if you want to see what the diff is from the GIFO dyno to the ones you test; including the Superflow.

Back to History: Look at what happened to Popular Hotrodding and their recent AirRaid test. Those guys aren't idiots, and certainly know their way around a dyno... but look what happened to them "on any given day" when they managed to come up with 249 hp on a stock Magnum.

One of the requirements of a successful experiment is repeatability. You shouldn't be planning a single dyno day. You should plan a series of them (two or three?) and see if there is variance from event to event. Not easy and not cheap. Otherwise what you are going to get are a series of snapshots; but what you need is a movie of sorts.

Same deal with the dyno operator. What is each operator going to bring into the equation? A variable. Ideally you'd get the same guy running it but I don't see that happening, so you'll have to live with that and know its not working in your favor no matter which way the numbers are swung as a result; if at all.

Next make sure you warm the car up to the same amount each time, since you are testing the dyno and not the car (looking for variance between dyno's as opposed to peak HP). You should be able to warm it up a hell of a lot more consistently than you could trying to cool it down. Or are you going to test an intake swap as well to see which dyno says what? Time management (below) will be critical to make sure every dyno has the same conditions to work with.

And learn from what we saw at MoFO 4.1 where we got too good at changing stuff around so we could do a separate run. Pick a specific time interval between each dyno run in your group of runs and make the operator stick to it.

Finally... Hasn't this been done already? I saw a link floated around within the last few weeks done by some other car club where some mighty smart guys compared the various dyno's and scribbled a bunch of calculations and stuff. My eyes glazed over a few paragraphs in but you guys are probably smart enough to follow it. Not the same as running a Magnum but there should be some insight there to pick up on.

[RobAGD]

MR - many good points

And here comes the ugly one: There will be no control. As in no baseline for comparison if you want to see what the diff is from the GIFO dyno to the ones you test; including the Superflow.

I just want to see between Dynos. I am not worried as much about matching GIFO, as to seeing what the differnt dynos all say about the same car. If the shop as a WORKING weather station the computer SHOULD adjust everything to see level and a hg reading in the 29.92 I belive and some sort of humidity level. So in theroy doing it all on the same day removes wether weirdness.

Same deal with the dyno operator. What is each operator going to bring into the equation? A variable. Ideally you'd get the same guy running it but I don't see that happening, so you'll have to live with that and know its not working in your favor no matter which way the numbers are swung as a result; if at all.

In dealing with the shops and people at the manufactures sites I am hoping I can come up with a protocall that we can use across all 3 dynos to minimizes the operators influence.

Next make sure you warm the car up to the same amount each time, since you are testing the dyno and not the car (looking for variance between dyno's as opposed to peak HP). You should be able to warm it up a hell of a lot more consistently than you could trying to cool it down. Or are you going to test an intake swap as well to see which dyno says what? Time management (below) will be critical to make sure every dyno has the same conditions to work with.

The basic plan was to test the cars at heat soak, less chance of problems with cooling that way. Something else I was looking to Dyno a 300 and Magnum that had basically all the same mods ( BBH's 300c ) and see what 2 alike cars dynoed with the same basic mods.

Matt - I am not knocking the shop or methods you all are using, I think you all are doing things as consistantly as we can on these cars, there are limits. The reason is I keep hearding differnt things about differnt dynos and how they dyno and come up with numbers. I would like to get some first hand on this and see what there is to see. I will with in my ability control what I can. I apperciate all the input, honestly I do.

-Robert

[CoolVanilla]

I would like to get some first hand on this and see what there is to see.Rob, I mean this with all sincerity: join us at the Mods Face Off 5, Oct 9-14 (or time in between). Take part in this thing. It is NOT a closed door event. Rather, I welcome your eyes on this; it will either reveal something we've all missed, or it will show you we're actually kind of on track. Regardless, it WILL be of benefit to you, me, us and the test. The invite is a standing one, my friend.

