Dyno Runs - Post your results

[KfabR8]

In response to a thread earlier, it suddenly made sense to me that we need a dedicated dyno run thread.

There are a few of us that have base line runs on stock cars and then runs on modified cars. I think it would be interesting to see how our base line runs compare to one and other.

So, here we go:
09 MT6 4.2 V8 - 348 hp, 266 ft-lbs. to the ground
09 MT6 4.2 V8 w/Heffner Twin Turbo - 482 hp, 414 ft-lbs. to the ground

Both of my runs were done on Mustang AWD dynos. The base line run was done in California (no idea of the fuel used) and the TT dyno run was done in Ohio on Shell 93.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljw3CpbHVew"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljw3CpbHVew[/ame]

[RS4Cab]

Great thread to keep all this info in one place. All my dyno's were done on same Mustang Dyno. Wish I had done a baseline before any mods. Fisrt one is with Stasis Exhaust and EVO Filter kit. 338 awhp and 273 awtq




Next one done when I got APR flash and has first dyno on it also. Got 350 awhp and 280 awtq, So APR gave me 12 hp and 7 tq gain at wheels





Video of last dyno [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00dL7-L8kiI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00dL7-L8kiI[/ame]

Last with Stasis Supercharger, APR replaced with Stasis Software and Filters back to stock. Gained 96 hp and 71 tq at wheels

[RS4Cab]

Could someone explain the AFR stuff to me? on my last dyno chart it shows running much lower, while APR tune had it running flat. Someone told me that means I have room for future gains?

[Arin@APR]

You're comparing the AFR on a naturally aspirated engine to one that's now supercharged. The air fuel ration determined to make the most power while still being safe is often different between the two.

With a supercharged or turbocharged engine, cylinder pressure will be much higher. Higher pressure will mean higher cylinder temperature. Higher temperatures in the cylinders will lead to knocking if you attempt to run the same amount of ignition timing advance. It will become a balancing act between lowering air fuel ratio and timing advance to combat knock and keep cylinder temperature acceptable. When you run a richer air fuel ratio, you'll spray more fuel into the cylinders, which will cool the temperature in the cylinder and allow for greater timing advance.

On our stage 1 software, we altered the air fuel ratio till we achieved the best power levels while still keeping cylinder temps acceptable. The supercharged run you've posted looks pretty similar to stock when compared to your APR vs Stock runs above.

[bz888]

Dyno Dynamics Dyno
Stock R-Tronic V8
4th Gear Runs

1. 345HP at wheels
2. 348HP at wheels
3. 352HP at wheels
4. 354HP at wheels (Last Run)

[LAT]

Dyno Dynamics Dyno
Stock R-Tronic V8
4th Gear Runs

1. 345HP at wheels
2. 348HP at wheels
3. 352HP at wheels
4. 354HP at wheels (Last Run)

Something amiss with the graph, HP and TQ have to meet at 5250 rpm, see posting above. On yours they meet at 4000 rpm. One of the two curves does not belong. Do you have others?

[bz888]

Something amiss with the graph, HP and TQ have to meet at 5250 rpm, see posting above. On yours they meet at 4000 rpm. One of the two curves does not belong. Do you have others?

Not sure what you mean by "amiss"? Kfabs baseline crossover at about 4200rpm. Mine crosses over at 3900. So, I don't think the crossover point is consistent.

To be honest, this really doesn't mean anything, due to the fact you can change the torque scale of the graph and have the crossover point wherever you like!

Also, there are major differences between Dyno Dynamics, Mustangs and DynoPacks Dynos. So, really no point in comparing as there are too many variables.

Best thing to do is get a baseline reading using the SAME dyno, SAME operator and adjusting for SAME atmospheric condition then compare any mods to baseline.

[LAT]

What I mean is that due to the fact that HP is not measured Torque is and HP is extrapolated by this formula

HP = rpm x T
.........5252

and 5252 being the constant they must meet there. You can change the torque scale and it will change the relative proportions of the graph but not the laws of mathematics.

I agree regarding the best use of readings but something is wrong with your graph.

Do you have the raw data to look at.

[bz888]

What I mean is that due to the fact that HP is not measured Torque is and HP is extrapolated by this formula

HP = rpm x T
.........5252

and 5252 being the constant they must meet there. You can change the torque scale and it will change the relative proportions of the graph but not the laws of mathematics.

I agree regarding the best use of readings but something is wrong with your graph.

Do you have the raw data to look at.

Your HP Calculation is correct and I see your point re Constant being the crossover point. But this is only true if the HP Scale and Torque scale are the same.

Example 0-450HP on the left and 0-450ft/lbs on the right of the graph.
Then you WILL see the crossover point at 5250.

However, my graph torque scale is different to HP scale. My torque scale only goes upto 270ft/lbs. This is why I think the crossover point does not meet at 5250.

Can you explain why Kfabs Dyno chart doesnt crossover at 5250?

[LAT]

I can try to extrapolate that at 5250 you have about 260 HP and therefore should have 260 lb ft of torque. The torque scale is not visible so if you can repost the picture we can see the numbers and solve this.