-Jason

[RobAGD]

CV - Thats a Hell of a trip for a Dyno day :)

I want to take a trip out, I got hosed on Spring Fling and it would make things easier if there was a silly Auto Train to the WC. Ill keep the data in mind ( I think thats mighty close to the Etown event and I dont know if I could pass up sub sea level air ;) )

Thanks a lot it means a lot to me for you to have made the offer !

-Robert

[wbornio]

DTM is having an open house July 29 and 30th... $50 for 3 pulls. Plus free food...

Sorry for being the Newbie here.. Where is DTM? I like free food and I have a unmolested , just broken in (2600 miles), 5.7 RT Magnum that I would like to 'baseline' before my mods... see if I really am getting bang for my bucks... This could be a good 'reference' if any-other dyno tests want to be compared to this group.

[MattRobertson]

Matt - I am not knocking the shop or methods you all are using, I think you all are doing things as consistantly as we can on these cars, there are limits. I know, I didn't mean that. What I'm probably beating around the bush and not saying is this is a real bitch to do right. I don't think anyone has done this or even tried cuz it would be so dad-blamed expensive and time-consuming.

And why *don't* you come out? We need all of the gray cells we can get hold of. And besides that it should be fun.

[Mosie]

And why *don't* you come out? We need all of the gray cells we can get hold of. And besides that it should be fun.Yes, come on out!


Have I mentioned that October is one of the best months out of the year to visit California?

Need a dyno? Get a vacation! The wonderfully pleasant indian summers in Oct are the best! The sunsets; even better! It’s not too hot, and far from cool! The place that we will be staying at is more like a mini resort than a hotel there is shopping, biking, dinning and varied activities within minutes. And if that’s not enough, San Francisco & Tahoe are great get-a-ways only an hour and a half in opposite directions. And Napa and the Sacramento foothills for wine tasting are a hop, LXskip & jump away from where the testing will be.

So, yeah! Come on out and go home richer in dyno-izum for it!

[MattRobertson]

Here to tell you that the Napa thing is a total kick. I haven't done it in years but its a killer time. Is the Old Adobe still around? It was the restaurant of choice for the savvy drunk looking to have an incredible meal without waiting around for reso's at some of the more trendy places that have been in business for less than 100 years. Brix and Col. Mustard's come to mind. Dang I'd love to do Napa again.

[RandomAccess]

Whenever I read CoolVanilla and Matt post about dynos... I keep thinking to myself...

Dynos are USELESS... I agree with everything they have posted regarding variables... including the operator (who themselves can provide inconsistancy even if you use the same person)

If a ruler used in California, can't be compared with the mesurements taken by a ruler used in New York... It is not a very good measuring tool..

[CoolVanilla]

Whenever I read CoolVanilla and Matt post about dynos... I keep thinking to myself...

Dynos are USELESS... I agree with everything they have posted regarding variables... including the operator (who themselves can provide inconsistancy even if you use the same person)

If a ruler used in California, can't be compared with the mesurements taken by a ruler used in New York... It is not a very good measuring tool..You're making one assumption we arn't willing to make RA; a "ruler" implies a consistent tool. A dyno is NOT a ruler. Rather, it is more akin to a "hand"; the way ancient Egypt used to measure distances. True one Pharaoh's "hand" has a different length than the next, but if you use the same Pharaoh each and every time, you've created a reference by which differences can be measured, and compared. Its those RELATIVE differences that are of value, and why the same "hand" is needed each and every time.

[RandomAccess]

I wouldn't want a hand used to measure anything bolted to my magnum... Would you?

[CoolVanilla]

Alls I know is I've got hand... and according to the wife, thanks to all these Mods Face Offs, I'm gonna need it. :loser:

[MattRobertson]

You're making one assumption we arn't willing to make RA; a "ruler" implies a consistent tool. A dyno is NOT a ruler. Rather, it is more akin to a "hand"; the way ancient Egypt used to measure distances. True one Pharaoh's "hand" has a different length than the next, but if you use the same Pharaoh each and every time, you've created a reference by which differences can be measured, and compared. Its those RELATIVE differences that are of value, and why the same "hand" is needed each and every time.Dang thats pretty darn well put CV.

to restate: Its the RELATIVE changes that matter. Not even the numbers can be considered etched in stone. You eliminate all variables you can via establishing controls over everything possible and then you have as relaiable of a measuring stick as you can have. Different dyno / environment / time of day/ paper or plastic / blah / blah = different stick.

[wbornio]

Alls I know is I've got hand... and according to the wife, thanks to all these Mods Face Offs, I'm gonna need it. :loser:

Had to read it twice to get the joke... That's some funny $h;t ...

I understand RA's objections to accepting dyno #'s 'at face value' but there is a scientific method that can be followed to elliminate enough variables that what remains is valuable gauge of performance increase.

for example... Everyone knows how critical ambient temp and humidity are... but if the tests are done within 1 hr of each other -the effect of those variables are reduced to negligable... arguably acceptable ammounts.

The DYNO testing #'s need to be presented with the laundry list of details on how the data was collected and what variables were controlled, and what was different on the data collection runs.

Mr. Robertson & Mr. Vanilla - Provide us with the # of hands you measure, whose hand you used, and the conditions under which you counted the hands and RA (& the rest of us) can read and evaluate for effective testing methods and hopefully conclude that your testing methods have been sufficient to 'convince' us of the actual gains that we'll recognize in real life.

As always - "Your mileage may vary"

Uh - on second thought - Please just use Mr. Robertsons hands...

[CoolVanilla]

Heh. Well, take a look here wb. (http://www.lxforums.com/board/showthread.php?t=37056) Within that link, are links to the previous 5 tests; and all the data you could ever want to see. In fact, you're welcome to download the actual dyno data files produced, and peruse them yourself. I warn you though, it could literally take you days.

[wbornio]

Heh. Well, take a look here wb. (http://www.lxforums.com/board/showthread.php?t=37056) Within that link, are links to the previous 5 tests; and all the data you could ever want to see. In fact, you're welcome to download the actual dyno data files produced, and peruse them yourself. I warn you though, it could literally take you days.

OK - I just spent a few minutes looking over the GIFO data -

I'm impressed that you took the time to collect and present the data so clearly. I will be spending more time soaking up the info there... thanks.

[RandomAccess]

I maintain that a tool that requires that much trouble to create readings that can be compared... must be useless.

So either Rob's testing is as valid as Matt and Jasons... Or neither is valid.

[CoolVanilla]

I maintain that a tool that requires that much trouble to create readings that can be compared... must be useless.

So either Rob's testing is as valid as Matt and Jasons... Or neither is valid.Wow, I just don't see this point of view. I'd really like to understand it, however. Can you give examples or a parallel scenario, or something to help clarify for me RA?

[RandomAccess]

The whole reason they stopped using the finger to measure an inch is precsion... If the dyno is not a precise tool when we are fighting to come up with a horse or two... What good is it?

If we all agree its "precise enough" then it's precise enough when Rob uses the tool (assuming its run by a qualified individual, and he reports back the details that are required... IE explanation of any contributing factors to fluctuations)

[CoolVanilla]

The whole reason they stopped using the finger to measure an inch is precsion... If the dyno is not a precise tool when we are fighting to come up with a horse or two... What good is it? Hmm... this style of measurement was changed not because of preciseness; in fact it was incredibly precise... their entire economy depended on it being precise. Rather, it was changed to ensure consistency. The difference being when someone says "2 hand" they also had to say who's hand. Now, with the "ruler", someone can say "2 feet" and no one needs to ask, "who's foot?" There is a huge difference there.

Unfortunately, with dyno testing, we still need to ask, "who's hand?"

If we all agree its "precise enough" then it's precise enough when Rob uses the toolNo argument at all if we are talking about net type statements; ie "this mod is worth 12 net hp/trq". But that necessitates absolute consistent parameters between tests, save the one mod. What I think Rob is proposing is changing the foundation of the results themselves. Again a huge difference there.

(assuming its run by a qualified individual, and he reports back the details that are required... IE explanation of any contributing factors to fluctuations)This we might just have to disagree on. I can see no feasible way of ensuring these assumptions are valid.

Again, to reiterate; when we come from a GIFO event and say "hey this Magnum ran at 298hp!" We assume folks understand that 298hp reading is relative to that set of circumstances on that day. However, what is far more powerful is when we say "Yep, this mod is worth 15hp!" That, someone can assume is a number they will replicate, plus or minus a percentage if they add the mod to their rig. Its that last statement that makes the Mods Face Offs worth doing, IMHO, not the claim of 298hp (for example).

[RobAGD]

I am not looking to change the foundation.

What I am looking to do is see what can be expected from differnt dynos and what kind of numbers they get relitive to each other on the same car the same day.

As out here we see more DJ's and Mustangs than Superflows, I think it would be intresting and slightly educational that wee compare the differnt dynos and HOW they messure HP/TQ etc.

I really was looking to do this for the sake of knowledge and to under stand WHY some companies say you have to use a load bearing dyno vs an inertisha dyno for proper numbers.

please pardon the spelling I am road worn and still over an hour from home, I bailed on the return trip as trafic was a mess.

-R

[RandomAccess]

I happen to believe that dynos ARE accurate... (my previous posts were intended in showing the impression I was given by your posts)

but.. WHEN there are fluctuations you need to explain AND prove why the fluctuation occured without a doubt... or discount the run completely if you cannot.

I think Rob's runs could help us understand and baseline one of these factors when comparing runs done in different environments... IE... Flowjet can yield results 10 HP more than mustang + / - 5 HP...

He should be encouraged and supported. I'm sure you may not have intended it to come out that way, but it did seem like you were trying to politely discourage his initiative.

Given yours and Matt's expereince how about getting involved and helping Rob come up with all the factors that he can minimize. And document those factors that cannot?

I'm pretty interested in the outcome of this... I'd also like to see a 4 wheel dyno thrown in for good measure.

[CoolVanilla]

I am not looking to change the foundation.Let me apologize for that comment. After rereading what I wrote, I can see how it comes off as negative. Not at all my intent and I am sorry.

What I am looking to do is see what can be expected from differnt dynos and what kind of numbers they get relitive to each other on the same car the same day.Fair enough. No doubt the results would be interesting to see. I guess, on this one point, its been good enough for me to accept the industry accepted "8%" factor; Superflow being the lowest, DJ being the highest, and Mustang in the middle. When I consider that swing, and consider any dyno *can* itself show +-2 or 3% depending on calibration state, I guess I just sorta haze over at that point and call it a wash as again, I've only ever really been interested in the relative results, not the absolute. Perhaps that's an oversight on my part.

but.. WHEN there are fluctuations you need to explain AND prove why the fluctuation occured without a doubt... or discount the run completely if you cannot.Ehhh, not sure about needing to discount something just because I don't have all the info needed to explain it. In fact, I think we've actually had something of a revelation BECAUSE we didn't discount our odd variations; and now we'll adjust in the upcoming Mods Face Off 5 accordingly to minimize the variability.

He should be encouraged and supported. I'm sure you may not have intended it to come out that way, but it did seem like you were trying to politely discourage his initiative.No doubt RA, and Rob I sincerely apologize if I came off as anything less than supportive. In fact, I think I'm trying to be overly supportive and in doing so, expressing my trepidation at coming out on the other side of this thing with only more questions than answers having spent a pretty penny and a bunch of time. I think that is still a very strong possibility.

Given yours and Matt's expereince how about getting involved and helping Rob come up with all the factors that he can minimize. And document those factors that cannot?Now THAT is a heck-of-an-idea. Let me propose this: Rob, I'm flat out thrilled to hear you're going to try to join us at the Mods Face Off 5. Assuming you can make it, lets carve out some time to sit down with Matt and Bob of SVS (drinks on me?). We might even want to record the conversation on tape for future reference. Lets ask these questions and have an open discussion to this idea's validity. I think between the 4 of us we ought to come away with a very good understanding of the facts, the variables, and the possible lessons.

Sound good?

[wbornio]

We might even want to record the conversation on tape for future reference. Lets ask these questions and have an open discussion to this idea's validity. I think between the 4 of us we ought to come away with a very good understanding of the facts, the variables, and the possible lessons.

Sound good?


Now that would take all the variables out of the equation now wouldn't it!

:not_worth

Whatever comes out of this discussion will be better understanding of testing methods (at minimum) and better testing methods (at best)!

[RobAGD]

CV - I am not time took anything you or MR said as negitive. It wouldn't stop me one way or another ;)

I am an idea guy, software people hate me ;) I want to get a full understanding of some of the weirdness we see on the cars on dynos.

Something I thought about last night, was for giggles, take an old skool carb car the run well and consistant and run it on the same dyno back to back like we do the LX cars and see what kind of differnace we get. No computers there to bork things up.

CV - If I make it out there I am all over it :) I'll see what I can get from the tech heads at the dyno manufactures before the event.

AND I apperciate the support, thoughts and ideas you gays are bringing up. They are valid points.

Personally when you dealing with +/-3% @ 300hp thats 9hp of possiable variance. That has to be mentioned in the margin of error.

-Robert

[CoolVanilla]

CV - I am not time took anything you or MR said as negitive. It wouldn't stop me one way or another ;)Glad to hear that. :rock:

I am an idea guy, software people hate me ;) I want to get a full understanding of some of the weirdness we see on the cars on dynos.

Something I thought about last night, was for giggles, take an old skool carb car the run well and consistant and run it on the same dyno back to back like we do the LX cars and see what kind of differnace we get. No computers there to bork things up.Might be interesting!

CV - If I make it out there I am all over it :) I'll see what I can get from the tech heads at the dyno manufactures before the event.

AND I apperciate the support, thoughts and ideas you gays are bringing up. They are valid points.Sweetness. Although I'm not a homosexual, and I'm darn near positive Matt isn't either... not that there's anything wrong with that... :grin:

Personally when you dealing with +/-3% @ 300hp thats 9hp of possiable variance. That has to be mentioned in the margin of error.No doubt! And in our case, I tend to under emphasis this in the results as we always test with a freshly calibrated dyno that minimizes that error to sub 1%.

You damn well better make it out and see whats up first hand Rob. Random, you're coming too, right? :pepper:

[RobAGD]

Wow, that was a serious typo.... Damn being at work and having to rush posts... ( thats my story and I am sticking to it ! )

-R

[MattRobertson]

ZZZZZZzzzzzz
mememememe
ZZZZZZzzzzzz
mememememe
ZZZZZZzzzzzz
mememememe
Sweetness. Although I'm not a homosexual, and I'm darn near positive Matt isn't either... ZZZZZZ...
*snork*!

Whatthehelldoyoumean DARN NEAR?!?

smartass.. One more word outta you and I'll make a video. (EDIT: or dig up an old one?. Hmmm... which box has the vcr in it...)



ZZZZZZzzzzzz
mememememe

ZZZZZZzzzzzz
mememememe

[MattRobertson]

...
but.. WHEN there are fluctuations you need to explain AND prove why the fluctuation occured without a doubt... or discount the run completely if you cannot.I think that this methodology would pretty much wipe most dyno'ing off the face of the Earth. There comes a point where the inexact nature of the science has to be acknowledged. If we were DCX we would have a climate-controlled room and a machine-run dyno but that will never happen (or will it? hmmm).

All you can do is control as many variables as you can, as precisely as you can, to eliminate the effect those variables -- which will always exist -- inevitably have. And like any set of experiments, even repetition makes for more data on potential variables. Thats part of what bugs me about this test is it would be sooo expensive to build repetition into the protocol. I mean, at Mods Face Off 4.1 we *knew* we were looking at bad runs in because we had so much time in with that dyno and similar mods that it was clear right away that something was wrong. Contrast that with the recent Popular Hotrodding dynos testing the AirRaid intake. They got 249 rwhp. Anyone out there want to argue that was an accurate dyno reading? They may have know the dyno but in this case they didn't know the car, and they got bit hard as a result.

I do think this is an excellent idea. What worries me is that it is going to be just one day.

Jason you are probably already planning this but lets post the protocol, with the methodology written out minute by minute for an 'ideal' run. Something I have been thinking of is we don't need to just control time, but also to control operator behavior as much as possible. X seconds between runs when the wheels are at full stop. Y seconds at run-up to WOT. Document at what speed and RPM WOT was initiated at. Honestly I think its overkill given that we're already doing calibrations but if we're going to talk about controlling variables there's almost all of them that can be influenced by the operator.

EDIT: Perhaps Morpheus can pitch in and do some real-time logging on things like throttle position to eliminate what I think is the last operator variable. For that matter if we could get a dyno mode out of Morpheus we could conceivably use that as a control check as well.

[RandomAccess]

Random, you're coming too, right? :pepper:

There is no way I'm going to hang out with you Gays!

[BrilliantBlackHemi]

There is no way I'm going to hang out with you Gays!

Aw come on.

[RandomAccess]

I think that this methodology would pretty much wipe most dyno'ing off the face of the Earth.

I'm not sure I agree...

What you guys are using the dyno for is similar to statistical control charts. (Which is also an "inexact science") In order for Control charts to be useful, you need to identify a base line, compare to the trend and explain any variations from that trend...

If you can't explain the variations... then the validity of the rest of the data comes into question...


... or maybe I spend too much time with computers... 1 or 0... 1 or 0... Can't be anything else!

[RandomAccess]

Aw come on.

What? Rob started it! LOL

CV knows I'm just busting chops!

[MattRobertson]

I'm not sure I agree...If you can't explain the variations... then the validity of the rest of the data comes into question... or maybe I spend too much time with computers... 1 or 0... 1 or 0... Can't be anything else!

See thats what I was getting at... you can't nail it down like that unless you put a machine in charge of climate and operation of the test unit, which *nobody* but an auto manufacturer, if then, does.

Machine-run, climate-controlled dynos are just not out there so we'd all have to throw in the towel and stop dyno'ing entirely if we demand a black/white standard. Which won't happen, right?


:popcorn::grin:

[RandomAccess]

Weather WOULD be an explanation of the variance. We should have the DA as one of your variables, abient temp etc...

See my point?

[CoolVanilla]

Weather WOULD be an explanation of the variance. We should have the DA as one of your variables, abient temp etc...

See my point?Oh it is. You'll notice every number we publish is in STP corrected form. You betcha weather matters, and we've given ya a way of quantifying that weather as the data is from the same weather station, therefore the same correction factors are applied :wink:

Edit: I should also point out the raw numbers as well as the raw weather samples are and have been avaible since the GIFO1.

[wbornio]

So - can anyone help me make sense of the following JBA dyno graphs?

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.jbaheaders.com/images/dyno/03hemi_dyno.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jbaheaders.com/dyno.asp&h=441&w=658&sz=191&hl=en&start=16&tbnid=-R3B8zEWqI2idM:&tbnh=92&tbnw=138&prev=/images%3Fq%3D5.7%2Bhemi%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26l r%3D%26sa%3DG

Whose hand did they use?

[RobAGD]

http://www.jbaheaders.com/images/dyno/03hemi_dyno.jpg

Thats actually a nomal looking graph with before and after runs.

They just dont way what dyno they used and that is something that has been beaten to death with the GIFO's as they couldnt get anything close to the same numbers all the manufactures got.

-R

[wbornio]

Regardless of their testing method... the stock motor dialed up a 248 the modified engie punched up a 263 for a net percentage gain of 6.048% increase... I understand that part now....


But how can this baseline compare to the JBA baseline in this graph?

http://www.jbaheaders.com/images/dyno/06charger57_exh.jpg

The BASELINE here is 282 HP.... how can the same engine have such DIFFERENT baselines FROM THE SAME companyon the same engine?

I realize you can have fluctuations due to weather, humidity, 'hand' used to run the dyno - but 248 - 282 THATS 34 HP which is 13.71% difference....

I know it's prolly the deadest horse in the world... and it's starting to draw flies... but how can JBA expect us to believe their 'claims' if they can't even settle on a dyno BASELINE for an unmodified 5.7L HEMI?

[CoolVanilla]

.. but how can JBA expect us to believe their 'claims' if they can't even settle on a dyno BASELINE for an unmodified 5.7L HEMI?Welcome to the club wb. That is the very question all of us have been asking for quite some time now. And its not just JBA; its K&N, its Jett, its Volant... so, we all said screw it, and we did our own tests. Enter the GIFO/Mods Face Off.

Not the best answer, I know. But it is the truth.

[RobAGD]

well first one is a Dodge Ram w/ 5.7 and the other is a charger :)

-R

http://www.jbaheaders.com/images/dyno/06charger57_exh.jpg

[wbornio]

Welcome to the club wb. That is the very question all of us have been asking for quite some time now. And its not just JBA; its K&N, its Jett, its Volant... so, we all said screw it, and we did our own tests. Enter the GIFO/Mods Face Off.

Not the best answer, I know. But it is the truth.

Thanks CV and Rob - I'm starting to see the smoke that has been the source of 'debate' in this thread...

Do you have a graph of you version of the truth from the GIFO's? (ie a baseline unmodified 5.7L HP + torque graph)

Have you performed a baseline at each of the past GIFO's and/or realized a 13% differential from baseline dyno's of unmodified 5.7L ?

Thanks for bringing me up to speed - I would love to be there in October - My Maggie might make it - but I may be working.

Wayne

[wbornio]

well first one is a Dodge Ram w/ 5.7 and the other is a charger :)

-R

That would make a difference - now wouldn't it. :doh: my bad.

[crhemi]

Rob have you called EB Motorsports in Chantilly I think. Superflow 3 pulls $75.00

[RobAGD]

the funny thing is WB is we have seen those kind of differnace in cars we have dyno'ed :)

No worries, you just have to stick to track times :racing:

or alway try to usethe same qulaity dyno shop

-R

[CoolVanilla]

WB, make sure you click the links to the specifics of each test buried within this summary thread (http://www.lxforums.com/board/showthread.php?t=19728). All the graphs/data tables you might ever hope for are in there, as well as the raw data should you so desire to download the reader yourself.
Thanks CV and Rob - I'm starting to see the smoke that has been the source of 'debate' in this thread...

Do you have a graph of you version of the truth from the GIFO's? (ie a baseline unmodified 5.7L HP + torque graph)

Have you performed a baseline at each of the past GIFO's and/or realized a 13% differential from baseline dyno's of unmodified 5.7L ?

Thanks for bringing me up to speed - I would love to be there in October - My Maggie might make it - but I may be working.

Wayne

[wbornio]

I'm in on a NOVA group dyno day... I have the stock Magnum Rt unmolested intake + exhaust that we could use as a baseline - I want to get that for my can anyway to see how much bang for the buck I'm getting for my modding $$$ - and you guys can 'compare' your results to mine and know close to what your 5.7 woulda done had you not modded anything...

Redsled just confirmed for this fridays Chik-fi-A M&G - anyone else showing up?

[wbornio]

WB, make sure you click the links to the specifics of each test buried within this summary thread (http://www.lxforums.com/board/showthread.php?t=19728). All the graphs/data tables you might ever hope for are in there, as well as the raw data should you so desire to download the reader yourself.

I'd be doing great if I could get the DAMN graph titles straight! :doh: :sad:

Geez I'm a doofus! Charger - Truck - they kinda look the same....

I'll take a look - most of your (CV's) testing methods that I've seen have been thorough and easy to follow.... I was thrown for a loop by the JBA claims (now I know came from diff vehicles).

[MattRobertson]

Do you have a graph of you version of the truth from the GIFO's? (ie a baseline unmodified 5.7L HP + torque graph)
Zillions of them. all available for your review using live client software that let you look at the data 50 different ways. Just follow the link CV gave you, download, install and... come back in a day or two. Once you start playing I bet you don't stop for awhile. The short versions/summaries are all in the threads themselves

Have you performed a baseline at each of the past GIFO's of course :-) Religiously. There is always a baseline done at the beginning of each test set for each vehicle that goes on the dyno. You can for example pull up baseline dynos on my car Waaay back at I think GIFO2 or maybe even GIFO1. Don't remember when I went on first. Then you can see the next baseline at the next GIFO and follow them thru all the way to Mods Face-Off 4.1 a couple of months ago.

and/or realized a 13% differential from baseline dyno's of unmodified 5.7L ?I don't believe we have ever seen that. I do remember at GIFO3 I went down a bit on my baseline, but only a bit and it may be that it was corrected out as a result of weather. This is part of the reason we always run baselines, stick to the same dyno :blah:. A large variance like that would immediately set off red flags.

You should come out in October! The more eyeballs the better! Plus its going to be fun.

[RandomAccess]

What are we debating again?

[RobAGD]

Great Taste !

:)

-R

[wbornio]

What are we debating again?


Sorry RA - Nothing to debate here... I had the unfortunate embarassment of mis-reading the JBA graphs flying around that had the baseline HP listed as 248 HP for a 5.7L on one graph and a base HP of 282 on another...

The mystery was solved when someone pointed out that the 248 Graph was for a Dodge RAM.

[MattRobertson]

Great Taste !
LESS FILLING!

[RandomAccess]

LESS FILLING!

You can't prove it's less filling... There are many factors involved... such as stomach size...

[CoolVanilla]

You can't prove it's less filling... There are many factors involved... such as stomach size...:loser: :Na_Na_Na_Na:

[MattRobertson]

Ah... but my stomach was just calibrated with an XXL pizza immediately prior to the test event. We counted the slices and thus were able, with an error factor of plus or minus 0.0003%, to determine the precise volume of the stomach cavity.

Six hours later we determined another precise volume but I'll save that for another thread.

EDIT: Yes of course we used a micrometer to measure and a diamond saw to slice the pizza. So do not even think of asking.

[RobAGD]

lol, I am sooo happy someone picked up on that :) ^5's MR

-R

[RandomAccess]

Three more pages of this should do it, and then we can talk dynos again.

[Mosie]

Three more pages of this should do it, and then we can talk dynos again. Yeah, that sounds about right.
Ah... but my stomach was just calibrated with an XXL pizza immediately prior to the test event. We counted the slices and thus were able, with an error factor of plus or minus 0.0003%, to determine the precise volume of the stomach cavity.

Six hours later we determined another precise volume but I'll save that for another thread.

EDIT: Yes of course we used a micrometer to measure and a diamond saw to slice the pizza. So do not even think of asking.And by the way, we are now calling the above: "1MoFO Test". We'll have plenty of 'X'MoFO designations leading up to the MoFO5 testing event in Oct.